KnutfAen
Joined 13 November 2012
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Hordaland in topic Bergen
Welcome!
|
Requested move
editA discussion is taking place as to whether the article Draugr, recently moved to Draug, should be moved back. The discussion may be found at Talk:Draug#New requested move discussion: return article to Draugr. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hello KnutfAen, I'm sure you remember me (I'm the admin who performed the page move you requested for this article). I'm also keeping an eye on this discussion since I was the one who made the decision to move the page to Draugr (since it appeared uncontroversial at the time you requested it). I just wanted to warn you about a few things that are troubling me very much.
- First of all, asking for friends off-Wiki to come participate at the discussion was very inappropriate. Doing so is considered canvassing. You'll notice in that guideline that all notifications to other editors is listed as "inappropriate"; in fact, you violated almost every aspect of our canvassing guideline by asking for people you know personally that are almost surely going to support you (self-described "friends"), and doing so off Wikipedia so that we can't verify what manner your notification was sent. People can be, and have been blocked for canvassing that wasn't quite so blatant.
- Secondly, asking people to come to Wikipedia to support you in a discussion may be considered meatpuppetry, which is equated with abusing multiple accounts. As our policy states, "recruiting new editors to influence decisions on Wikipedia is prohibited". I am at the very least going to block the accounts of your friends, and their contributions to the discussion should be discounted.
- Thirdly, allowing other editors to use your computer during this whole process makes it appear that you're doing all of this yourself, and creating phantom people to support you. While we always try to assume good faith from editors until there is evidence that a good faith assumption is unreasonable, any technical evidence gathered from a CheckUser is going to give the impression that you're abusing multiple accounts. Be very, very careful about letting other editors use your computer, even doing so from their own account separate from yours. If they edit in the same areas as you, or edit in a manner similar to you, it is going to look like you're abusing multiple accounts.
- The last concern I have is not something that really involves a policy or guideline infraction, but just some common sense advice. When an editor comes onto Wikipedia (especially a new editor with no editing history) any claim of authority or expertise is practically impossible to verify. With few exceptions, every editor here is anonymous, and even those who claim to be identifying themselves are difficult to check. So while it can be useful to inform others about your profession, or what knowledge or skills you have, it is not something you can expect to sway other editors. If you can make solid arguments and back them up with evidence, that will work. A person who comes out of nowhere and claims to be "a scolar of germanic culture" or "a linguistics expert" is wasting their time. I could claim to be anything I like and nobody can conclusively say otherwise, therefore doing so isn't going to have any effect.
- Under most circumstances an editor who has done what you've done would be blocked from editing, at least temporarily, and possibly for an indefinite period. Trying to influence a discussion in the manner you did is very serious. The only reason I haven't blocked you, and probably won't for now, is because every infraction above is something you admitted to, and I believe you've done it out of ignorance rather than malice. I am going to block your friends, however, because even if what they've done wasn't due to malice either, they appear to have created their accounts for inappropriate reasons. I'm also going to strike their arguments in the discussion for the same reason. -- Atama頭 19:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
KnutfAen, please revert the edit in which you undid the striking out of your friends' posts to the discussion, explained above by Atama, and again removed someone else's post. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- I've been pretty generous, I could and probably should have blocked you indefinitely, especially considering that CheckUser revealed that you weren't being completely honest with us. I also see from this comment that you still don't understand or acknowledge what you did wrong. I've given you a big chance here, basically trying to let everything slide, but your recent actions are demonstrating to me that you're unwilling to follow Wikipedia's policies, which means that your continued participation here is looking less and less like it is in the project's best interests. This is your last chance to demonstrate that you're operating in good faith, one more repeat of this behavior and I'm revoking your editing privileges. -- Atama頭 15:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Bergen
editHi. (Hei!) FYI: I've just commented about images on Bergen's Talk page including your composite one. It would be nice to get a discussion going there in hopes of ending the slow-motion edit-warring. (I tried linking you in the comment, but a link to your user page makes it look like you don't exist. Why not redirect your user page to your talk page, as some others have done? Either that or write something on it; it doesn't have to be a full autobiography.) --Hordaland (talk) 16:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)