User talk:Drieakko/The Kven incident

Kven user

Hi Drieakko.

I wonder, if I have encountered you before on Kven-related articles? Maybe as an anonymous user?

I am also thinking, if the best solution is not to take this matter to Arbitration, since it appears to be futile to discuss with the user known as "Kven-User" (a.k.a. user:Art Dominique, user:Digi Wiki, etc.)

I haven't been involved since the article was split, and at that time Art Dominique was blocked-- or in any case, he disappeared. But now that he is back in action again, it might be necessary to get a conclusion about this user. What do you think?

Fred-Chess 13:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created my first and only account sometime early this year. Just one user name and no anonymous postings unless accidentally when I haven't realized to have logged myself in.

The Kvenland article should be semi-protected forever to block the nuisance of consistently appearing sock puppets. All users contributing sensible material to the article are anyway permanent creatures. Preventing the puppets from appearing on the discussion forum is naturally difficult, but I think all parties involved in the discussions are so aware of the situation already, that nobody is really bothered by Art Dominique's posts any more. --Drieakko 13:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input.

Your suggestion is, in my opinion, not sufficient because if all puppets are prevented, then the user will register an account (think "Art Dominique") and continue his postings.

I want to know, do you think it is rewarding to discuss this user, or should we act to block him indefinately from all Kven-related articles?

Fred-Chess 13:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From my part, it is not needed to have any other actions than semi-protection, perhaps also for Kven and Kven language. I can cope with the situation then without problems. The only thing that annoys me are the sock puppets tampering the article several times a day. Just slowing down the vandalism a bit is needed. --Drieakko 13:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, all three articles have been semi-proctected. Kven had already been protected for five months: 19:13, 5 April 2006 Mikkalai protected Kven.

Fred-Chess 13:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Drieakko 16:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drieakko, like Fred Chess I was going to propose taking this matter to Arbitration. My concern is that the multiple recent duplicate posts makes relevant discussion in the Talk:Kven impossible. Have you changed your mind after the recent days postings? Labongo 19:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that the problematic user in question won't be affected by the arbitration process in any way. He will keep creating new accounts and use new IPs and post his long rants. I think the fact is that we just have to live with him as long as he bothers to be around. --Drieakko 19:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I was hoping that the Arbitration comittee had some "big guns" they could use to block this user for a very long time.Labongo 20:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course they have!

The purpose of arbitration is that they can put an injuction, stating that a reincarnation of a user is to be immediately blocked by any admin!

Fred-Chess 15:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user creates a new puppet for every occasion and abandons it immediately. That is very difficult to tackle. --Drieakko 15:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have an incorrect view of the arbitration committee and the blocking function on Wikipedia. On blocks, account creations is also blocked, at least from this IP (not sure about the details). / Fred-Chess 16:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration request on Kven-users

Dear Editor, since you have been involved in editing the Kven, Kven language, or Kvens of the past articles in the last months, articles that have been troubled by peristant POV-pushing, your name is listed in the Request for Arbitration on this matter. You can make a statement here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Kven-users. Best regards, Fred-Chess 16:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kven+Ghirlandajo

Since you may no longer have the page on your watchlist, I want to tell you that I have answered Ghirla's query there. Please do not interpret this message as stalking, since I only want to give you the opportunity of answering it, as it might as well have been addressed to you. Have a nice day. --Pan Gerwazy 10:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. But that case has nothing to do with me. --Drieakko 13:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kven

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kven. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kven/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kven/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --FloNight 23:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppets

I think we should keep Kven unprotected because it is Wikipedia standard.

The sockpuppets are quickly blocked and reverted (and blocked from creating more accounts from the same IP). Mikkalai blocked user:Ustinov 100 before I had a chance. [1].

Fred-Chess 08:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand that having a note about vandalism on Wikipedia pages looks bad and should be avoided. Thanks to both of you for quick actions on this. --Drieakko 09:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kven

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

Kven-user limited to one account and is placed on probation. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts by aggressive biased editing. The Kven-user is banned from editing articles related to Kven or making any edits regarding the topic. Should Kven-user edit under any username or IP prior to selecting a username any edit made may be removed on sight and the account indefinitely blocked. Should Kven-user violate any ban, he may be briefly blocked, up to a month in the event of repeat offenses. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Kven#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srik e it ^{(Talk | Email)} 00:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Art Dominique

Thanks for letting me know, I think I got them all. Cheers, Khoi khoi 18:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick actions. --Drieakko 19:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'll semi-protect it when it gets bad (probably in a few days). It's just not fair to the other anons & new users who want to edit the page. Khoi khoi 19:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old friends active again

Hello, Drieakko. I have some delightful news! Greatly missed Kven User is apparently on the road again, this time in Finnish Wikipedia. So far he has been dealing with the articles Jatkosota and Kveenit.--217.112.249.156 19:42, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it seems so. I have been only little active in Finnish Wikipedia, but I can have checks on those topics every now and then. --Drieakko 05:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]