Requests for comment/Global ban for Leonardo José Raimundo

This is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.

---

Opening statement

---

Leonardo José Raimundo is currently indefinitely blocked on four projects, yet he continues to perform detrimental activities to Wikimedia projects. I hereby request that this user is globally banned. I will go over details as to why I think this measure is necessary.

---

Leonardo José Raimundo's behaviour

• Leonardo José Raimundo (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser)

Early activities

This user is indefinitely blocked from the Portuguese Wikipedia following a unanimous decision in a block discussion on the basis of competency issues, abusive behavior, disruptive editing, harassment, religious proselytizing over many years. You can read the block discussion and the ptwiki block history of this editor for in depth details. I can confirm that such behavior that lead to the indefinite block there has spread cross-wiki.

Further blocks on other projects

eswiktionary

Indefinitely blocked for inventing terms and translations, using unverifiable sources, incurring on the same errors since 2016, not cooperating or seeming to understand warnings, harassment (Especial:PermaLink/5051306#cuatordécuplo). See also previous blocks.

ptwikinews

Indefinitely blocked per this request for keeping the same harassing behavior that lead to the ban on the Portuguese Wikipedia.

wikidata

Indefinitely blocked: long-term (over a year) abuse of Wikidata (maybe other Wikiprojects as well). Clearly misleading Babel-language info and lying per Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2023/01#Report concerning User:Leonardo José Raimundo

metawiki

Blocked for 1 month: Abusing thanks feature: see User talk:Leonardo José Raimundo#Thanks for the thanks, but

ptwiktionary

Blocked for 1 month by myself for massive abuse of the 'thank you' feature there.

Current cross-wiki abuse

Known for ongoing massive abuse of the 'thank you' feature, this user is repeating the same behavior that resulted in indefinite blocks on the projects mentioned above, namely harassment, disruptive editing, insertion of false information and so on on other projects where he isn't currently blocked.

List of sockpuppets

---

• w:pt:Categoria:!Fantoches_de_Leonardo_José_Raimundo

Formalities

---

Criteria confirmation

• The user demonstrates an ongoing pattern of cross-wiki abuse that is not merely vandalism or spam.

  Not vandalism:  Yes

  Nor spam:  Yes

• The user has been carefully informed about appropriate participation in the projects and has had fair opportunity to rectify any problems.

  Warnings from admins:  Countless

  Time given to change: Several years

• The user is indefinitely blocked or banned on two or more projects.

  See above

Requirements

• Required steps
  • Confirm that the user satisfies all criteria for global bans:  Confirmed
  • File a new request for comment on Meta:  Filed
  • Inform the user about the discussion on all wikis where they are active:  Done by Elton
  • Inform the community on all wikis where the user has edited:  Done by Elton

• Nominator requirements:  All passed See my CentralAuth.
  • have a Wikimedia account
  • be registered for more than six months before making the request
  • have at least 500 edits globally (on all Wikimedia wikis)

Statements by other users

Please create new h3 sections below this line.

---

---

Comments

---

Support

1.  Support per nomination — Elton (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
2.  Support (I am the person who blocked him on eswikt). Peter Bowman (talk) 08:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
3.  Support per nomination. FusionSub (talk) 11:44, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
4.  Support * Pppery * _{it has begun} 01:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
5.  Support From all the things that I've read about this case, it's clear to me that this guy does not respect all the serious work done by many other Wikipedians. So, block him forever! Joao Xavier (talk) 01:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
6.  Support --Mighty Wire (talk) 01:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
7.  Support Gremista.32 msg 01:58, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
8.  Support Mainly for long-term abuse in several Wikiprojects. Clearly misleading Babel-language info and lying per Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2023/01#Report concerning User:Leonardo José Raimundo. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 03:58, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
9.  Support - I have recently found out that this user is autist, which may explain some of his childish behaviour, but I agree that this has gone on for way too long... --ValJor (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
   • Are you sure? Well, in that case we are being too harsh. To be direct: I'm also an autist and I have been "blocked" on numerous occasions - not on Wikipedia, but irl. You have no idea how badly such a categorical rejection reflects on people who hardly have a clue how society works, who are seeking acceptance all the time, striving to adapt and failing where everybody succeeds. And yes, I know Wikimedia is not a virtual therapy space. But all the same, this user will feel traumatized about this, quite possibly for the rest of his life. Is that worth it? Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 19:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

     Hi Steinbach!

     If you read his "essays", he is clearly describing himself in at least two occasions when he talks about autism, so, yes, I'm quite sure about that.

     Should we refrain from blocking him from fear that it might affect him adversely? I'm all for taking care of people, but how far do we go? I mean, he has been damaging the projects with his ill-advised "contributions" for years. This has been going on for a long time, we have been trying to help him, guide him, but it is all for naught, he doesn't seem able to understand the damage he's doing.

     ValJor (talk) 10:22, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

   I'm not saying we shouldn't block him. My main point was: be careful. If I were him, aggressive phrases like the above "Block him forever!" would drive me utterly insane.

   This user has already been banned on many wikis, often indefinitely. Can't we just leave it there? What harm has he been doing lately, now that he has been expelled from the main wikis where he was active? A global ban hits just a bit harder than a local one, you know. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 10:39, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

   Hi Steinbach!

   Well, I think you should contact Elton (talk · contribs) to discuss that. But considering the long history of Leonardo's damages to the projects, I doubt Elton would be open for such an approach.

   --ValJor (talk) 19:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

10.  Support It is interesting to know that he was blocked due to the abuse of the "Thanks" tool on other wikis, even after he had already been blocked on the Portuguese Wikipedia for the same problem. At one point he also posted those texts on other wikis, which is a dual problem of a lack of understanding of the purposes of wiki projects (1, 2, ...) and a lack of care for his own privacy (1, 2, 3, ...). A global locking, even though it's a harsh attitude, is required for his own protection and the projects. ━ ALBERTOLEONCIO Who, me? 16:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
11.  Support per above. -JacobSanchez295 (talk) 02:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose Generally, in my opinion, a global ban should be imposed only to people who infameously propagate disinformation, or intentionally damage wiki pages by applying SPAM and vandalism. I read a lot of text behind those links offered on this page, and I learned that user Raimundo caused a lot of problems and is an inconvenient, maybe troublesome person. But in this case, I think a global ban is not an appropriate reaction, especially when religion and disability are involved. --YaganZ (talk) 09:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

   Apart from the reasons I mentioned above, there is also recent plain vandalism (from socks in this case) that cannot be overlooked. He will probably get blocked on more projects, eventually will get locked by a steward then, but after way more harm to Wikimedia. There have been quite some leniency with this user already. Almost a year ago, I gave him a warning myself, which was ignored after a little while. He might have mental health issues, but it is worth mentioning that there are also other users with mental disorders that became productive users, including a few administrators, and did not turn out to be trouble makers. Leonardo José Raimundo, on the other hand, clearly crossed the line with continued cross-wiki disruption over many years, regardless of his possible mental health issues. — Elton (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Yes, competence is absolutely required and this user grossly overestimates his language skills. I got acquainted with him on the Zealandic test Wiktionary, where he added all the books of the Bible with bizarrely inaccurate descriptions. This also introduced me to his disruptive proselytizing. But after I pointed this out to him, he remained friendly and stayed away from the project. This user has shown his incompetence on numerous occasions, but is that enough to block someone globally?

We have had users like LJR on many other occasions. More than once they turned out to be children/adolescents, to whom self-overestimation and trouble working in teams come naturally. This user might just turn into a mature contributor with a realistic assessment of his own abilities who keeps his personal beliefs for himself. So that's why I opt for neutral: I'm just not sure the nuclear measure of a global ban is appropriate. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 13:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Just to note that according to this user page, he was born in 1987, so there's probably not a big chance of him maturing any more. Others have noted above that he may be autistic, which is certainly something to be sensitive to, however. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 06:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Questions

• Sadly I had to start this given the continued disruptive behavior of the user. I am a little unsure of the procedure of notifying the wikis. I would appreciate if someone is willing to help me with this. Are we supposed to notify the user and the community on every wiki they've made at least one edit? Or just the wikis where they've been actively editing is enough? — Elton (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

  As far as I know, so far this has been interpreted in the most general way possible, that is, all wikis edited (from any account). ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:45, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

  Ok. The notification procedures have been done. If not, please let me know. — Elton (talk) 01:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

  At some point it would be nice to make a bot for this. With some long-term established-user bans (where it would take notifying 400+ wikis) it's an unreasonable amount of work, and top 15-20 edited is probably good despite not being the strictest adherence to policy. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 14:22, 26 May 2023 (UTC)