Icewhiz
Don't say you weren't warned. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
My familiarity with them may, indeed, be glancing, but calling them a "cancer on Wikipedia" was not in anyone's best interests. I don't understand why a discussion, be it about content, conduct or a combination of both, needs to devolve like that. There simply is no excuse. El_C 02:57, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
El_C, are you aware of this: [11]? "He's a cancer on Wikipedia" is so far outside collegiality, and this is a repeat offense, at AE, targeting Icewhiz in particular and admin generally. In light of what happened just a couple months ago, I'd ask you to consider picking up where Sandstein left off rather than issuing a warning. – Levivich 04:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
No, I was unaware, and am troubled by the sheer levels of aggression displayed in that exchange. Still, I'm not gonna rescind my warning and supplant it with a block at this time. Certainly, any further violations of NPA will be met with immediate sanctions. I promise to be undaunted about that. El_C 05:12, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Jesus.I would consider this a personal attack, saying, "he is a cancer on Wikipedia." diff, to almost echo his statement, I stay away from him, because he is extremely aggressive and almost impossible to deal with and just not a civil person. I am not sure why the admins are not doing anything about it. Sir Joseph (talk) 02:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I have not had a chance to review this Incidents report, but I did just give the user a final warning about engaging in personal attacks. Conducting oneself in this manner is not going to be tolerated. Not by me, at least. El_C 02:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
[11] points to a literally identical example of the behaviour he is being warned about. Same target, same venue, same type of offence, same intent behind it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =887158168
It isn't like it is hard to look into the history of any user to see if you might just be failing in your duty by unilaterally issuing "final warnings" without assessing whether this will be remotely appropriate.
The Wikipedia equivalent of bad parenting - expecting a "final warning" to have any effect whatsoever when it has already been so blatantly ignored once.
Not hard to see how people like Malik, the very personification of an out of control Wikipedia toddler, get away with it, time after time after time. Literally on that score too - this comes as part of the wider context of them having been blocked SIX TIMES for personal attacks since January 2017. Each time they reacted the same way - FUCK YOU MR WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTRATOR, YOU'RE NOT MY REAL DAD.
good parents absolutely need to be able to recognize when they're dealing with a problem child, and take the necessary measures. The longest block Malik has received thus far, is two weeks. To someone who has poured nearly 120,000 edits and 4,546 days of their life into Wikipedia, it is the equivalent of being grounded for a day.
When that person is a former Administrator, and is still being defended as if he still a was one, it is a complete joke. Higher standards MY ARSE.