Wiktionary:Votes/2012-07/Blocking of Luciferwildcat

Blocking of Luciferwildcat

• Voting on: whether User:Luciferwildcat should remain blocked.

• Vote starts: 00:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

• Vote created: - -sche (discuss) 23:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
• Discussion:

  WT:BP#Indefinite_or_long-term_blocking_of_registered_well-meaning_editors

  User talk:Luciferwildcat

  User talk:Msh210/Archive/Razorflame

  Wiktionary talk:Votes/2012-07/Blocking of Luciferwildcat

Support

1. Support Equinox ◑ 15:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC) I know the vote hasn't started but I'll probably be away on holiday before it does. Regardless of the final vote wording, I support the longest possible block. Equinox ◑ 15:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
2. Support SemperBlotto (talk) 15:48, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
3. Support with our limited resources, we don't need a misbehaving user who needs to be babysit for every single one of his fucking edits. He's really no different from the likes of Wonderfool. -- Liliana • 21:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

   Actually I'd say he's a lot like Wonderfool, but slightly worse, as Wonderfool is simply better at editing. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

4. Support, but not a block for infinity. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 02:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
5. Support -- Gauss (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
6. Support Dan Polansky (talk) 10:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
7. Support --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC) although I'd like him to get unblocked sometime not too long from now. Ditto Ungoliant. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
8. Support Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 01:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC) Too arrogant and defensive to work in a group. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 01:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

   Support Too many unverifiable "words" and spellings over too long a period. Collect (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

   This is after the vote has closed, so I'm indenting it. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose —Stephen ^(Talk) 04:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Casting this proxy vote for Luciferwildcat.
2. Oppose 50 Xylophone Players talk 16:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
3. Oppose --Æ&Œ (talk) 16:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose the block. Maro 17:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
5. Oppose —CodeCat 17:27, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose —Stephen ^(Talk) 21:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose the block - -sche (discuss) 21:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose Ivan Štambuk (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose --Istafe (talk) 18:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose Astral (talk) 01:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
    • Oppose TheghostofWF (talk) 22:25, 17 July 2012 (UTC) and yes, my vote is valid
      • I've indented that vote to strike in accordance with (quoting WT:V) "For a Wiktionary user to be eligible for voting, the following requirements must be satisfied: Their account's first edit to English Wiktionary (made locally rather than transwikied from another project) must predate the start time of the vote by at least 1 week. Their account must have at least 50 edits in total to the main, Citations, Appendix, Rhymes, Wikisaurus, or Concordance namespaces on English Wiktionary by the start time of the vote".​—msh210℠ (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Abstain

1. Abstain —Ruakh_TALK 16:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
2. Abstain. The question for me is whether he will contribute more positively to this wiki than he will negatively, regardless of his motives. I think it's pretty marginal. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

   True, some good editors may be forgiven for their occasional misbehaviour, this may not be the case as far as I can tell. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 04:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

3. Abstain --Vahag (talk) 16:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
4. Abstain Was between support and abstain. I'm annoyed with difficult editors as well, value my time but appreciate if they are seriously trying to get better (more cooperative, respectful of other people's efforts and learn to seek agreement) and I also see that we are sometimes too harsh but I'm not too familiar with his edits and the whole story, so decided on abstaining this time. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 03:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Decision

• No consensus. No action taken. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • But see Wiktionary talk:Votes/2012-07/Blocking of Luciferwildcat#How does this work?. I think we should unblocked based on that, though I admit there's nothing on this page to contradict you, SemperBlotto. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I agree; I think the mechanics of this vote were inadequately planned, but they leave unblocking as the most logical decision at this point. Note: this is not biased; I supported the vote. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

• I've changed the block to last for six more days — approximately a one-month block — since the vote clearly shows a lack of consensus for a long-term block, and I think the discussions surrounding the vote suggest agreement that consensus should be required for one. —Ruakh_TALK 17:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)