This MedLibrary.org supplementary page on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct is provided directly from the open source Wikipedia as a service to our readers. Please see the note below on authorship of this content, as well as the Wikipedia usage guidelines. To search for other content from our encyclopedia supplement, please use the form below:
Related Sponsors
This process page is undergoing reform discussion on its talk page here.
This process is for discussing specific users who may have violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In order to request comments on a user's actions, follow the instructions to create a subpage in the section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in Article content disputes.
Before using this page, you should have read the general instructions on RfCs for users. You might also want to read some suggestions on how to present an RfC case.
Contents |
Uncertified user RfCs
Requests for comment which do not meet the minimum requirements 48 hours after creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Request comment on users for the minimum requirements. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.
Instructions
Different RfCs have been run in different ways, and there are few hard and fast rules. An RfC's general structure in dealing with user conduct is:
- A statement of the dispute, including an evidence section with diffs
- The subject's response
- Individual Views from other editors
- A list of which editors endorse each of the above sections
To create a new User Conduct RfC, follow the instructions in the "General User Conduct" section below.
Once the RfC is created, it should be listed in the "Candidate pages" section, until two different users have certified the RfC. After certification, the RfC is then moved from the "Candidate pages" section to the "Approved pages" section.
RfC guidelines
Once a User Conduct RfC has been opened and certified, other editors can take a look and offer comments, either by posting their own view, or endorsing someone else's view.
The following represents the guidelines formed by general practice. These are not policies or "rules", but advice on how most RfCs are run:
- Anyone, including those who wrote the original RfC, is allowed to post their own view, in a separate section with their name on it, such as ==View by <name>== It can be helpful to indicate the viewpoint of the particular editor, such as "Outside view" "Inside view" "Semi-involved view" etc.
- In most cases those who brought the RfC do not post individualized views, since the initial statement already indicates their thoughts, but in some cases they may wish to post an additional individualized view to clarify their opinion. Either method is acceptable.
- Other users can endorse a view, by adding their signature to the list after that view. Along with their signature, they may wish to offer a clarifying comment of one or two sentences, for example if they agree with all but one particular part of the view. Longer responses than that should probably go into their own "View" section.
- All signed comments and talk that are neither a view nor an endorsement should be directed to the discussion page.
- Any other types of discussion should be directed to the talkpage.
- Anyone can endorse any view, regardless of whether or not they are outside parties, inside parties, or even the subject of the RfC. Ideally, there will be some view(s) that both sides of the involved parties can endorse.
- You may endorse as many views as you wish. You may also endorse the original RfC statement, and/or the subject's response.
- Only endorse views with which you agree. Do not post "disagreement" endorsements. The lack of a signature is sufficient indication that there may be some disagreement with the statement.
For more information on how previous RfCs have been run, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive.
Closing and archiving
Disputes may be removed from this page and archived under any of the following circumstances:
- If no additional complaints are registered for an extended period of time, and the dispute appears to have stopped.
- The parties to the dispute agree.
- The dispute proceeds to another method of dispute resolution, such as mediation or arbitration.
Remove the link from the list here and add it to the archives at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. If the dispute is handled in mediation or arbitration, please make a note of where the dispute resolution process continued.
General user conduct
Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example user as a template, and then list it as follows:
- Example user
- {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~ (note: that is five tildes, not four, RFCs are signed with the date only, not your username)
Use this form to generate a new page:
An alternate template example is available at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example user2. This new template has been redesigned from the original to try and focus more on discussion than conflict. If you would like to use this template, create a subpage and list it the same as a normal RFC:
- Example user2
- {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~ (note: that is five tildes, not four, RFCs are signed with the date only, not your username)
Or use this form to generate a page:
Note: In certain rare situations, the above methods may not work if there has already been a User Conduct RfC on that particular user, since clicking on the button will simply take you to the old page. If this happens, you will need to manually create the next page in the series. For example, if you wanted to create the third RfC on John Doe, you would create a page at [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Doe 3]], and then list the new page in the "Candidate" section below. If you have any questions on this, you can ask at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User conduct.
Candidate pages (users)
- Has assumed aggressive and attacking behavior, has made unwarranted accusations of Meat Puppetry, and has attempted to take control of the article without coming to a dispute resolution. -- 14:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Approved pages (users)
These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.
- Has engaged in out-of-the-blue personal attacks, failed to assume good faith, tossed around several accusations of sockpuppetry and in general he is prone to aggressive, disruptive behaviour. -- 22:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Disruptive and single-subject editing of articles on Automatic link establishment, violations of WP:COI, WP:SPA, WP:OWN, WP:LUC, WP:CIVIL, WP:VANDAL. 03:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Incivility, assumption of bad faith. 12:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- User showing long-standing pattern of behaviours inconsistent with a communal, collegiate environment, including incivility, threatened and actual disruption, unwillingness to abide by consensus, and sense of ownership of material. 00:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- User showing blatant disregard for Wikipedia policies and guidelines via making threats and incivility during an AfD. 16:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Reverting and deleting information without appropriate discussion. 21:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Use of administrator privileges
This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Wikipedia:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, blocking or unblocking users, and enforcing Arbitration Committee decisions. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:
- Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example admin
- Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~
As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.
Candidate pages (admins)
Approved pages (admins)
These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.
- Davidruben promoted WP:MEDRS to guideline over well-argued objections of several editors. He then took sides in the resulting dispute by reverting to the version of the page he prefers and protecting the revert. 03:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- Issues with behavior and policy interpretations, primarily centered around images. 12:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- Concerns about the management of editing conditions. 22:29, 1 August 2008
Use of bot privileges
This section is only for discussions specifically related to the operation of a bot. This includes the actions of unauthorized bots, bots without flags, and inter-wiki bots. It does not include the use of scripts or semi-automated tools on a user's account. If the dispute is over a bot owner's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:
- Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Example bot
- Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts} ~~~~~
As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.
Candidate pages (bots)
Approved pages (bots)
These RfCs have met the two-person threshold. List newer entries on top.
Wikipedia content modification information:
- This page was last modified on 13 October 2008, at 00:52.
Wikipedia Authorship and Review
Wikipedia content provided here is not reviewed directly by MedLibrary.org. Wikipedia content is authored by an open community of volunteers and is not produced by or in any way affiliated with MedLibrary.org.
Wikipedia Usage Guidelines
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article on "Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct".
The URL for this specific entry is:
All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.