Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052: Difference between revisions
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1052 (edit)
Revision as of 17:55, 22 November 2020
, 1 month agoOneClickArchiver adding User:Bus stop bludgeoning discussion at Talk:Parler
(OneClickArchiver adding E-960's topic ban) |
|||
|
::::: Several months you say? Let's see... you opened an account on February 8, 2020 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astral_projection&diff=prev&oldid=939736099&diffmode=source], and you edited for <u>2 minutes</u> (total 2 edits). Then you came back on February 15, 2020 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gentlemen%27s_Agreement_of_1907&diff=prev&oldid=940906093&diffmode=source] and edited for another <u>50 minutes</u> (total of 10 edits) with two more edits on February 22, 2020, where you spent <u>11 minutes</u>. Then you went dormant for 3.5 mothns and returned on June 5, 2020 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Military_history_of_the_Netherlands_during_World_War_II&diff=prev&oldid=960880601&diffmode=source] were you made several edits until June 29, 2020, for a total time of approximately <u>13 hours</u>. Then you went dormant to return on July 11, 2020[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_van_der_Lee&diff=prev&oldid=967121060&diffmode=source] to spend a total of <u>3 hours</u> editing in July. Then <u>5 hours</u> in August [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emer_Costello&diff=prev&oldid=975767583&diffmode=source], <u>5 hours</u> in September [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kishinev_pogrom&diff=prev&oldid=980585408&diffmode=source], and then you perfectly wrote and linked this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=980587533&diffmode=source]. In October 2020, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_October_6&diff=prev&oldid=983109880&diffmode=source] you edited for a total of <u>4 hours</u>, and in November, you edited for approximately <u>30 minutes</u> before you wrote this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=989215186&diffmode=sourc]. So to let's add this up (give or take), you have been here for a total of <u>'''31 hours'''</u> spread out over a few months, and then you arrived here with a perfectly formulated, flawless report.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=989498312&diffmode=source]. - <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:GizzyCatBella|<span style="color:#40">'''GizzyCatBella'''</span>]][[User talk:GizzyCatBella|<span style="color:transparent;text-shadow:0 0 0 red;font-size:80%">🍁</span>]]</span></small> 20:36, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
'''Please note''' - [https:/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CommanderWaterford] - <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:GizzyCatBella|<span style="color:#40">'''GizzyCatBella'''</span>]][[User talk:GizzyCatBella|<span style="color:transparent;text-shadow:0 0 0 red;font-size:80%">🍁</span>]]</span></small> 22:23, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
{{abot}}
{{Clear}}
== [[User:Bus stop]] bludgeoning discussion at [[Talk:Parler]] ==
{{atop
| status = resolved
| result = I think we are done here. This is getting less productive by the moment. [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 04:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
<br/><br/>I endorse this non-admin closure, since this user was already topic banned on 17 November, which was endorsed by almost all comments here. The one dissenter, [[User:Darouet]], turned silent after having been explained the issue and the procedure. The further reaching request for a site ban does not invalidate the resolution at this time, and falls under [[WP:SNOW]]. ◅ [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 07:57, 20 November 2020 (UTC) }}
Can I get some uninvolved admin eyes on [[User:Bus stop]]'s behavior at [[Talk:Parler]]? It's getting absolutely ridiculous. I initially created the RfC in part because we were going in circles, but it doesn't appear to have helped. The user keeps [[WP:REHASH]]ing the same arguments over and over and over again—claiming that people have not explained why the mention of antisemitic content on Parler ought to be included in the lead when they have (often more than once), and most often repeating the [[WP:OTHERCONTENT]] argument that "if it's not in the lead of [[Twitter]], why should it be included here?". Multiple users have asked them to stop, but they are continuing. I don't know if they genuinely believe it's a legitimate argument or if their intent is to overwhelm and derail the discussions there, but the end result is the same. [[Talk:Parler#Description_of_this_service]] is the most recent example of the behavior, but it can be viewed up and down the talk page including in [[Talk:Parler#Heavy bias circumvents guidelines of conservative, dispassionate descriptions. Please remove subjective and unsubstantiated "antisemitism" claim]] and in the RfC. They began doing this on November 7 (see my comments then: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987551568&oldid=987550986], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987549711&oldid=987549490]) and have shown no sign of slowing.
Diffs of multiple editors explaining to them they need to stop, that their behavior is disruptive, and/or that discussion of Twitter should happen at [[Talk:Twitter]]:
* Myself: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987586621&oldid=987586002], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987708525&oldid=987708175&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987901732&oldid=987898821&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987904204&oldid=987904066], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987943944&oldid=987943082], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988904784&oldid=988904629], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=989087811&oldid=989086193], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=989095727&oldid=989095010]
* [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988170656&oldid=988169494], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988182068&oldid=988175089], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988380042&oldid=988379758]
* [[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988155807&oldid=988125603], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988174417&oldid=988173532]
* [[User:XOR'easter|XOR'easter]]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988198082&oldid=988195717], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988908745&oldid=988906457&diffmode=source]
* [[User:Grayfell|Grayfell]]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=987741184&oldid=987737478&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=988119264&oldid=988118880], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=989097778&oldid=989096858&diffmode=source]
I am also seeing that Bus stop has quite the [https:/wiki/Special:Search?search=bus+stop&prefix=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard&fulltext=Search&fulltext=Search&ns0=1&searchToken=98wpv7s1bc12rohcr5du48kmj history at ANI], including numerous discussions about disruption at articles related to Judaism that go quite far back. Not sure if anyone more familiar with their history could provide additional context.
Thanks in advance to whoever wades through that long talk page to try to sort this out. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 01:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*Bus stop is on a roll again--an AP2 topic ban would be a great help. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 02:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*This has happened many times at AP articles, often over minor issues or trivia, as at Donald Trump and Stefan Molyneux. [https:/wiki/Talk:Stefan_Molyneux/Archive_5#jewish_redux_again] [[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 02:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*Bus stop's first comment in this mess, to the best of my knowledge, was their inserting language ranting about ''"social media oligarchs"'', specifically naming Twitter, in a response to a thread that an abusive user titled ''"User GorillaWarfare Twitter Troll"'' [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AParler&type=revision&diff=986921232&oldid=986903129]. The abusive user in question vanished after GorillaWarfare asked for others to step in here [https:/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jroehl]. It got more crazy when Bus stop jumped in to support the abusive user's illegitimate call for a "vote" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AParler&type=revision&diff=987382866&oldid=987331633] in which said user accused GorillaWarfare repeatedly of being a paid employee of Twitter, and then they went back to complaining about and trying to compare Parler to Twitter [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AParler&type=revision&diff=987418997&oldid=987403913][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AParler&type=revision&diff=987499326&oldid=987421631][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=next&oldid=987530616][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=next&oldid=987544290][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=next&oldid=987548320].
:This has been going on for the better part of two weeks now and I have felt for several days that it had passed into the realm of [[Sealioning]] and [[Wikipedia:Civil POV pushing]] behavior, but today's comment that started with ''"I am merely asking you for your reasoning, GorillaWarfare"'' and falsely accusing GorillaWarfare of being unwilling to defend her reasoning [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AParler&type=revision&diff=989095010&oldid=989093916], followed by regurgitating once again ''"There is no reason this article should deviate from the [[Twitter]] article. Left-leaning politics is not a reason"'' [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parler&diff=next&oldid=989095727], was definitive. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 02:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*This is standard operating procedure for Bus stop. Even when it is explained to Bus stop that they could easily get a consensus for their desired edit, Bus stop can't resist the opportunity to browbeat an editor instead of simply seeking an easy consensus. Here's [[Talk:Mara Wilson#Ben Shapiro is more often described as conservative|my experience]] in which I explained to Bus stop that I would not oppose their attempt to change consensus. It seems that Bus stop relishes the bludgeoning process. [[User:Sundayclose|Sundayclose]] ([[User talk:Sundayclose|talk]]) 02:33, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* I've warned Bus Stop multiple times about bludgeoning since July, including [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=971314737&diffmode=source this one] which referenced a commitment on their talk in September of 2019 to no more bludgeoning discussions. [[User:Valereee|—valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 11:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* I'd support an AP topic ban. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 19:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* I think a rate limit would be more effective, like a sitewide restriction of 3 posts per thread, appealable in six months. I don't think the posting-too-much is limited to any particular topic area. [[User:Levivich|Le]][[Special:Contribs/Levivich|v¡v]][[User talk:Levivich|ich]] 19:42, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
**A rate limit seems like it would be easy to circumvent by just starting a new thread. --[[User:WMSR|WMSR]] ([[User talk:WMSR|talk]]) 20:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
***{{ec}} Indeed -- part of the issue has been that Bus stop is bringing up the same argument at practically every new thread on the page (and the page has attracted a lot of new users who are starting new threads because they don't know to read up on the talk page to see if the discussion has already started). [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 20:25, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* I agree with Levivich. If bludgeoning is the only behavior issue then some sort of voluntary/mandatory restriction on talk page discussions is in order. Perhaps they are allowed 1 reply to another editor per day unless the are reply to a comment made directly to them. This can be a bit of rope before an AP2 tban. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 20:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
**<s>Given MastCell's comment about prior blocks (below) I have less faith in my more narrow approach.</s> [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 20:04, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
***I'm pulling that back. The most recent block was from April 2011! [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ABus+stop]] If that was the last block I think some rope should be allowed in this case. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 20:08, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* An AP topic ban seems like the minimum appropriate response, given this editor's history. He has at least 3 indefinite blocks in the past, primarily (it would appear) for obsessively partisan editing and a fixation on tagging people he identifies as Jews. Each indefinite block was lifted in exchange for mentorship and a promise of good behavior ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bus_stop/Archive2&oldid=254020871#Returning_to_Wikipedia here's a representative example]). His mentors are mostly gone from Wikipedia, but he's still here, and his behavior is still poor (as the diffs above demonstrate). At some point we have to show at least some nominal respect and value to the constructive editors who have to deal with Bus stop's disruptive editing, instead of endlessly enabling him. Cutsomized post restrictions would potentially be appropriate if this were the first, or second, or even third instance of disruptive behavior, but we're well beyond that. An AP2 topic ban would be appropriate and can be enacted by any uninvolved admin, although an indefinite block is also more than justified by his history and ongoing disruption. '''[[User:MastCell|MastCell]]''' <sup>[[User Talk:MastCell|Talk]]</sup> 20:02, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* I would like to see what they have to say about the situation but mostly I am swayed by Levivich and Springee. Seems the most common sense and helpful approach. [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 20:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* AP topic ban. Pretty simple. They've had plenty of rope over the time and haven't changed behavior.--[[User:Jorm|Jorm]] ([[User talk:Jorm|talk]]) 20:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Topic banned.''' I've topic banned Bus stop indefinitely from all pages and discussions concerning post-1932 American politics. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|tålk]] 20:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC).
*I'm late to this party, and here only because I saw the notice of indefinite AP topic ban on Bus stop's UTP. He has been a clear net-negative on article talk pages for years, and my exposure to that has been mostly outside the AP area. So I agree it's not just AP, and perhaps a more appropriate sanction would be community ban, but the AP ban is far better than nothing. By the way, the serious problems also include persistent circular and repetitive argument that tends to make it less likely that arriving editors will read any of the existing discussion, largely defeating its purpose. Despite repeated exhortations Bus stop has seemed unable to grasp the concepts that a discussion is more than a debate between two or three editors, and that one doesn't need to keep repeating the same arguments over and over. While I doubt this TBAN will be the end of the Bus stop problem, it's a welcome step in the right direction. I only wish it didn't take years to reach this point. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">☎</span>]] 21:13, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*:I imagine that continuance of the behavior that just led to an indefinite AP topic ban would make a pretty convincing case for a community ban, if it comes to that. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 21:23, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*::It's been going on for 14 years, including previous complete Wikipedia bans, yet here we are again. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 21:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*:Please add these to my list: 1. Repeatedly asking you to answer a question that you have already answered multiple times, and, when you finally stop responding to those demands, accusing you of not being willing to participate in constructive discussion. 2. Believing that a discussion must continue until one of the parties is convinced by the other. That almost never happens, and it is not the purpose of discussion. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">☎</span>]] 04:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Endorse''' the AP2 topic ban, and the notion that violations should lead to an indef block and a CBan discussion. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 21:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
* This is just the latest in a long line of topics and discussions that Bus stop has mercilessly bludgeoned. A year ago he was banned from Aministrator Noticeboards for 3 months for bludgeoning a dicussion there: [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1017#Formal_proposal_2]]. After that he stated [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABus_stop&diff=prev&oldid=914170962 "I commit to no more bludgeoning"], yet I've seen many discussions since then which he has bludgeoned. [[User:GorillaWarfare]], [[User:Valereee]] and [[User:Mandruss]] have it right in that this isn't about AP2 per se, but about 14 years of bludgeoning discussions. After each sanction (or serious threat of one), Bus stop "reforms", but it rarely lasts more than a couple of months. [[User:Sundayclose]] is correct when they write "It seems that Bus stop relishes the bludgeoning process". I appreciate the topic ban [[User:Bishonen]], but that just means the bludgeoning will soon start up elsewhere. Building on [[User:Springee]]'s idea, I think a limit of one comment/reply per page per day might help Bus stop overcome his apparent need to bludgeon. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 21:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
*Y'all deserve to be bludgeoned {{google|Parler}}:<blockquote>Parler is an American microblogging and social networking service launched in August 2018. Parler has a significant user base of Trump supporters, conservatives, and right-wing extremists. Posts on the service often contain far-right content, antisemitism, and conspiracy theories. [[Parler|Wikipedia]]</blockquote>If you take the time to read the referenced sources, the main themes are: free speech, explosive growth due to mass exodus of conservatives, fracturing of our information sources, and yes about 2/3 down in most articles highlighting the nasty content. Editing so as to get the most damning aspects of something you don't like to show up in the google search results seems the way WP is written these days. [[User:Fiveby|fiveby]]([[User talk:Fiveby|zero]]) 23:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
**Reality is just biased. [[User:GPinkerton|GPinkerton]] ([[User talk:GPinkerton|talk]]) 23:56, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
***People are biased, reality just is. It is a shame they did not even get to reply or defend themselves though. [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 00:32, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
****Check out [[BitChute]]. Same deal. I initiated a discussion on the lede, which can be found [https:/wiki/Talk:BitChute/Archive_1#lede_2 here]. That was on 4 September 2020. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BitChute&oldid=976068607 Here] is what the lede looked like on 4 September 2020. It read {{tq|BitChute is a video hosting service known for accommodating far-right individuals and conspiracy theorists.[9] The platform was created in 2017 to allow video uploaders to avoid content rules enforcement on YouTube,[10] and some creators who have been banned from YouTube or had their channels barred from receiving advertising revenue ("demonetized") have migrated to BitChute.[2] The Southern Poverty Law Center has said the site hosts "hate-fueled material".[11]}} That's not the way a lede should be written. That constitutes left-leaning point-of-view-pushing. A lede is not a [[billboard]]. The point-of-view-pushing on Wikipedia is '''not''' primarily being done by those of us who might be considered "conservative", whatever that means. Thank you, {{u|Fiveby}}, {{u|PackMecEng}}, for weighing in. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 00:51, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::Wow, I think this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABus_stop&type=revision&diff=989232584&oldid=989100050] is relevant. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 01:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::Repeating, once again, arguments you've repeated ad nauseum about an AP2 topic on the thread in which you've just received a ban in the AP2 topic area for bludgeoning discussions, and where people have expressed concerns the behavior will continue, is certainly a bold choice. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 01:28, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::::::We shouldn't write ledes of social media articles that maximally disparage the underlying entity. This is what I am objecting to. Ledes are not ''required'' to do anything. It is entirely gratuitous to load the lede of a Parler or a BitChute article with every reliably-sourced, negative comment we can find. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 01:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::::Astonishing. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 01:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::::::::I just realized that fiveby said ''"y'all deserve to be bludgeoned"'' above, isn't that some kind of threat? [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 01:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::No, in context I don't think so, when the metaphorical use of "bludgeon" is omnipresent in the conversation. Cheers. [[User:Dumuzid|Dumuzid]] ([[User talk:Dumuzid|talk]]) 01:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
* '''Community ban now'''. I'm convinced this is the best solution after reading all the comments and evidence above. -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) 01:50, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
* I ran into an EC when Bish issued the TBan, and decided not to add. But, since this continues: The bludgeoning issue has existed for a long time and warnings haven’t helped. I asked Bus Stop to read BLUDGEON long ago, they said thank you, and then shortly after continued. This is quite disruptive on a page with several editors. I don’t think restricting edits per thread makes sense as repetition of an argument is more of the problem than sheer number of edits. An AP2 TBan would certainly help the situation and perhaps will provide time for the editor to understand the problem. [[User:Objective3000|O3000]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 01:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
* '''Endorse''' per Beyond My Ken. [[User:Firestar464|Firestar464]] ([[User talk:Firestar464|talk]]) 03:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] and I have had major editorial disagreements on four pages, two on articles I had originally created. I can't recall ever agreeing with them. That said, their disagreement, and repeated replies to other editors, never caused any disruption: in every case they were outnumbered, they argued their case, and that was the end of it. Given this, I don't understand why they are being banned from AP. Yes they respond with their opinion more than you want, and yes most of you (and me too apparently) disagree with them, but I don't perceive how having their opinion on the talk page is disruptive. In fact, when arguing with Bus stop in the past in the AP area, I've been acutely aware of the fact that a majority of reliable sources are on my side, but that Bus stop is expressing the view of a minority of American editorial boards - presumably those on the right of American politics — and is also expressing the views of perhaps 30-40 % of the United States. I'd rather have that view represented in the talk pages. And from a procedural perspective, why is action being taken against a long-term editor (not a vandal) after less than 24 hours of discussion? And before they've had a chance to defend themselves? -[[User:Darouet|Darouet]] ([[User talk:Darouet|talk]]) 03:13, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::{{reply|Darouet}} The issue and disruption is [[Sealioning]], [[WP:SEALION]] behavior. In this case, they have been ceaselessly re-demanding that GorillaWarfare and others expend time and energy responding to the same questions that have been answered over and over again, all the way from November 3rd to now. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 03:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::Darouet: 1. Your experience with Bus stop has been completely different from mine. 2. You are largely missing the point. 3. As for defending himself, he has offered no defense on his UTP, and his only "defense" here has been to continue the same "I just can't shut up" behavior that everybody is complaining about. GW calls him on it [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=989274877&oldid=989274515 here], and what is his reply to that? More of the same! Could the evidence be any clearer that Bus stop just doesn't get it? Given the long history here, could the evidence be any clearer that Bus stop is incapable of getting it? {{tq|From a procedural perspective,}} Bus stop has shown that it would have been pointless to wait. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">☎</span>]] 03:43, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::Darouet, please look at the diffs provided and not rely on your memory. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 03:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::{{replyto|Darouet}} if an admin feels that a topic ban is justified and the requirements to impose such a ban under the [[WP:ACDS]] process is meet, they do not need any specific community backing/consensus for such a ban. That's the point of the process, it allows admins to act without needing a long community discussion for each case. The topic ban can be appealed by Bus stop, as with all such bans. The number of endorses complicates things a bit, but in general, Bishonen is free to reconsider the ban based solely on Bus stop's request, and arbcom themselves could be willing to modify the ban. By comparison, for a community ban, it could not be simply overturned by Bishonen, and while arbcom is I believed technically still allowed to overturn such bans my understanding is they've said they won't overturn community bans. Also appealing a community ban just after it was imposed is nearly always an instant fail, whereas it's theoretical possible an instant appeal of a DS ban will succeed. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 12:31, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Endorse AP2 Topic ban'''. But I don't know if American Politics topic ban covers discussion at [[Talk:Parler]]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 03:27, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:It definitely does, and the discussion at issue was entirely about the presence of antisemitism and other far-right content on the platform. There's been an AP2 notice on the talk page for some time now. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 03:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::Good to know, thanks. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 03:49, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
* This [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABus_stop&type=revision&diff=989362947&oldid=989357375] is completely bonkers.
:# Ranting about Ted Cruz attacking Jack Dorsey (as if Cruz isn't your basic demagogue).
:# Something about frozen peaches, I'm not really sure.
:# Yet again ranting about the ledes.
:# ''"I "bludgeoned" the Talk page to try to introduce a little fresh air into the stuffy room. To tell you the truth it's a pleasure to speak freely. If they ban me, fine. So be it."''
:# ''"Let them tell me that they admit wrongdoing for trying to make Wikipedia into a partisan screed. Then I can admit wrongdoing for "bludgeoning" the page"''
:I have no words left to describe it. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 16:15, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::You have a strong fixation on seeing any "opponents" sanctioned. You've already been warned before so let me restate that comments such as "as if Cruz isn't your basic demagogue" is a BLP infraction and calling other editors "bonkers" is a NPA violation.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] ([[User talk:MONGO|talk]]) 16:27, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::First: you're wrong. Second: I did not say the editor is bonkers, I said '''the comment''' (which I linked) is bonkers. Third: as a statement of opinion regarding ''"a political leader who seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument"'' I believe I'm on pretty safe ground here. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 16:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::::You really do need to be a lot more careful with BLP issues. Even [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GorillaWarfare&diff=prev&oldid=989294188 here] calling people white supremacists is not great. [[User:PackMecEng|PackMecEng]] ([[User talk:PackMecEng|talk]]) 16:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
::::I Hate Accounts, no, you're wrong. You best read up on BLP as it applies everywhere and referring to those who are under the BLP covenant here as "demagogue" in your own voice is a BLP violation.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] ([[User talk:MONGO|talk]]) 17:05, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::As an editor mostly uninvolved in this subject (I haven't edited the article, but I ''do'' live in the US and make posts online) I will echo the sentiment that this might not be a great series of posts. In an AN/I thread about a political argument you were involved in, I'm not sure that posting stuff like "completely bonkers", "basic demagogue" and "frozen peaches" (what??) is a helpful approach. '''[[User:JPxG|jp]]'''×'''[[User talk:JPxG|g]]''' 09:16, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Endorse AP2 Ban''' Bus Stop definitely has a bludgeoning style of debate (regurgitating ones' arguments and asking odd questions about that which causes discussions to go in circles) and while I don't edit many AP2-related pages, this comes up on the WP-space pages where AP2 factors come into play - BLP/N, Jimmy Wales' talk page, etc. policy pages, etc. Assessments above related to highly partisan editing and not using those discussions to try to come to consensus but continue to push a point are my experience, and reviewing the talk page of Parler shows the same problems (mind you, I see valid points raised on neutrality and tone but Bus Stop is going at it all wrong). --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 16:34, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Site ban now''' BS has just [https:/wiki/User_talk:Bus_stop#Notice_that_you_are_now_subject_to_an_arbitration_enforcement_topic_ban violated his TBAN on his talk page]. This has been a long time coming. It's time to stop wasting community time and resources on this.[[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 16:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''Oppose site ban''' but a 1 week block including talk page might work nicely as a cool down period. I've looked over the Parlor lead. It clearly fails IMPARTIAL but the general editorial atmosphere there is too toxic to bother with. I understand why an editor would be pissed. It also doesn't help that IHateAccouts seems to be campaigning for action against Bus Stop [[https:/wiki/User_talk:GorillaWarfare#Bus_stop]]. Clearly Bus Stop's emotions are up. Let them come back when they calm down a bit. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 16:52, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:Not "campaigning". Commiserating with someone else who has had to deal with Bus Stop's [[Sealioning]]. [[User:IHateAccounts|IHateAccounts]] ([[User talk:IHateAccounts|talk]]) 16:59, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:{{ec}} IHateAccounts is fairly new to the project and has been to an extent using me as a sounding board to get a feel for the norms of the project (when to raise an issue at a noticeboard, when to let it go, etc.) Given the topic areas we both edit in, it's a tough place to dive in, and I think they've been wise to do what they're doing rather than just barging in headfirst at noticeboards etc. where there are a lot of "unwritten rules". IHA is perfectly aware that I am [[WP:INVOLVED]] with Bus stop and not going to take action with respect to them, and their comments on my talk page are not asking me to take action. They've primarily been using my talk page to get feedback on their concerns, which I think should be encouraged, as well as to vent a little bit on what has been an ''extremely'' frustrating experience on the talk page of the article. It should be noted, while we are on the subject of people campaigning for action, that you have seemed to be doing some of the same with respect to IHA, based on your recent comments at their talk page, followup at valereee's talk page, and now here. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 17:01, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::My comments on their talk page and later on Valereee's talk page were related to their civility issues. The original post to their page was in reply to interacting with them on other discussion sections. I'm not the only editor who has noted their civility standards. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 17:11, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::GW, IHateAccounts is not fairly new as they were around long enough to IP hop for some time before they created this account. It's nice they did create an account as now its easier to make sure they are compliant with our policies.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] ([[User talk:MONGO|talk]]) 17:16, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:::I am quite familiar with IHateAccounts' editing as an IP; I was one of the people who encouraged them to create an account while also trying to remind our editors that there is no requirement one do so. I was including their time as an IP editor when describing them as "fairly new". [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 17:18, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::::Super! I knew that too! Whats the cutoff for no longer being "fairly new"?--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] ([[User talk:MONGO|talk]]) 17:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:::::I don't know, a year or so? [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 17:28, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::::::Excellent. Thats a nice long training period.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] ([[User talk:MONGO|talk]]) 19:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:Springee, it should be abundantly clear by now that this discussion is no longer about recent behavior at one article. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">☎</span>]] 17:33, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::This. I may have some agreements in where Bus Stop is taking his arguments in terms of the tendency for articles in that area of the political spectrum to have poor NPOV wording and tone and where its hard to get traction with the editors that heavily edit them, but the way Bus Stop has argued for that throughout several cases is bludgeoning and the fact that they turned right around after been AP2 banned to add more AP2 shows a bit of IDIDNTHEARTHAT, which is common to numerous past discussions. This is more disruptive than helpful at this point. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 18:24, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:::I am inclined to agree with this comment; the actual political merit of the arguments in question seems like a distant issue from the objectionable way in which they've been prosecuted, which is obviously detrimental to the encyclopedia. '''[[User:JPxG|jp]]'''×'''[[User talk:JPxG|g]]''' 09:20, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
* '''Endorse AP2 ban''' as per Beyond My Ken's concerns. [[User:Sjones23|Lord Sjones23]] ([[User talk:Sjones23|talk]] - [[User:Sjones23/Wikipedia contributions|contributions]]) 17:07, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*'''I oppose sanctions for violating the topic ban at this time.''' Re the suggestions here that Bus stop is violating his topic ban in his comments here and on his page: I disagree. To be topic banned from a major area is a shock. When users are blocked, we tend to tolerate venting and angry comments about the block — I know I do — and the same principle should apply to topic bans. I won't sanction Bus stop for anything he has said in this thread or on his page so far, and I hope nobody else does either. If he were to post a lot of drawn-out commentary/discussion infringing on the AP area, instead of appealing the ban, that would be a different situation. But we're not there yet. And, [[User:Springee|Springee]], I see your point, but we don't do "cooldown blocks". [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|tålk]] 17:19, 18 November 2020 (UTC).
*:I just wanted to +1 this. Although I was surprised to see Bus stop continue the exact line of argument that led to this topic ban, we do usually allow a little leeway to editors venting a bit about a major sanction. If it continues for a protracted period of time or they continue on editing AP2 articles/their talk pages as if there was no topic ban, that would be a different story, but I don't think an immediate sanction would do anyone any good here. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 17:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*::That seems reasonable. It's like the [[Acela]]. If we are on the right track, another one will come along fast enough.[[User:SPECIFICO |<b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b>]][[User_talk:SPECIFICO | ''talk'']] 17:42, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
*:::{{smaller|1=Gotta love a good train metaphor. :) ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">☎</span>]] 17:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)}}
Masem, you write {{tq|I may have some agreements in where Bus Stop is taking his arguments in terms of the tendency for articles in that area of the political spectrum to have poor NPOV wording and tone and where its hard to get traction with the editors that heavily edit them, but the way Bus Stop has argued for that throughout several cases is bludgeoning and the fact that they turned right around after been AP2 banned to add more AP2 shows a bit of IDIDNTHEARTHAT, which is common to numerous past discussions.}} First of all nice sentence. I couldn't have written a longer sentence myself. Did I bludgeon the Talk page of [https:/wiki/Talk:BitChute/Archive_1#lede_2 BitChute]? I don't think so. A light bulb went off in my head when, subsequent to the BitChute experience, I saw something very similar happening at Parler. The parallels were striking: another second-tier social media article with everything but the kitchen sink in the way of criticism in the lede. I'm not sure what {{tq|"several cases"}} you have in mind, {{u|Masem}}. But the immediate precedent and the case I had in mind in my argumentation on the Parler Talk page was the BitChute article. I wanted to stem the trend. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 20:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
:While I disagree with you about a lot, I don't think that you're wrong about everything. That said, you really ought to consider opting out of these huge endless arguments with people who are obviously never going to agree with you. I mean, right now, you are on AN/I, in a thread where you have just been topic-banned for doing this, posting about the exact same thing! I exhort you to relax for a while. The first time I saw your posts on a talk page, it was in a similarly ill-advised jousting match on Jimbo's talk page, which went on for kilobytes, to absolutely no productive end. It's one thing to argue for NPOV; it's another thing entirely to [[owning the libs|spill gallons of ink on talk pages]] when consensus is clearly not in favor of your changes. '''[[User:JPxG|jp]]'''×'''[[User talk:JPxG|g]]''' 09:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
::JPxG—the much ballyhooed policy of WP:NPOV does not mean much if the Wikipedia community fails to endorse it. I think Wikipedia has some principles and practices that should '''only''' be altered after considerable discussion. Pertaining to the ledes of articles on social media sites, such a discussion has not taken place, to my knowledge. There should not be 2 different standards for the first and biggest social media sites and those smaller social media sites which have sprung up—call them second-tier sites—in response to users being banned from the first and biggest social media sites. I've been here long enough to recognize principles that permeate the project. We do not write glowing ledes about the first and biggest social media sites and then throw every negative piece of commentary that is reliably-sourced into the ledes of articles on second-tier social media sites. That is [[wikt:thumb on the scale|putting one's finger on the scale]] and therefore, in my opinion, a violation of [[WP:NPOV]]. I am guilty of [[WP:BLUDGEON|"bludgeoning"]]. I can admit to that. But I am also explaining to you and others why I have argued vociferously on the Parler Talk page. I am addressing a very real problem. I should not be penalized for doing so. I would never think to write '''in the lede''' of the BitChute article that {{tq|The Southern Poverty Law Center has said the site hosts "hate-fueled material"}} yet that is what '''an administrator''' is doing [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=895423895 here]. I only discovered that moments ago; it has no bearing on why I "bludgeoned" the Parler article. Let's all be honest about our roles. We have our opinions. What is called for, in my opinion, is an earnest discussion about how WP:NPOV applies to articles on social media articles, specifically the ledes of those articles. We can't have 2 standards in place. I contend we presently have a de facto dual standard in place—one for the big companies and another for the small companies. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 22:54, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
:::I would be happy to address this comment if others think it is appropriate and worth discussing. However, I am extremely hesitant to do so here/with you since it seems to be largely agreed that you are violating the topic ban that was just placed. Although I agree with those who think people should be given a bit of leeway as they adjust to a new restriction, that patience usually wears a bit thin if the person continues to behave as though the ban was not in place, and I don't intend to encourage such violations or appear to be baiting you into a sanction by engaging you in the discussion. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 23:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
:::I clearly agree with Bus stop for those that know what I have argued on other places like NPOV/N and the like, but to Bus stop, the issue is not that you're taking this point, but your are repeating the same arguments over and over again, adding rabbit trails to the arguments that are ongoing that editors have to stop and address, and basically not keeping a focused discussion on the matter at hand. Once in a while topics can get out of hand, but this has seemed to be a common problem in the discussions that you have been in that I've been a part of as well, as also part of the diffs shown in this thread. Even here, you're trying to point out the logic of the NPOV issues on articles, but the focus here is your behavior and style of debate; what the topic area is or concerns are not relevant here (particularly when you're trying to argue that you feel you are correct and thus justifying your behavior that way - that's never a good starting point). Focus on why there's a topic ban, and it is not because you are arguing for a more neutral take on these articles, it is because the way you present debate on these articles is getting in the way of practical discussion. --[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 23:15, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
* '''Endorse AP2 ban''' but we should be relaxed about appeals once the dust has settled - maybe mid 2021? '''[[user:JzG|Guy]]''' <small>([[user talk:JzG|help!]] - [[User:JzG/Typos|typo?]])</small> 23:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
**{{u|JzG}}—you refer to [[Andy Ngo]] as a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=984929546&oldid=984929062 "neo-fascist apologist"]. It boggles the mind that you can recommend that my editing privileges should be curtailed. Admins are supposed to set examples for others. You are not exactly setting good examples for other editors. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 00:14, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
::: Only because he is, though. And to be clear: he is allowed to be an apologist for neo-fascists, it's just that we're not allowed to pretend he is a neutral commentator. '''[[user:JzG|Guy]]''' <small>([[user talk:JzG|help!]] - [[User:JzG/Typos|typo?]])</small> 00:17, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
::::Actually it's a [[WP:BLP]] violation. [[User:Bus stop|Bus stop]] ([[User talk:Bus stop|talk]]) 00:38, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
:::::Actually, you're still violating your ban and should be blocked. [[User:Valeince|Valeince]] ([[User talk:Valeince|talk]]) 01:46, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
::::::This is getting silly. '''[[User:JPxG|jp]]'''×'''[[User talk:JPxG|g]]''' 04:17, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
:::Bus Stop, I'm sympathetic with the IMPARTIAL issues you are worried about. I think your concerns were very valid but you need to stop discussing AP2 material. The admins above were willing to let things slide shortly after the block was imposed but that grace period is not, to the best of my knowledge, a rule and I would say it has expired. Please respect the Wikipedia process and the Tban. I suspect if you chill for a while, show you can be a productive editor in non-AP2 areas and then come back with some self imposed anti-bludgeoning restrictions you may be able to return to AP2 topics. This isn't going to help. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 04:37, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
{{abot}}
| |||