User talk:Jimbo Wales

Archives 2007, 2008, 2009, Jan-May 2010, June 2010

HNY

--Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Happy new year !

=) --Claritas (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Bullying on wikipedia

Hello Jimbo,

I am going to talk about bullying on English wikipedia. I am blocked there by my own request because I was bullied, that's why I decided to put my message here. I could have emailed you of course, but I'd rather have it in an open for the world to see.

When I was blocked on English wikipedia by en:user:Gwen Gale I knew right away it was not an action of a good faith administrator. The last few days I examined some of her other blocks, and it was even worse than I believed it was. Let's please take a look at some examples:

• On 26 April 2009 Gwen Gale blocked user Funguy06 with the edit summary "(Vandalism-only account: no meaningfully encyclopedic edits)". The user who started contributing to wikipedia in 2006 was blocked over this 2009 edit for "vandalism only". Really? But please see the article. Funguy06 was right! He vandalized nothing. Not only he made a good faith edit, but he made an encyclopedic edit as well. This block is not just a bad block. This block is unbelievable. The user is gone. He did not even bother to write an unblock request.

Gwen Gale often misuses tools while involved. Not only that she lies in blocks edit summaries claiming "vandalism" "blp","spamming" where there is none. Here are only a few examples:

• This thread is about yet another bad block imposed by Gwen Gale. She blocked this user while involved with him (edit warring on the same article). The user was blocked at 15:04, 28 June 2008 for so called "vandalism" at en:Fred Noonan. Gwen Gale edited this article a lot. Actually Gwen Gale wrote this article, when she still edited as Wyss, but let's see June 28,2008: Gwen Gale was edit warring with the very same editor she later blocked.

• Interestingly enough after blocking the user while so heavily involved, and being told and agreeing she should not have done it, Gwen Gale blocked him again just two days later on 22:38, 30 June 2008 in spite of being "not happy with having been the blocking admin".

• User Jayeba was blocked at 23:18, 26 August 2009 for "spamming right after the user reverted Gwen Gale at the article she was edit warring with this very user she later blocked.The user was unblocked with the summary "no spamming".

• User Nextbook was blocked at 20:56, 9 November 2011 after Gwen Gale was edit warring with him. Gwen Gale claimed BLP. Another admin questioned the block, saying in particular "I don't think BLP concerns are a carte blanche for disregarding AGF like this and especially not BITE since we can't expect newcomers to understand these complex policies within their first 10 edits. I would appreciate if you would be more polite and welcoming towards new editors in the future, and not be as quick with the block-hammer, if you feel you don't have the patience for giving adequate explanations to a newcomer feel free to contact me and I'll gladly take over", but Gwen failed to clarify her position.

• Have you ever seen an admin blocking a user, telling him how to proceed and then declining his unblock request?

The above examples are only very few, there are more of the same.

Jimbo, an admin could get desysoped for a single unblock. How many bad blocks an admin should impose to get desysoped? The blocks in the examples I provided above were imposed by a dishonest bully-administrator who has been hurting wikipedia for years. If she were strongly warned after the first bad block and desysoped after the second me and others would have still be contributing to wikipedia.

I informed about my findings a few members of arbcom on their Meta talk pages. There was no response. I believe they decide to ignore me. Jimbo you and they could ignore me as much as you want, but you should know that by not acting on my findings you are covering up a dishonest, power-hungry bully who is hurting wikipedia.

I uploaded hundreds of high resolution images, I wrote around hundred very popular DYK inducing the most popular ever, but I consider my fight with bullying the most important thing I have ever done on wikipedia, and no matter what anybody is thinking I am proud of what I am doing! --Mbz1 (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, hi again.

• In this section I documented how Gwen Gale misused her tools during the years. There are quotes from a few admins about her conduct.
• In this section I documented unwarranted blocks
• In this section I provided only one striking example of Gwen's inability to assume a good faith.

The question is for how long you, Jimbo Wales, will pretend that it's OK, and let the bully to go on?--Mbz1 (talk) 17:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

BTW, when I emailed to arbcom about this issue, I was refused in any response except I was cowardly advised to exercise my right to vanish. It reminded me Joseph Stalin, who used to say:"no man, no problem". I accuse members of arbcom and you, Jimbo Wales, in protecting the power hungry, dishonest bully administrator Gwen Gale!--Mbz1 (talk) 21:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Is the next victim of Gwen Gale's bullying is going to harm himself?

Hi Jimbo, I've just noticed this exchange at Alison's talk page, and then I noticed this post by WMF and now please take a look here. As you could see this user (I believe he is very young) wrote an unblock request in which he directly mentioned (complained) about Gwen Gale, and she was the one who declined his unblock! Doesn't she understand that this user feels hounded by her? I documented this misuse of tools yesterday in my RFC before later developments . Of course nobody payed any attention. Is next Gwen's victim is going to harm himself under indifferent watch of arbcom and WMF and your personally, Jimbo Wales? Could you sleep well with a protected bully at the run while my well documented findings simply getting ignored? I am not saying his unblock request should have been accepted. I am saying Gwen Gale as a heavily involved admin should not have been the one to decline it, and she did it at the time I have been documenting her other bullying. I know wikipedia is not a therapy, but it should not be a site that allows supports bullying either!I am not against Gwen Gale. I am for victims of bullying, and I am proud of what I am doing!--Mbz1 (talk) 05:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)