Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cumbey

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: {insert UTC timestamp with ~~~~~}), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 08:44, 28 December 2024 (UTC). This page was reverted by User:Mark, without adequate explanation upon request of User:Kc9cqj who was working on the RfC but requested reversion. I have now reverted it at: --SqueakBox 16:37, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC), and suggest the 48 hours start from now

---

• (Cumbey | talk | contributions)

---

Statement of the dispute

The dispute arises due to the fact that Cumbey is an Internet (and published) author with an established interest in Javier Solana and proving him to be "The Antichrist". Cumbey had edited the Solana article to the point where it has lost its encyclopedic value - when non-essential information and vandalism were removed by other editors, the information was added again in a short amount of time by Cumbey and a slew of non-recognized IP addresses. After a month of vandalism and bad edits questioned by the Solana article's editors, Cumbey turned to an off-site blog to continue her quest.

Description

Cumbey is engaging in personal attacks on and off of the Wikipedia site, has been known to blank user and talk pages where discussion is taking place on fixing articles, within the Javier Solana article and related threads.

Several IP addresses are rumored to be attached to or involved in this dispute:

1. Special:contributions/68.31.252.69 - A single user which added content to Solana's Talk channel. Located in Reston, Virginia where Cumbey occasionally goes. She has signed from IP's located in this town.
2. Special:contributions/69.209.175.201 - Three edits on the Solana article, mostly background bio on mother. Is from Allen Park, Michigan, within the area where Cumbey lives and works.
3. Special:contributions/66.0.239.178 - Addition of some red text about '666' and biographical information on Solana's family. Comes from Alabama, and is not Cumbey.
4. Special:contributions/68.31.251.196 - Cleaned up some punctuation in Cumbey's comments. Is from Reston, Virginia.
5. Special:contributions/69.209.166.174 - Signed a comment as 'CEC'. Is from Allen Park, Michigan.
6. Special:contributions/68.61.150.80 - This IP address has prior been attributed to Cumbey. Is from nearby Rochester, Michigan.
7. Special:contributions/66.0.239.178 - Addition of 666 text and bio information on Solana. Is from Alabama and therefore not Cumbey.
8. Special:contributions/68.159.142.14 - Comment or talk comment signed as CEC. Is from Michigan state.
9. Special:contributions/65.148.140.210 - Single user comment, possibly Cumbey.Is from Victorville, California, and therefore is unlikely to be Cumbey.
10. Special:contributions/69.209.129.193 - Cumbey Statements to Solana Talk page. Is from Allen Park.

Evidence of disputed behavior

(provide diffs and links)

1. [1]Shows Cumbey's off-site blog where SqueakBox and One Salient Oversight are named by username. Identical to her user page accusing SB and OSO of vandalism.
2. [2]Blanked this RfC entirely as shown as user 68.61.150.80.
3. [3]Deleted comment on Chris 73's userpage written by SqueakBox.
4. [4]Cumbey accuses SqueakBox and One Salient Oversight of vandalism .
5. [5]Cumbey vandalizes SqueakBox's page to insult him by stating that Sqeakbox had "inpregnated" (sic) his dog.
6. [6]Insertion of a link to SqueakBox's user page under a trivia heading .
7. [7]Blanking the Solana talk page .
8. [8] Blanks SqueakBox's comments off of her own talk page.
9. [9] Cumbey is warned of a 3rr violation by Chris 73.
10. [10] Cumbey inserts SqueakBox's real name into her talk page and SqueakBox removes it.
11. [11] - Cumbey copies and crossposts text between articles.
12. [12] - On April 12, 2005, Cumbey copies 'her' version of the Wikipedia article to her personal blog and fails to mention the GFDL or provide a link back to the current or working copy of the Solana article.
13. [13] Cumbey reverts a SqueakBox edit and states "Sorry! I got tired of reading SqueakBox's dumbed down version!"
14. [14] Reversion from One Salient Oversight's version back to her version.
15. [15] and [16] show Cumbey's move of the NPOV template 'in order to drive Google results higher' as stated in one of the comments.

Applicable policies

{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}

1. Repeated violation of the No personal attacks policy.
2. Repeated violation of the Neutral Point of View policy.
3. Possible copyright violations.
4. Violation of the No legal threats policy.
5. Attempted blanking of this RfC which is vandalism.
6. Violation of the GFDL on her own personal blog, using the disputed Solana content from Wikipedia.

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

1. One Salient Oversight has attempted to resolve the dispute by a post to Cumbey's blog here. After his/her comment to Cumbey's original comment regarding Wikipedia, OSO and SqueakBox were both mentioned in Cumbey's next blog comment.
2. In addition, One Salient Oversight attempted to solve the dispute here by attempting to reason with Cumbey.
3. SqueakBox requests mediation, a request that Cumbey has not replied to as of yet.
4. One Salient Oversight creates Javier Solana Antichrist allegations after discussing the issue with others at Talk:Javier Solana. This was done because he was convinced that an article about the issue was needed on Wikipedia. The fact that this article could result in a de-escalation of the edit war was incidental.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

(sign with ~~~~)

1. SqueakBox 17:44, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
2. One Salient Oversight 11:15, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary

(sign with ~~~~)

1. KC9CQJ 09:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
2. Guettarda 13:18, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
3. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:08, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Response

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

Outside view

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

This seems to be overly antisocial behavior that is pretty bad. Though I agree that this kind of incivility must be frustrating, I would encourage everyone to stay a bit more calm about disputes like these. If methods and behavior are so obviously non-sensical, try to go easy on the editing, also try to be as civil as possible.

The alleged sock puppets seem to be agreeing with another quite well, though I don't have enough experience to know how solid the evidence is expected to be. Edits like this one certainly don't favor Constance's view of the matter. I Googled for other things written by her and found this at Antichrist watch. The mentioning of "ASSEMBLY RECOMMENDATION 666" followed by bible quotation in an article on Solana is especially interesting.

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

1. Peter Isotalo 22:29, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.