The problem with this article is? The language in the lede is peacock, a bit, or just a clumsy translation from the French. "autochtone" means "native," "aboriginal" not being used in English to talk about "civilized" peoples like the Tunisians.
(Okay, so it needs work, but it would still be a valuable contribution. The problem is if it stays as defective for years. The real problem: no efficient process for upgrading articles, it's all ad hoc, and incredibly wasteful of editor time ... and too often, as Wikipedia stands, editors who work hard end up having wasted years of effort.)
As is common on Wikipedia, however, dig beneath the surface, it is crawling with vermin. The article was created by duckduckstop. Global contributions, 9,010, 192 deleted. Files uploaded, of which only 5 were uploaded to Commons. This user was creating many non-free files, hosted under a claim of fair use. He was blocked as a sock 5 April 2015 by Drmies. First edit was a notice of intention to attend a meet-up, as "duckduckgo," 20 April 2013, clearly a returning user. However, there was no sign of disruptive editing. The user page, as edited by Drmies, refers to the SPI casepage for Slowking4. That user had 21,049 edits to Wikipedia, from 7 January 2011 to indef block 8 May 2013. User was clearly in trouble by 17 April 2013, for "(systematic abuse of non-free content policy)"
Ah, one of my favorite stumbling blocks for users who actually want to improve the project. Wikipedia policies are supposedly designed to create a "free encyclopedia," but is, in fact, designed to allow "free re-use," including by commercial ventures, who may not be able to rely on Fair Use. Policies require a machine-readable non-free template, allowing a commercial re-user to remove non-free content, but this will create work for them, which they would need to supply. It could be costly. We ran into this at Wikiversity, where the educational purposes of the project were clearly advanced by hosting material under fair use, and it is legally safe. But there were wikignomes who came to WV to demand removal of harmless fair use images. WMF policy, you know. In fact, the WMF never complained.
Slowking4 has 272,354 total edits to WMF projects. He's still active on Commons. It appears that, creating or editing articles, he would find an image usable under fair use, in his opinion. The wikignome fanatics, instead of finding a suitable free use file (as suggested by guidelines), find it far easier to attack the file, and many would speedy-deleted, though there is clearly an editorial judgment involved. As a very, very active user, there would be, it's reasonable to expect, many examples where he came into conflict with editors, and it appears that administrators deleted at least some of these files with no notice. He objected. Perhaps he used some choice words, and people who invest enormous work into editing often do. And, of course, instead of someone intervening to mediate and calm the waters, instead he's blocked.
He uploaded 302 files to Wikipedia, mostly claiming fair use (he'd upload fully free files to Commons). Of those, about 80 have been deleted (26%). Of the most recent 50, 8 (16%) have been deleted. Given that adding a fair-use image is often controversial, it's a judgment call if it is appropriate or not, his level of deleted files is not high; the level of files remaining and presumably considered to improve articles is actually quite decent. given the strong prejudice.
Duckduckstop uploaded 631 files
apparently for fair use. 51 have been deleted. That's 8%. Duckduckstop did not contest deletions. However, he did not abandon incivility.
Yet I see no warnings. Some remarkable comment from an arbitrator.
There is no visible explanation of why he was blocked, except for being a sock of Slowking4. Once upon a time, in a land far away, checkusers would not look for socks unless a request showing disruption was shown. From DGG's comments, Duckduckstop was being attacked, and what attackers do is to send private information to checkusers. What did the checkuser find? Everyking4 would have been stale.This was the report
. Filing this as a SlowKing SPI case, linking to a very old edit signed (mysteriously), was outing an editor's IP, and I'm not surprised to see that from Beetstra. The original purpose of the SK block is forgotten, all that needs to be known is "was indef blocked and is therefore block evading."
From the timing, Drmies checked based on that and possibly other private evidence. (That signature would only establish that SK used that IP, which was not stable, two years earlier. The edit Beetstra blocked was a library.) SK was very visible, apparently, at meetups. This is really Star Chamber process.
Beetstra became obsessed with this editor. In a later report, he says he "nuked" the contributions of a series of alleged socks. Technically, that's allowed; however this blocked user had a long history of positive contributions. He was blocked for non-free uploads, when his track record was actually positive, and for incivility, mostly over what can easily be infuriating. Not for bad edits. Once upon a time,this edit
would have been considered vandalism. With the adminstrolls, status offense takes priority over value of content (and also over privacy, by the way and common decency). The banhammer is a blunt instrument, as used. This all could have been fixed years ago, but ... there are forces at work that don't want a reliable encyclopedia. It would interfere with their agenda, or at least with their personal power. What else would they do with their time?
There was an effort to get SlowKing unblocked after a year
. The questions asked were standard. His response was actually sane. He's better off blocked. The administration is some mixture of abusive and incompetent. He believed that his block was improper. But nobody did anything about it. Ah, the old Meatball:DefendEachOther. Shame on the community!
He expects that if he were unblocked, and did the work that he was good at, he'd run into the same trouble all over again. And why should he volunteer so many hours to a project that treated him so shabbily?
On the other hand, he's active on Commons, another opportunity to spend countless hours in an unreliable and sometimes quite hostile environment. (But Commons is friendlier than Wikipedia, overall. Unless you are a clueless noob and don't understand policies, and some defacto-policy makes no sense to ordinary people, it can be brutal.