Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tobias Conradi/Evidence

< Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration | Tobias Conradi

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&oldid=5584644] [1].

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Be aware that arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Evidence presented by Gnangarra (talk · contribs)

edit

Undiscussed article moves

edit

Tobias has moved 113 articles between April 5 and April 16, none of these moves had prior discussions. The articles were of differing quality from stubs to featured articles, with each of the moves there were no edits to correct redirects

The moving of pages without discussion by Tobias isnt just a recent occurance this discussion on Tobias' talk page occured around September 27, 2006. This discussion did became uncivil, which attracted the attention of User:Ganeshk who directed Tobias to the WP:RM page.diff

Ignoring consensus

edit

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi/admin right abuse discussion resulted in this page which listed alleged admin abuses being deleted. When it was listed Tobias was asked to take any issues he had with admins to the dispute process. Then User:Tobias Conradi/2006 summer admin incidents was created and nominated for deletion Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi/2006 summer admin incidents same recommendation for dispute resolution and page again deleted. Then he placed the content on User:Tobias Conradi, I requested that it be removed diff Tobias replied that he only follows policy not discussions diff I advised him I would remove it, then removed the offending content from his user page myself and was reverted by Tobias shortly after. Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tobias Conradi was started and the result was the deletion.

Evidence presented by User:Lar

edit

Note: Much useful material was collected by Tobias himself on the various pages he characterised as documenting admin abuse. Review of the content of deleted pages such as this one: [2] can provide useful starting places for investigation and presentation of evidence.

Tobias probably is a native speaker of German

edit

English probably is not Tobias's primary language. this deleted revision of his user page (and many others) states he lives in Berlin, Germany.

Tobias has been blocked on the German Wikipedia

edit

See [3] which shows two blocks, one for 2 hours and one for 2 weeks. Tobias has acknowledged that this is his userid on de. He also probably has userids on a large number of other wikipedias this deleted revision of his userpage shows many userids claimed as his. However many of these wikis do not have many edits from him. For example, this wannabe Kate run shows Tobias has about 500 edits on de.

Tobias disputed the nature of the process for approval to use AutoWikiBrowser

edit

Summary

edit

Since there is a lot of detail I decided to summarise

  • AutoWikiBrowser is a powerful external tool, first written by Bluemoose and now maintained by a team of volunteers, that lets users edit Wikipedia in a rapid semiautomated way, although it is technically not a bot.
    • Since a great deal of cleanup work can be caused by this tool if used in a careless or malicious way, the author (after consulting with the community, and in accordance with the general thinking at WP:BOT) decided to require validation. The tool requires a user to be logged in, and checks the userid to see if it is present on a list found on Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. This page is protected and only admins can edit it.
    • Non admin users post to Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage to gain approval. Although any admin can edit the CheckPage, in practice, a small set of admin users do so, using Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#.281.29_Register as their guide (typically any editor with more than 500 edits gets approval).
  • Tobias Conradi, an editor with more than 500 edits, sought approval to use AWB
  • Winhunter, an admin, declined to approve Tobias, citing his long previous block log.
  • Tobias attempted, multiple times, in the face of reversion and warnings, to make changes to the AWB policy pages to state that AWB policy allowed any admin to use it, that AWB was not in accordance with WP policy, and that AWB was not subject to WP policy.
  • These edits were not well received, and subsequent discussion saw some users characterising the edits, reversion, and commentary by Tobias as disruptive, or even as trolling.
  • Tobias was warned about this
  • Tobias was blocked and unblocked, with an apology, by me
  • Tobias was blocked and unblocked by Ligulem.
  • Tobias was subsequently approved for use of AWB.

Details

edit

Note: I have reconstructed this as best as possible but I may not have the sequence exactly right, there were a lot of edits to several pages. I welcome correction.

In late September 2006, Tobias applied for approval to use AWB at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage per the process: [4] and was not approved [5] by Winhunter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), with the edit summary "(→Names - rm processed; Tobias Conradi NOT approved because of block logs)". Tobias then asked [6] if admins are automatically added, which was answered [7] by Bluemoose (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (the original author of AWB) to say that all admins were initially added, and new ones added as they made themselves known. Tobias then asked [8] why they were in by default and whether that meant they did not have to "follow the rules of WP", and asserted that thus "AWB is outside of WP policies". Bluemoose then tried to explain [9], that admins are by default trusted to use AWB appropriately.

Several days later on 5 October Tobias changed the AWB policy on approval [10] and commented that AWB was outside WP policy, quoting Winhunter's answer to his query about why he was denied. The policy change was reverted [11] by Bluemoose. A different policy change was then inserted [12] by Tobias again asserting admin discretion rather than policy, and an exception [13] for admins asserted. These changes were reverted [14] by Bluemoose, who also [15] commented about rules applicability. Tobias [16] justified his change citing his issue with admins that in his view did not follow rules, and then [17] removed the warning that abuse of the tool would result in removal of authorisation, and made [18] other changes reasserting removed policy changes. These changes were reverted [19] by Bluemoose with the summary "(rm trolling again, last warning)", who then commented [20] "who is using the software to repeatedly make mistakes?" and asked that the wording not be changed again. Tobias then [21] changed the wording to assert the guide has false claims and asked Bluemoose "why do you ask" in reply to his "make mistakes" question. Blue replied [22] and then again removed the policy changes [23] with "rm trolling", which Tobias then [24] reinserted, (reverted: [25]), reinserted again [26], (reverted again: [27]) and commented [28] that he was not aware of admins using the software to violate policies. Kingboyk (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tried to calm things [29], [30] but noted [31] that Tobias had a long block log. During this time, I commmented on Tobias's talk page [32] that some of these edits concerned me, and Bluemoose commented [33] saying his trolling was disruptive. This was removed [34] by Tobias as an "attack".

On October 7th Tobias modified [35] with assertions about AWB, resulting in Bluemoose stating [36] "I don't know why you won't accept that granting usage of AWB is an admin right, just as blocking and deleting is.", and trying to clarify [37] AWB policy again. These comments were shortly thereafter [38] removed. At this point I [39] warned Tobias (using a hand written warning, not a template) about this and other things, asking that he be more collegial. This was modified [40], [41] by Tobias to group with previous warnings, and then [42] removed.

On October 8th, Tobias replied to several posters [43] asking if it was thought he was complaining about not getting access rather than trying to clarify policy noting that AWB abides by WP:BOT.

Several days later on October 13th, Tobias again inserted text [44] into the policy section, and also added an unsigned to it for Bluemoose on a particular section. This was reverted [45] by Bluemoose "(rm trolling)"

During this period I commented [46] on Tobias's talk, asking again what he was trying to accomplish and warning him that he might be blocked if he contineud to be disruptive.

Tobias then [47] reinserted removed text and replied to Winhunter, and asserted that Bluemoose was in violation of WP policy by removing Tobias's assertions of what AWB policy needed to be. The policy change was reverted [48] by Bluemoose who then again warned [49] Tobias to stop being disruptive. Ligulem (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) noted [50] that he had warned Tobias.

On October 14th things went as others described them, particular Ligulem.

The following blocks were associated with this series of events

  1. 13:24, 13 October 2006 Lar (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Tobias Conradi (contribs)" with an expiry time of 2 weeks (edit warring over AWB pages despite repeated warnings) (Unblock)
  2. 13:37, 13 October 2006 Lar (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked Tobias Conradi (contribs) (blocked in error - Edit in question was made before warning was given)
  3. 14:21, 14 October 2006 Ligulem (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Tobias Conradi (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Disruption on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage) (Unblock)
  4. 06:00, 15 October 2006 Ligulem (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked Tobias Conradi (contribs) (I'm willing to shorten this block)

The community has discussed how best to deal with Tobias more than once

edit

Here is one time: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive147#Proposed_community_ban_for_Tobias_Conradi. There are others.

{Write your assertion here}

edit

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.

Evidence presented by Ligulem

edit

The AWB checkpage situation

edit

The AWB dispute escalated after admin Winhunter denied Tobias' request for addition to the list of enabled AWB users based on Tobias' block log (diff). I believe this was problematic, as past blocks should not be held against users per se. Some other experienced users with non-empty block logs had already been added in the past.

The main problem here was: Tobias didn't talk with Winhunter about the denial of his request for inclusion on the checkpage. Tobias instead started to wiki-lawyer about the process of adding admins to the AWB checkpage (initial post by Tobias, see also evidence presented by Lar), later clearly causing disruption on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage for which he was warned, blocked and notified about the block by me.

After an email exchange with Bluemoose and after reviewing the situation I tried to defuse the AWB checkpage situation per WP:AGF by adding Tobias to the list of enabled users on a trial basis (diff), notified Tobias, shortened my original 24h block and notified Tobias about the lifting of my block. --Ligulem 23:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence presented by User:ShivaIdol

edit

Controversial moves without first seeking consensus

edit
edit

Incivility

edit
  • Uncivil comments in a page move discussion: [85]
  • Deleting talk page comments asking Tobias to seek consensus before moving pages:[86]
  • Deleting talk page comments asking Tobias to seek consensus before moving pages:[87]
  • Accusing an editor of being a xenophobe and a hypocrite: [88]
  • Accusing an editor of being full of hate: [89]
  • Incivility in response to incivility: [90]
  • A listing of diffs labelled as lies: User_talk:Tobias_Conradi#false.2C_unproven_statements.2C_lies
  • A listing of diffs labelled as abuses of admin rights: User_talk:Tobias_Conradi#abuses_of_admin_rights
  • Suggesting other editors are lying: [91], [92], [93], [94], [95], [96], [97], [98]
  • Suggesting people don't have sufficient intelligence: [99], [100]
  • Suggesting editors have personal disabilities: [101]
  • Calling an editor an "ignorant reverter": [102]
  • Calling an editor an arrogant policy violation supporter: [103]
  • Calling an editor an asshole in the edit summary while deleting warnings: [104]
  • Accusing an editor of trying to mislead other editors: [105]
  • Accusing editors of stalking: [106]
  • Accusing editors of attacking: [107]

Inability to accept consensus

edit
  • After a consensus agreed on a page name, Tobias claims the move is "illegal": [108]
  • [109]
  • [110]

Soapboxing

edit

Editors tired of Tobias's behavior

edit

Evidence presented by {your user name}

edit

before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

{Write your assertion here}

edit

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.

{Write your assertion here}

edit

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Tobias_Conradi/Evidence&oldid=431112006"