Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Stefanomencarelli

message: ==Stefanomencarelli's full statement==
In the last weeks i was more and more rollbacked in my contributions in wikiarticles. I am aware to have not a very well english, but still, all is happening now is beyound any previous problem. I started to post much material in July-August, but in the last month i posted less and handled less articles (except those in which i made only minor edits). 
Despite this, now there is a continous, logorating action made by these two admins to delete every post i make so i must write in the discussion page only, 'to correct herrors'. Even i was forced to do so, still in those pages these contributions are without any attention and this happens since weeks. Pages as B-50 [], CF-104 [], Aeritalia G.91 [], and just yesterday i dared to write some datas on EH101 [], promptly roll-backed in just one minute, while some raw datas in F-86 are in discussion to be reverted as well! So, in practical terms, i am forbidden to edit at all in any wikipedia pages on aviation project. Even if i had respected this (forced) pact to not post big edits in main pages, my censors have no attenctions to help these edits, and so i continue to write in talk pages only, risking immediate roll-backs in contrary cases, while what i write is not allowed to be put in the main pages. 
At one time i written many articles without these problems, now even if i provide sources and try to respect the endless rules that are asked for, i am handled as an idiot and called troll without any problem. I am forced to contest the operate of these admins. I don't perfectly write in english, but perfection is not obligatory in contribution rules AFAIK: 
"Be bold in editing, moving, and modifying articles, because the joy of editing is that, although it should be aimed for, *perfection is not required*."
And those had forced me to write only in talks not only humiliate myself but also don't bother to make their 'corrections'. This situation cannot run so badly for more time. I am in fact, forbidden to edit in main, and treaten to be blocked if i dare to do so. Is it possible to find a solution? Actually i am in fact out of editing in main, eveny few bites are promptly deleted..--Stefanomencarelli 11:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank-you for explaining the nature of your sources and I appreciate your comments, but it highlights my remarks regarding the problems involved in using sources that we are unable to refer to ourselves, and which were described by other editors. No insults to any of the authors were intended. --Red Sunset 21:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre-case statements

message: In the last weeks i was more and more rollbacked in my contributions in wikiarticles. I am aware to have not a very well english, but still, all is happening now is beyound any previous problem. I started to post much material in July-August, but in the last month i posted less and handled less articles (except those in which i made only minor edits). 
Despite this, now there is a continous, logorating action made by these two admins to delete every post i make so i must write in the discussion page only, 'to correct herrors'. Even i was forced to do so, still in those pages these contributions are without any attention and this happens since weeks. Pages as B-50 [], CF-104 [], Aeritalia G.91 [], and just yesterday i dared to write some datas on EH101 [], promptly roll-backed in just one minute, while some raw datas in F-86 are in discussion to be reverted as well! So, in practical terms, i am forbidden to edit at all in any wikipedia pages on aviation project. Even if i had respected this (forced) pact to not post big edits in main pages, my censors have no attenctions to help these edits, and so i continue to write in talk pages only, risking immediate roll-backs in contrary cases, while what i write is not allowed to be put in the main pages. 
At one time i written many articles without these problems, now even if i provide sources and try to respect the endless rules that are asked for, i am handled as an idiot and called troll without any problem. I am forced to contest the operate of these admins. I don't perfectly write in english, but perfection is not obligatory in contribution rules AFAIK: 
"Be bold in editing, moving, and modifying articles, because the joy of editing is that, although it should be aimed for, *perfection is not required*."
And those had forced me to write only in talks not only humiliate myself but also don't bother to make their 'corrections'. This situation cannot run so badly for more time. I am in fact, forbidden to edit in main, and treaten to be blocked if i dare to do so. Is it possible to find a solution? Actually i am in fact out of editing in main, eveny few bites are promptly deleted..--Stefanomencarelli 11:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stefanomencarelli's full statement

message: I wish to point to Mr. Stefanomencarelli that writes "i(sic) have three articles as 'featured' in that wiki (it.wiki)." he, like everybody else, owns no articles on that and on any of the Wikipedia projects. Anyway, It could be useful to add that during one of those featuring debates  he was banned for three months (and today the ban is infinite) for personal attacks to rewievers.--EH101 00:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment by uninvolved EH101 

message: I have been an editor on Wikipedia for only three weeks experiencing the low of an article Lockheed XF-104 being nominated for AfD, then the high two days later of it being a DYK on the front page. My specialist area of interest is the Lockheed F-104 where I quickly noticed the editing conflicts and respectfully added some advice/comments of my own, I received replies that I felt were aggressive. The Aeritalia F-104S article is in dire need of editing, though to be fair it has just been created from a previous article that detailed Italian F-104 service. I could clean this article very quickly but am very reluctant to do so for fear of having to justify every edit (which goes against the 'being bold' principle).
I speak German fairly well and am an English translator for the F-40 series of aviation books  however I would not even attempt to contribute to Wiki.de knowing that someone would probably have to correct my inevitable grammar or spelling mistakes.
I would be willing to help with correction of stefanomencarreli's submissions if they were short enough (and factually accurate) but I do know how long it can take and can understand completely that the only way to correct the articles he has contributed to is to revert even if it does mean that new information is omitted. I personally hope that the situation improves soon.Nimbus227 22:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment by uninvolved Nimbus227 

message: Dear Nimbus227, be aware that your contributions as well as those of Stefanomencarelli  are valued and that in the spirit of camaraderie, editors to Wikipedia are welcomed and submissions are not routinely challenged because "good faith" does trump every other consideration. The instances that were evidenced in some submissions related above do not represent the typical Wikipedia aircraft article contribution, nor even the usual Wikipedia edit. By and large, thousands upon thousands, maybe even millions of edits have been made without controversy because a bevy of interested and knowledgable contributors have joined together to create a unique reference source. No one in the group of editors working on Wikipedia aircraft articles prefers or enjoys editwarring or conflicts, instead it is a group whose passion like mine and yours has revolved around aviation and aviators. FWIW Bzuk 00:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bzuk's reply to Nimbus227

message: Since his first appearance on en.wiki, Stefanomencarelli has demonstrated enthusiasm in contributing in depth to numerous articles that have hitherto received little or no interest, and created many others, albeit with a poor grasp of the English language. This is highly commendable, and the language/grammar problem is understandable (pun not intended), but the sheer volume and nature of the contributions has not always improved the articles and has led to much work on the part of other editors in cleaning it up. Other, more experienced and well-regarded editors, most notably Bzuk and BillCJ have correctly attempted to deal with the issues of sourcing and copyvios, and have found it necessary to remove the associated material; while I have concentrated mainly on copyediting. This has unfortunately led to Stefanomencarelli interpreting their actions as being unduly hostile and taking issue with those involved, rather than adapting his edits to conform with wiki guidelines; however, it is only fair to say that I have received no negative responses from him to any of my own modifications to his work. My participation in the clean-ups has waned of late because of the overwhelming amount of Stefano's contributions, and in the recent revelations as to the nature of the reference sources used. Although I personally have an issue with using sources written in a language where the information cannot be verified by the reader, I continued "in good faith" that they were reliable, but the use of children's magazines is a bit suspect to say the least.
IHMO, the suggestion by Akradecki that Stefanomencarelli posts his contributions on discussion pages only is a good solution to the problem, but would require his willingness and patience in allowing other editors time to incorporate them into the relevant articles. --Red Sunset 10:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank-you for explaining the nature of your sources and I appreciate your comments, but it highlights my remarks regarding the problems involved in using sources that we are unable to refer to ourselves, and which were described by other editors. No insults to any of the authors were intended. --Red Sunset 21:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by uninvolved Red Sunset

message: I would like to like to add my comments on the issue.
I was quite surprised when Stefanomencarelli started contributing to the articles of the WP:AIR project. Suddenly large amounts of information was added to relatively obscure articles (mainly Italian aircraft articles), which was quite nice. Obviously the user had access to better/more detailed sources than many of us other.
However, the massive additions of information aroused some suspicion among the ranks, and some editors began suspecting the user of copyright violations/text dumping and started to investigate the matter a little more thoroughly. I decided to stay low on the matter until there was some clear evidence on the matter. I even decided to give Stefanomencarelli an award as encouragement for his contributions at quite an early stage. However, in light of the development in the matter, as well as reasons of abuse of the award, I have decided to withdraw it.
However, I have begun leaning towards a reprimand towards the user as there have been some indications that the texts have been taken from an Italian aviation magazines (unquoted), and I would also suggest that Stefanomencarelli takes up the advice given before: If he decides to contribute in a similar manner in the future, then place the text on the article talk page for further copyediting, and add the sources.
As for Bzuk and BillCJ, I have come to know them as some of the most dedicated authors in the WP:AIR project. Their contributions have been absolutely vital for the momentum and quality of the project. --MoRsE 07:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment by MoRsE