Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/JarlaxleArtemis/Evidence

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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/wiki.phtml?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=0&oldid=5584644] [1].

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

Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs, a much shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and answer and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues.

If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user.

Be aware that the 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.

Evidence presented by Psychonaut

[edit]

Note: due to the sheer volume of evidence, I have not entered dates for every incident. However, diffs or links are always provided where possible. (Many of his images and articles have already been deleted, so I can't link to the originals.)

Posting inappropriate articles

[edit]
  • 02:52, 25 Jan 2005
  • 05:23, 16 Feb 2005 [8]
    • Jeremy creates his own article on Rasputin; reads like another homework assignment.

Deleting articles or valid information therefrom

[edit]
  • 02:42, 5 Jan 2005 [9]
    • Deletes users comments he doesn't agree with
  • 02:32, 11 Jan 2005 [10]
    • Deletes large portions of Spira; claims it was a mistake [11]
  • 11:29, 20 Feb 2005 [12]
  • 11:47, 20 Feb 2005 [13]
  • 12:36, 20 Feb 2005 [15]
    • Attempts to speedy ECONOMY OF INDIA; should have been a merge (or a copyvio, as was later determined)
  • 03:17, 21 Feb 2005 [20]
    • Attempts to speedy The Getaway: Black Monday; should have been a merge or redirect (he even realizes it's a duplicate article)
  • 02:20, 2 Mar 2005 [21]
    • Removes an imagevio tag and replaces it with a PD tag(!)

Personal attacks

[edit]
  • 03:14, 25 Jan 2005 [22]
  • 02:59, 26 Jan 2005 [23]
    • "Jeez, Germans sure are stuck-up/arrogant, aren't they?" in response to complaint about de:Spira
  • [24] [25]
    • "This user is an idiot" posted on a User talk page.
  • 00:44, 3 Feb 2005 [26]
  • 01:29, 19 Feb 2005 [27]
    • Vandalism of other users' User pages
  • 08:54, 19 Feb 2005 [28]
    • "Kevin and Bean are gay lovers."
  • 15:22, 20 Feb 2005 [29]
  • 10:39, 20 Feb 2005 [30]
  • 15:33, 20 Feb 2005 [31]
  • 15:50, 20 Feb 2005 [32]
    • "Brownman40 is a troll." (complete with ASCII art)
  • 12:56, 20 Feb 2005 [33]
    • "Weirdo: This guy is a total nut-job."
  • Template:Troll
  • 16:14, 20 Feb 2005 [34]
  • 16:14, 20 Feb 2005 [35]
  • 16:18, 20 Feb 2005 [36]
    • Creation and use of "This user is a troll" template

Adding pointless or inappropriate information

[edit]
  • 04:21, 13 Jan 2005 [42]
    • No apparent point to this image; he doesn't even use it on his user page
  • 03:06, 16 Feb 2005 [43]
  • 08:25, 19 Feb 2005 [44]
  • 08:54, 19 Feb 2005 [45]
  • 06:59, 20 Feb 2005 [46]
    • Treats Wikipedia like a chat room, BBS, or list of links
  • 12:01, 19 Feb 2005 [47]
    • Gratuitous nudity added to article
  • 12:30, 19 Feb 2005 [48]
  • 12:36, 19 Feb 2005 [49]
  • 12:45, 19 Feb 2005 [50]
  • 12:39, 19 Feb 2005 [51]
  • 12:58, 19 Feb 2005 [52]
  • 13:35, 20 Feb 2005 [53]
  • 14:04, 20 Feb 2005 [54]
  • 14:18, 20 Feb 2005 [55]
  • 13:51, 20 Feb 2005 [56]
  • 13:58, 20 Feb 2005 [57]
  • 14:12, 20 Feb 2005 [58]
  • 14:30, 20 Feb 2005 [59]
  • 14:34, 20 Feb 2005 [60]
  • 14:37, 20 Feb 2005 [61]
  • 14:40, 20 Feb 2005 [62]
  • 14:55, 20 Feb 2005 [63]
  • 15:00, 20 Feb 2005 [64]
  • 14:08, 20 Feb 2005 [65]
  • 02:24, 21 Feb 2005 [66]
    • Adding redundant images to articles
  • 05:26, 3 Mar 2005 [67]
    • Non-notable high school

Failing to leave meaningful edit summaries

[edit]
  • See Jeremy's User contributions
    • most edits lack an explanation
    • some obviously major edits (e.g., changing copyright information) are flagged as minor
[edit]
  • [128] (photo was taken by the user who uploaded the image)
  • [129] (18th-century image)
  • [130] (should be "screenshot")
    • Questionable or incorrect use of "unverified" tag
  • [131] This is marked as an official publicity still; it's possible it was photographed on set and not actually taken from the film. Should be "fair use".
    • Questionable or incorrect use of "screenshot" tag.
  • 11:07, 1 Jan 2005 [132]
    • Jeremy is warned about copyright issues, but does not seem to understand
  • 11:47, 1 Jan 2005 [133]
    • Jeremy claims that simply by changing the copyright tag on the image, he "made it legal"
  • 11:51, 1 Jan 2005 [134]
    • Jeremy claims that simply by changing the copyright tag on the image, he "legalized it"
  • 22:55, 29 Jan 2005 [135]
    • "I have no idea where I got the sex symbol image. I was surfing the net one one day and the picture just caught my eye. By the way, the picture didn't qualify for fair use, so I put it under the GFDL."
  • 23:15, 29 Jan 2005 [136]
    • "It wasn't copywrited, either. Would that qualify the image to be under the Public Domain template?"
  • 06:02, 21 Feb 2005 [137]
    • Ignores constructive criticism regarding copyright mistakes
  • 00:59, 23 Feb 2005 [138]
    • Doesn't understand that copyright applies whether or not use of an image is for profit
  • 04:10, 3 Mar 2005 [139]
    • "I don't understand how the Image:The City Of Rome.png couldn't be public domain. True, I got it from Encarta, but I thought all pictures on Encarta were public domain because they are not copyrighted."
  • 05:45, 3 Mar 2005 [140]
    • "I don't understand how this [image from Encarta] could be a copyright infringement. The image should qualify under fair use because it is educational and shows the Roman expansion in ancient times."


Conclusion

[edit]

This pattern of behaviour makes it clear that in most cases, he is not acting with malice, but rather out of ignorance of Wikipedia policies and copyright laws. However, he has had ample warning and time to educate himself on these matters, and has so far refused to do so. Psychonaut 20:14, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Evidence presented by FirstPrinciples

[edit]

Psychonaut has done an excellent and encompassing job of outlining the issues of concern. Further points:

Personal attacks

[edit]
  • 14:27, 2 Feb 2005 [141]
    • "...your user page sucks. Try to write something a bit more intelligent..."

Deleting articles or valid information therefrom

[edit]
  • 11:23, 20 Feb 2005
    • In the course of adding an (incorrect) image tag to Image:Gravity not fictitious.png, JarltaxleArtemis deleted all other information from the image text, consisting of several paragraphs of important explanation. He neither corrected, explained nor apologised for this action. (N.B.: the image has since been deleted legitimately for other reasons, and its information moved to fictitious force.)
[edit]
  • 8 Mar 2005: Has persisted in using copyrighted images of questionable value. Has misused image tags, for instance tagging images as fair use book covers (Template:bookcover) when they are very clearly not: [142] [143] [144] [145] [146]

General comment

[edit]
  • For what it's worth, JarlaxleArtemis is (by his own testimony at [147]) a 10th grade student. While I'm aware Wikipedia has many sensible and highly valued young members, I suggest that in this case, his youth and lack of maturity may be relevant factors in regards to this Arbcom hearing.

Conclusion

[edit]

I concur with Psychonaut that JarltaxleArtemis is (in general) not acting with deliberate malice, but rather out of ignorance. He has, in fact, made some reasonable edits (e.g. [148]); however, he has also persisted in his "ignorant" actions despite several warnings and concerted attempts to improve his behaviour. I suggest that this reflects a lack of maturity on his part, and an unwillingness to conform to the standards of the Wikipedia community. -- FP 04:21, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Evidence presented by {your user name}

[edit]

<day1> <month>

[edit]
  • <timestamp1>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp2>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp3>
    • What happened.

<day2> <month>

[edit]
  • <timestamp1>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp2>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp3>
    • What happened.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/JarlaxleArtemis/Evidence&oldid=431106322"