Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-7981828-20130526072341

On my wiki, I have a rather "eccentric" editor, and while we don't have a lot of editors and most of this editor's edits have been positive, they have several things they do that concern me as an admin.

1. Shaky grasp of the English language - While most of their edits seem competent enough, most of their messages on talk pages have very broken English most of the time, often to the point I have to repeat my own questions more than once to understand their responses.

2. Poor ability to work with others - While they work well by themselves, this editor is one of those "do their own thing" types, and while we have pretty laid back rules, we do have SOME rules, and I once had to threaten this editor with a temporary block to get them to follow the few rules we do take rather seriously. Thankfully, this is a rare occurrence, but the editor is still one of those types that seems chronically poor at collaborating with others.

3. Refusal to conform to a manual of style - Despite our laid back ways, we do expect pages to have a relatively consistent layout, and several of our pages need serious cleanup, but instead of bothering to fix these things, this editor just adds their own examples and pictures to the pages without bothering to clean up anything, and while we don't insist on this, this editor refuses to understand that if we do have to clean up a page, it may displace many of their edits if we have to reimport (since most of our pages were transcluded from another wiki) pages from scratch, instead opting to complain that their edits disappeared and demanding in barely comprehensible English that me or whoever else cleaned up the page fix their added material, and while I've tried to be polite and understanding, this editor still doesn't seem to entirely register that the other editors (or even administrators) do not exist to serve their needs 24/7.

4. Shrine building - (Somewhat related to #2) Our wiki covers many topics, and while we encourage editors to curate what they want, this editor has occasionally tried to shoehorn their fandom preferences onto every page they could find an excuse to do so, and I once had to threaten another temporary block when the editor refused to answer a reasonable request by myself to explain why they thought their edits (two pictures) belonged on a certain page (their relevance seemed questionable), and when I asked them to provide me some reasons why these pictures belonged (with the proviso that I would accept them given good reason), they just up and added the pictures anyway.

This hasn't happened since, but after looking through their contributions, this hasn't been the first time this editor has made rogue edits without any attempt at consensus building in the event of a page discussion.

This hasn't become a major problem yet, but it is a matter of some concern, and ideas how to deal with this appropriately are welcome. 