Cannabis Ruderalis

Top edits to an article All edits made to a page by one user, in chronological order.

Article Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cold fusion 2/Workshop (Log · Page History)
User Abd (Edit Counter· Top Edits)
Total edits 228
Minor edits 30 (13.2%)
(Semi-)automated edits 0 (0%)
Reverted edits 0 (0%)
atbe1 0.1
Added (bytes)2 379,961
Deleted (bytes) -2,336
Minor edits · 30 (13.2%)
Major edits · 198 (86.8%)
(Semi-)automated edits · 0 (0%)
Manual edits · 228 (100%)
Reverted edits · 0 (0%)
Unreverted edits · 228 (100%)
1 Average time between edits (days)
2 Added text is any positive addition that wasn't reverted (approximate)
Date Links Size Edit summary
Diff · History 170 Recent disputes: attribute note to my comment to WMC
Diff · History -15 Recent disputes: sp
Diff · History 130 Recent disputes: sign it, add note re uncivil signing comment
Diff · History 933 William M. Connolley desysopped: add note of serious and blatant use of tools while involved, while in previous conflict involving me as well.
Diff · History 3,762 Edit warring is prohibited: r to Noren, start
Diff · History 1,445 General discussion: haven't done an analysis. No time.
Diff · History 1,126 Cold fusion talk page FAQ: quite, like a graveyard.
Diff · History 1,006 Cold fusion talk page FAQ: Support, of course.
Diff · History 1,433 Article talk page archives: Support.
Diff · History -1 Community topic ban confirmed for Abd: link
Diff · History 1,001 WP:TINC: responses
Diff · History 5,316 Community topic ban confirmed for Abd: Oppose, and describe alternative that should theoretically attract consensus.
Diff · History 2,610 Record-keeping of bans: support in part and oppose in part.
Diff · History 923 WMC blocking as involved admin: Support
Diff · History 2,248 Abd tendentious editing: Oppose and why.
Diff · History 1,003 Abd in violation of prior remedy: I fail often.
Diff · History 217 Cold fusion page ban: r to Beetstra about participation bias. This is a general truth about Wikipedia discussions.
Diff · History 741 Cold fusion page ban: r to Mathsci, this is even more a blatant denial of our fundamental decision-making system, the reason why Wikipedia works without a bureaucracy.
Diff · History 645 Cold fusion page ban: serious charge, and I can't think of an example.
Diff · History 1,332 Cold fusion page ban: r to Beetstra, there is a fundamental issue here of how Wikipedia makes decisions.
Diff · History 84 Cold fusion page ban: ce, add explicit support with qualification.
Diff · History 6,045 Cold fusion page ban: respond with history of the "one month" decision.
Diff · History 58 Locus of dispute: support.
Diff · History 31 Edit warring is prohibited: clarify
Diff · History 5,749 Edit warring is prohibited: Support.
Diff · History 1,516 Administrator conduct: Support.
Diff · History 5,105 Avoiding apparent impropriety: Support and respond to "other" comments.
Diff · History 359 Good faith and disruption: please remove disruptive comment or at least move to proper section -- but it is completely off-topic here.
Diff · History 952 Good faith and disruption: Support
Diff · History 544 Wikipedia topic bans: Support. "bans," not "topic bans."
Diff · History 3,093 Neutrality and conflicts of interest: Support, and caveats
Diff · History 101 Purpose of Wikipedia 3: Support
Diff · History 460 Loss of trust: support
Diff · History 61 Abd's presentation of evidence is inappropriate: ce
Diff · History 1,895 Abd's presentation of evidence is inappropriate: Response.
Diff · History 78 Extraordinary length of case material: Support
Diff · History 1,595 Admissible evidence: Support.
Diff · History 973 Decorum in Arbitration proceedings: support and suggest
Diff · History 862 Timely communication: good proposal TOAT
Diff · History 86 Operation of the Arbitration process: Support
Diff · History 971 Abd and William M. Connolley instructed to disengage: Oppose, both for myself and WMC
Diff · History 1,806 Abd is topic banned: Oppose, and why this would be so dangerous.
Diff · History 2 Abd's treatment of cold fusion: fmt
Diff · History 2,330 Abd's treatment of cold fusion: Oppose.
Diff · History 921 Coverage in articles should be appropriately weighted: Support, in itself.
Diff · History 109 Community bans: collapse, this was off-topic in this section , but there may have been some response to it....
Diff · History 2,164 William M. Connolley desysopped: advice for WMC
Diff · History 2,028 Community bans: my position on bans.
Diff · History 3,759 Decorum: read it carefully, SBHB.
Diff · History 1,206 William M. Connolley banned: Sigh.
Diff · History 727 Abd placed under mentorship: easy to enforce, actually.
Diff · History 1,446 Abd placed under mentorship: r to Beetstra.
Diff · History 2,313 Abd placed under mentorship: about supervision of mentorship.
Diff · History 7 Abd placed under mentorship: okay, too much? strike
Diff · History 1,866 William M. Connolley desysopped: The record does not support a claim that I seek out admins to haul before ArbComm.
Diff · History 1,375 Abd placed under mentorship: okay, to make this even, desysop me too, okay?
Diff · History 4,070 Abd admonished: on edit warring and inciviltiy and context and "admonishment."
Diff · History 3 Allegations of a cabal: ce
Diff · History 108 Allegations of a cabal: eek! out damn bold!
Diff · History 1,583 Allegations of a cabal: ce explanation of 'cabal'
Diff · History 4,517 Allegations of a cabal: r to Crohnie
Diff · History 7,335 Second block of Abd: respond to TenOfAllTrades, who rejected an opportunity to mediate this dispute out of the same ABF that he shows here.
Diff · History -2 Allegations of a cabal: fmt
Diff · History 3 Abd admonished: bold
Diff · History 422 Mathsci admonished: Recuse.
Diff · History 444 Abd admonished: r to Shell
Diff · History 1,433 Abd admonished: Oppose.
Diff · History 856 Abd placed under mentorship: Support. Thanks!!!
Diff · History 544 William M. Connolley banned: comment
Diff · History 1,330 William M. Connolley desysopped: Recuse
Diff · History 1,132 Allegations of a cabal: r to MastCell.
Diff · History 3,031 Allegations of a cabal: Support. With a reservation.
Diff · History 649 Abd's style of discussion: Support.
Diff · History 937 Personal attacks: It's true.
Diff · History 1,909 Second block of Abd: Support.
Diff · History 132 Editing comments of other editors and edit-warring on case pages: Support.
Diff · History 955 Edit-warring on the request for arbitration: Support
Diff · History 1,749 First block of Abd: Support.
Diff · History 638 Purported topic bans: Support.
Diff · History 3,671 William M. Connolley's reversion: Disagree because of the issue of consensus. It was there, but made difficult to see by disruption over the polls.
Diff · History 734 Recent disputes: Support. The gaming of RfPP by Hipocrite created the need for a rapid finding of consensus, it should be mentioned.
Diff · History 539 Locus of dispute: response to Shell.
Diff · History 345 Locus of dispute: Support with correction.
Diff · History 987 Use of administrative tools in a dispute: support
Diff · History 165 Implementation of discretionary sanctions: Moot.
Diff · History 81 Bans: sign and ce
Diff · History 1,607 Community bans: Support as actual practice, but some expression of caution. The involvement of editors supporting a ban is routinely not considered.
Diff · History 1,265 Bans: support, respond to Beetstra
Diff · History 639 Conduct on arbitration pages: support. comment on enforcement of order.
Diff · History 169 Decorum: Support
Diff · History 980 William M. Connolley an uninvolved administrator with respect to Cold fusion: r to Ikip and Enric.
Diff · History 1,687 William M. Connolley an uninvolved administrator with respect to Cold fusion: Support, but irrelevant.
Diff · History 1,253 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: finding on majority of editors commenting at AN/I were concerned about WMC's block, opposite to Enric's claim.
Diff · History 1 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: fmt
Diff · History 252 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: most editors confused about this FoF. It is not about WMC's ban or block of me.
Diff · History 1,044 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: on ArbComm as a representative body.
Diff · History 8 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: close de small
Diff · History 498 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: edit per request by Enric Naval.
Diff · History 438 A proxy for Abd: backwards, Shell
Diff · History 1,346 A proxy for Abd: Oppose. But thanks for the thought, Coppertwig. This just doesn't need to be in an ArbComm decision!
Diff · History 3,829 Record-keeping of bans: Oppose. Once we understand an administrative ban as a warning, the problem with setting up automatic enforcement becomes visible.
Diff · History 3,246 Abd block: respond to Beetstra and Fritzpoll
Diff · History 2,449 Abd block: Oppose. The block decision should be made by a neutral administrator.
Diff · History 1,992 Timeline: Enactment of ban: Support, plus suggest more detailed, more neutral version
Diff · History 3,601 Bans mean no editing: respond to Beestra and Shell Kinney
Diff · History 0 Bans mean no editing: sp
Diff · History 6 Bans mean no editing: bold
Diff · History 12,145 Bans mean no editing: bad idea based on a good idea that is almost always true, but we can do better, and, in fact, do.
Diff · History 3,622 Ban notification: Support and extended comment
Diff · History 1,145 Policy descriptive not prescriptive - policy may not be up to date: reply to Beetstra
Diff · History 592 Policy descriptive not prescriptive - policy may not be up to date: support and comment.
Diff · History 85 Wikipedia bans: support
Diff · History 10,377 Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: extended response examines this issue in detail. Conflicts with WP:DR.
Diff · History 4,250 Abd's Evidence for consensus: r to Enric Naval
Diff · History 1,735 Abd's Evidence for consensus: bottom line, at the top
Diff · History 2 Abd's Evidence for consensus: sp
Diff · History 3,658 Abd's Evidence for consensus: reply to Bilby with reasons why I bothered to comment here.
Diff · History 128 Abd's Evidence for consensus: collapse original response to Bilby
Diff · History 212 Abd's Evidence for consensus: ce
Diff · History 1 Abd's Evidence for consensus: now it's a missing close quote!
Diff · History 1 Abd's Evidence for consensus: missing close ital, fixed
Diff · History 1,913 Abd's Evidence for consensus: respond to wikilawyered argument, red herring.
Diff · History 107 Abd's Evidence for consensus: collapse first reply to Woonpton.
Diff · History 10,997 Abd's Evidence for consensus: respond to Bilby, detailed, will refactor other responses.
Diff · History 9 Abd's Evidence for consensus: fmt
Diff · History 1 Abd's Evidence for consensus: I do that all the time, put in a quote instead of two apostrophes for italics.
Diff · History 992 Bans should be clear: This should not be controversial.
Diff · History 214 Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: Agree with Mathsci. Perhaps. Or not.
Diff · History 1 Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: fmt
Diff · History 1,638 Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: The section title is fine, but the proposal isn't, especially within the context of this case.
Diff · History 55 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: add smalltext note about response to FoF
Diff · History 551 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: good example of cabal reflex responses here.
Diff · History -2 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: flying brackets
Diff · History 195 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: who pulled my chain? Collapse.
Diff · History 266 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: r to Mathsci
Diff · History 895 The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: Oppose.
Diff · History 1,086 Reverting during protection: comment on the situation at Cold fusion when WMC rolled the article back to May 14.
Diff · History 1,042 Reverting during protection: support and explain
Diff · History 870 Page protection: comment on Bilby's proposal, I do support "administrative bans." But they really are warnings, not bans.
Diff · History 602 Page protection: support
Diff · History 1,077 Help the clueless: r
Diff · History 5,212 Don't debate proposals with no support: refactor proposal, respond to Beetstra
Diff · History 40 No personal attacks: the situation shifts.
Diff · History 1,509 No personal attacks: Thanks, GoRight. And about the fox guarding the henhouse. Will we allow this even if the fox hasn't eaten any chickens yet?
Diff · History 12,174 Administrative recusal upon claim: respond to comments.
Diff · History 3,519 No personal attacks: Fox counts votes while Stalin guards the henhouse. Maybe they can make a deal.
Diff · History 6,577 Proposed findings of fact: GoRight has not expressed my position here. That's fine, of course, but not if editors assume that he has.
Diff · History 6,761 Abd's Evidence for consensus: r to Bilby.
Diff · History 811 Proposal by User:Objectivist: r to Objectivist.
Diff · History 2,946 Expert opinion is essential: on experts and Cold fusion; articles in fringe topics, should have the most expert "believers" available as advisors.
Diff · History 1,268 Expert opinion is essential: new version of reply to Spartaz, sign Raul reply
Diff · History 2,376 Expert opinion is essential: about experts and COI. Do we have a Wikipedia:WikiProject Experts? If not, we should.
Diff · History 497 Expert opinion is essential: wouldn't you want to know the opinion of the fox?
Diff · History 4,015 State of the Cold Fusion article: Oppose. "Peaceful" Talk page with controversial topic is not, actually, a good sign, unless high consensus has been reached. We aren't there.
Diff · History 1,421 Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: Crohnie, if "all you did was vandal patrol," you'd not have been named as a member of the cabal.
Diff · History 2,372 Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: Oppose, I did, in fact, follow that advice. Read it carefully, and read the rest of the decision.
Diff · History 1,055 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: BTW, nice example of wikilawyering, citing text of policy to argue against substance.
Diff · History 1,845 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: why it is very important that this principle be addressed by ArbComm.
Diff · History 4,778 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: Wild Hair Ideas
Diff · History 2,441 Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: r to MastCell.
Diff · History 2,170 WP:TINC: r to Mathsci
Diff · History 6,278 WP:TINC: r to MastCell. Thanks.
Diff · History -1 Abd has driven away subject matter experts: Durova's fault. Her apostrophe demon.
Diff · History 6,079 Abd has driven away subject matter experts: this is preposterous. Not one example, in fact.
Diff · History 3,359 Abd/GoRight disruption of dispute resolution proceedings: respond to this proposal.
Diff · History 2,296 Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: some responses.
Diff · History 1 Wikilawyering: fmt
Diff · History 870 Wikilawyering: Oppose. Very bad definition of wikilawyering.
Diff · History 2,895 Meatpuppetry: respond
Diff · History 805 Don't debate proposals with no support: r to Boris.
Diff · History 0 Administrative recusal upon claim: number
Diff · History 0 Help the clueless: number
Diff · History 0 Don't debate proposals with no support: number it
Diff · History 5,062 /*Administrative recusal upon claim */ propose
Diff · History -2,315 Help the clueless: This mouse is weird, I suspect it flash-copied the section....
Diff · History 2,315 /*Help the clueless */ a modest proposal
Diff · History 2,315 /*Help the clueless */ a modest proposal
Diff · History 32 /*Don't debate proposals with no support*/ Give it a title.
Diff · History 70 Template: sign it.
Diff · History 2,152 Template: don't debate proposals unless independent support is expressed.
Diff · History 925 /*Broadening of consensus is always desirable */
Diff · History 215 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: redact proposal to strike second sentence about implementation.
Diff · History 8,248 Abd's Evidence for consensus: detailed examination of Woonpton's very defective analysis, which was founded on obvious error.
Diff · History 1,195 Proposal by User:Objectivist: another view.
Diff · History 57 Proposal by User:Objectivist: punct
Diff · History 1,230 Proposal by User:Objectivist: Oppose. WP:RS is crucial for science articles.
Diff · History 2,777 WP:BURO: Okay, here is the history, the diffs, and the reason why this is relevant. I should be back on Monday. Be nice.
Diff · History 1,151 Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: long post on WR:short time. Short text here: long time.
Diff · History 2,204 Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: respond to arbitrators.
Diff · History 1,106 Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: I request, again, undeletion of that page. It could not possibly be harmful now.
Diff · History 922 Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: respond to comments.
Diff · History 967 Template: Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence
Diff · History 436 Not enough experts: respond to R. Baley
Diff · History 1,109 Expert opinion is essential: experts are driven away, not by massive commentary, which they can ignore, but by our incredible inefficiency.
Diff · History 72 Not enough experts: sign it
Diff · History 1,514 Not enough experts: Raul is making serious charges with no evidence, only allegation.
Diff · History 3 Two more weeks to gather evidence: fmt
Diff · History 617 Two more weeks to gather evidence: r to the usual Raul654 self-contradictory claim.
Diff · History 410 Two more weeks to gather evidence: no, but a clerk could do it. Parties may respond in the "others" section.
Diff · History 1,143 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: Ah, this explains it!
Diff · History 921 Two more weeks to gather evidence: Stephan Schulz is opposed to a consensus of the parties? Why?
Diff · History 3 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: fmt
Diff · History 517 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: comment on collapse.
Diff · History 149 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: collapse extended response.
Diff · History 5,429 revert simply to prepare for refactoring.
Diff · History 1,156 Expert opinion is essential: support. I could quibble about essential, but, in fact, in the long run, it *is* essential.
Diff · History 4,524 Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: Since they won't provide evidence for the charges, I do link to the actual diffs for the Scibaby incident.
Diff · History 831 Two more weeks to gather evidence: Two weeks okay by me.
Diff · History 332 Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: May I please have a copy of that deleted page?
Diff · History 1 Not enough experts: format
Diff · History 6,278 Not enough experts: Support, discuss expertise.
Diff · History 2,416 WP:BURO: Support, with a caveat.
Diff · History 2,728 Abd's wikilawyering: oppose: internally contradictory.
Diff · History 1,591 Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: oppose, obviously.
Diff · History 1,713 Meatpuppetry: r. to Enric Naval's assertion of policy violation.
Diff · History 1,381 One more week to gather evidence: Support.
Diff · History 5,422 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: it's fundamental because we have no other objective measure of NPOV than degree of consensus.
Diff · History 2,727 Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: oppose, of course.
Diff · History 2,823 Meatpuppetry: oppose.
Diff · History 1,140 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: This discussion could be very important.
Diff · History 610 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: proposal is an explanation of the five pillars, not a substitute for them.
Diff · History 383 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: respond to raw ABF, personalizing a seriously proposed principle.
Diff · History 1,365 Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: r to Newyorkbrad.
Diff · History 951 Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: respond to Newyorkbrad.
Diff · History 817 /*Consensus is fundamental to NPOV*/
Diff · History 465 Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: respond to Mathsci.
Diff · History 1,061 Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: withdraw part of motion.
Diff · History 1,816 /*Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties*/ Motion to add.
All times are in UTC.

Leave a Reply