In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, 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 with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. 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: 23:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 16:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC).

• JzG (talk · contribs · logs)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

Uncivil, angry, and vengeful behavior by User:JzG

• JzG (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

That the block be removed from my record and that JzG (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) be blocked for abusive behavior or desoyped as well as a look at users block log for similiar behavior [1] and not following wikipedia policy. Especially the blantant violation of WP:DRC as well as WP:Civil and WP:EQ

I was told by and admin to refile [2] the report so it wasn't a retaliation. I filed two reports on AN/I one againt the admin [3] and the other against the two users [4] But if you look at the one against the two users I simply walked away since I was told I was forum shopping. The first report wasn't archived so I questioned a few thigns to which I was told by the admin who blocked me that "you've come here to bitch about being reverted" I asked why is it ok to use youtube on one thing but not another [5] and then he stated that i was going to get a kick in my arse [6] I know we are all human but that isn't a way to talk to someone. I even spoke on his talk page that I wasn't going to dwell on it [7] . Its strange in that I was blocked after I stopped asking question and removed what I deemed to be an angry comment (please see this also) [8] and stated that it was WP:DRC at 22:12, 14 March 2008 and was blocked 22:15, 14 March 2008 although my last comment on AN/I was at 21:57, 14 March 2008 which was only a question on general youtube policy [9] and 4 minutes before that ,21:53, 14 March 2008 , I said even if i disagree i won't push it [10] . I guess this also brings up the question why is JzG allowed to ignore WP:DRC and restore a comment on my talk page (not once but twice [11] and [12] that I removed and then blocked me for it after I questioned it [13] under the guise of something [14] that I had already walked away from 20 minutes prior. [15]

Continued to violate WP:EQ by changing the title of incidents on AN/I that he already archived from Jaysweet User:colfer2 to Uconnstud complaining [16]

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

1. even gone so far as to threaten me [17]]
2. In violation of WP:EQ writes to me in a demeaning manner [18]
3. In violation of WP:EQ writes to me in a profane manner [19]
4. Has a history of harrassment of others [20] WP:Harassment and WP:WHEEL
5. There has already been three other cases filed against him, but the outcome of 2 i'm unsure of [21] this one is a huge one [22]
6. blocked me for refiling a 3RR [23] and stated that I was blocked as a result of my refiling it in retaliation [24] even though another admin told me specifically to refile it. [25] on 22:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
7. Ignored wikipolicy about removing comments [26] and restored a comment on my page without my permission in violation of WP:DRC

{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}

1. WP:NPA
2. WP:CIVIL
3. WP:OWN
4. WP:EQ
5. WP:DRC
6. WP:Harassment
7. WP:Stalk
8. [27] Violation of Admin conduct

(provide diffs and links)

1. [28] He had archived a report I made and I asked him a question. He simply reverted it.
2. [29] I stated that I would walk away from the situation.
3. [30] I stated all I wanted was a reply
4. [31] I questioned wiki policy on youtube links and a few seconds later was blocked.
5. [32] I told him I wasn't going to dwell on a situation. I had moved on.

(provide diffs and links to demonstrate that the disputed behavior continued after trying to resolve the dispute)

1. Continued to violate WP:EQ by changing the title of incidents on AN/I that he already archived from Jaysweet User:colfer2 to Uconnstud complaining [33]
2. [34] Stated that I was blocked for retaliation when I specifically told that to refile a 3rr [35]
3. [36] I stated that I wanted help in this situation and JgZ retaliated with a threat [37]

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

1. Uconnstud (talk) 23:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

1. ~ LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

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. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.

{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:

• Uconnstud needs to take a wikibreak, and chillout. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary:

1. I dealt with this guy yesterday after a 3RR dispute with another user. I believe JzG was a little brash but not as bad as what is being represented here. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 23:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
2. The first diff is ridiculous. How is that a "threat"? ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• I have been working with Uconnstud to try to get his problem heard, and by looking at all the diffs I have seen, JzG needs to cooldown a bit and not just block people cause he does not like them. ~ LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 00:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary:

All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.