Forum:De-adminship of Jorge Queirolo Bravo on es.literatura

Forums: Index → Watercooler → De-adminship of Jorge Queirolo Bravo on es.literatura

Fandom's forums are a place for the community to help other members.
To contact staff directly or to report bugs, please use Special:Contact.

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5593 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Information in this thread may be out of date. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

== De-adminship of

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) on es.literatura. ==

Moved from Wiki adoption requests

I'm sorry for opening this request here, but I couldn't find anyplace better to do this. I'm requesting

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) de-adminship from Literatura Wikia based on the following violations of Central Wikia policies, GFDL, and sockpuppetry to sabotage community decisions:

It's important to note that

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) is administrator of Literatura Wikia by adoption, not by election of the local community.

Violation of GFDL policies.

Jorge Queirolo Bravo it's deleting the {{Wikipedia}} template from several articles without basis. Although I've explained this in this talkpage, and tell him that a derivative work must always quote the source of the original document in order to respect the GFDL license; he isn't willing to accept this. In addition, he has full-protected the article Federico García Lorca, víctima de la intolerancia because he says that he is the author, and he has full copyright over it (the intellectual property record #148.015 in Chile). And therefore, no one can edit the mentioned article. I've mentioned that by publishing the article in Wikia he agrees to release the content under GFDL, but he's not willing to accept that and unprotect the article. It's clear that the user doesn't understand the GFDL license and Wikia policies correctly, one of the most important things an administrator should understand.

Arbitrary full-protection of his articles.

This not only violates Central Wikia policies of w:c:Help:Common mistakes and w:c:Protection from where I quote:

Thinking you own the wiki Even if you requested the wiki be created, you do not own it. The wikis are owned by the communities, not by any one user. See Ownership. Protecting pages unnecessarily The majority of pages on all Wikia should remain publicly editable, and not protected. Pages may, however, be temporarily or permanently protected for legal reasons (for example, license texts should not be changed) or in cases of extreme vandalism or edit warring.

And from w:c:Protection:

The majority of pages on all Wikia should remain publicly editable, and not protected. Pages may, however, be temporarily or permanently protected for legal reasons (for example, license texts should not be changed) or in cases of extreme vandalism or edit warring. Rules Do not make the common mistake of protecting pages unnecessarily. For example, do not protect a page simply because it is the main page. Do not edit or revert a temporarily protected page except to add a notice explaining the page is protected. Do not protect a page you are involved in an edit dispute over. Admin powers are not editor privileges - admins should only act as servants to the user community at large. Avoid favoring one version of the article over another, unless one version is vandalism. Temporarily protected pages should not be left protected for very long. Talk pages and user talk pages are not protected except in extreme circumstances. The protection of a page on any particular version is not meant to express support for that version and requests should therefore not be made that the protected version be reverted to a different one.

But also violates wiki spirit.

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) has full protected without a proper reason every article that makes reference to him or his work. The articles are: Novela negra, Jorge Queirolo Bravo, Moscú sin visa y Federico García Lorca, víctima de la intolerancia. Those articles are full protected with the reason of "very likely to be vandalized". It's important to note that all the articles in question has references to Jorge Queirolo Bravo. His biography, his first book (Moscú sin visa), his essay (Federico García Lorca, víctima de la intolerancia) and a paragraph about his work (Novela negra).

Doesn't hear community opinion

Me and

Davichito (talk • contribs) who's also administrator on Literatura Wikia repeatedly tried to tell

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) that his actions aren't right. You can find this discussion in here. The response of

Jorge Queirolo Bravo (talk • contribs) was to arbitrarily rollback a community decision. The community decided that his protections were unnecesary and he re-protect the page without explanation.

Uses sockpuppetry to force community discussions

After the unprotection of the article Novela negra, he used and anonymous IP to vandalize his own articles. You can make a checkuser verification on this, and you'll find that the anonymous user and Jorge Queirolo Bravo are related. In addition, he was blocked from Spanish Wikipedia for the same reasons: sabotage and sockpuppetry to support his point of view. You can find information about this here, here and here. Also, the IP that edited his article in Literatura Wikia at the same time also edited the article Ecuador in Spanish Wikipedia introducing a similar information that Jorge Queirolo and his sockpuppets made there before the expulsion. Previously, another IP of a similar range tried to force a community discussion into Jorge Queirolo Bravo's point of view. That IP has also made editions in Spanish Wikipedia, where he harass the user Juancho100, who was in a dispute with Jorge Queirolo Bravo at the time he was expelled from Spanish Wikipedia.

He's not building a community.

The last user who create an article in Literatura Wikia was frightened away by Jorge Queirolo Bravo. The new user's edits has a couple typos and grammar errors, and Jorge Queirolo Bravo protected the page the new user was editing to prevent further editing and eliminated the new content. The other administrator of the site,

Davichito (talk • contribs) noted this, and reverted the protection, restored the deleted content and presented apologies to the new user, but was already late the user never edited again.

Davichito (talk • contribs) asked Jorge Queirolo Bravo for an explanation about the issue, and he responded that the grammar errors in the editions made by the new user provoked the rollback and protection.

Davichito (talk • contribs) counted and solved the grammar errors, counting only 10 small errors. Jorge Queirolo Bravo clearly failed in presuming good faith and abused with no reason of his administrator rights.

If any spanish speaker read this, there is more information about this issue in Foro:Politicas, Usuario Discusión:Davichito, Usuario Discusión:VálvulaUno and Usuario Discusión:Jorge Queirolo Bravo. If any clarification is needed, please ask me or

Davichito (talk • contribs) for confirmation of my story. Regards. VálvulaUno 20:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Confirmation

I add that everything said by VálvulaUno is true. I might mention that the 10 errors were a rounding I made, in another post I realized they were exactly 3 of them. I summarize JQB (Jorge Queirolo Bravo, for short) behavior and what we have tried to do to solve the problem:

JQB behavior and our attempts to gain consensus

1. JQB decided that wikipedia templates to inform the source of articles copied from there were not needed. (I agreed with him because I had not read the GFDL. As soon as VálvulaUno entered the wikia, he clarified things for us.)

VálvulaUno told him he was wrong and he thought VálvulaUno has a "special interest on him" and accused VálvulaUno to be an administrator with animosity towards him, from Wikipedia-es. VálvulaUno replied he had no interest on him but on GFDL.

2. JQB reverted changes by user Tatiana Misluka with the reason: too many errors and low quality editions. He then deleted the talk page, without valid reasons and then protected it against creation. After that, he protected the page itself, also.

I reverted his arbitrary measures and apologized the user but it was too late. We lost a new user.

3. He protected all the articles he is mentioned because he was "sure they would be vandalized as his articles were vandalized in Epistemowikia".

I told him it was something like autopromotion and against wiki way of things. It's absurd to protect articles because I am mentioned there. I proposed something different: to link his paragraph from another page, a template, so we would only have to protect it. He said nothing. So, I tried another approach, to make a fork of pages, something like w:c:es.literatura:Novela Negra and w:c:es.literatura:Novela Negra, versión JQB. So, I renamed actual article to the second, referencing his name and then I created Novela negra from Wikipedia. I edited the article, added several paragraphs, fixed some errors, added a picture. But JQB ignored everything I had made and deleted my page, then restored the original name of his version. The result: he wiped all of my changes, completely overwrote my version with his. And I had created a fork, to prevent this. I wanted to have a general purpose article: Novela negra, which would not be protected, for obvious reasons. But he never asked me or contacted me; instead, he just deleted everything I had created. So, my solution was to delete Novela negra, while we get consensus. But I know he will just restore it again, bypassing the community and the other administrator, me. He does not like to search for consensus, it seems. But I may be wrong. He has not commented on any of his arbitrary measures. Besides, it is completely absurd to protect a general purpose article only because a person is referenced in only one paragraph.

4. VálvulaUno decided to fill this request for removing administrator privileges to JQB. I was trying to propose something different: I said to JQB that we needed new admins, that I would be glad to have my administrator privileges removed and his too. That way, we could discuss and vote for new admins. I even requested a bureaucrat to a staff member, for that purpose: to create a new discussion and votation for adminship. He replied he did not like that idea because the wiki would be without "head".

5. Sock-puppetry. JQB has used sock-puppetry 3 times that we know of. First, to vote in a forum, thrice, using 2 different IPs and his main user account. Second, to make vandalism against his own article, using vulgar language to refer to himself... The reason I think he did that was to "confirm" that his pages were going to be vandalized... He did not think we could confirm that fact, that he is the same user, maybe. So, we know he vandalized his own article and insulted himself, to prove a point. I think it is not a policy any administrator should follow. I read at wikipedia:wikipedia:Sock puppetry that it is one of the reasons for the removal of an adminiship. And, as we have seen, he had gone against wikia policies in other cases too. And he has behaved that way many times, not only once. And he has not listened to us; rather he has completely ignored our comments; has wiped our information and acted unilaterally while we thought we were discussing.

My summary is a bit long, but it is shorter than the discussion at w:c:es.literatura:Foro:Políticas. That discussion did not get to consensus, because the user used sock-puppetry to trick the community, by making self-vandalism.

As VálvulaUno decided to create this request, I agree with him because it is the only choice user JQB has left us. I contacted a staff member first, to serve as mediator, but User Zuirdj has not replied to the moment (more than 2 weeks and no reply). I hope this request is examined carefully. Everything we say in here can be read at Literatura Wikia; all of it is provable (except JQB user talk page, which he deleted after he did not like a suggestion I made. I think that is not polite, but he can do whatever he wants with his talk page...)

--David 22:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC)