Jump to content

Requests for comment/Global ban for Leonardo José Raimundo

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

The following request for comments is closed. Consensus to ban. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:56, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Opening statement

[edit]

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

Early activities

[edit]

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

[edit]
eswiktionary
[edit]

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
[edit]

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

ptwikisource
[edit]

Blocked for 1 month based on their continuous copyvio-ing.

ptwiktionary
[edit]

Update 7 June: Initially blocked for 1 month by myself for massive abuse of the 'thank you' feature there. After deliberation, we, administrators of the Portuguese Wiktionary, decided to stop being lenient with his long-term problematic behavior and edits, which include, but is not limited to using unverifiable sources, using automated translators without proper review, inserting inaccurate and false informations, and indefinitely blocked him there, since he has resorted to personal attacks and harassment after I started this global ban discussion. The (previous) mention of "abuse of the 'thank you' feature" on the indefinite block was actually a mistake that has been fixed (see the block log).

wikidata
[edit]

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
[edit]

Blocked for 3 months: Abusing thanks feature: see User talk:Leonardo José Raimundo#Thanks for the thanks, but (again; see the previous block log)

Current cross-wiki abuse

[edit]

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

[edit]

Formalities

[edit]

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

[edit]
Please create new h3 sections below this line.

Response from Leonardo José Raimundo

[edit]

See diffs 5975292 and 5975393 (in Portuguese)

Guys, who do you think you are to ban me globally? I am evangelical and I have the right to create entries with books of the Bible in the language I want. All the administrators who are against me are very authoritarian, full of rules. Since I'm going to be banned globally, I'll have a word of mouth with the Wikimedia projects: I'm in my house and I make the rules. Remember that you at the Wikimedia Foundation are messing with an anointed of God. Anyone who messes with me is messing with God. If it's because there was excess of gratitude, go screw yourself! I'm in charge of my house. You guys have no right to globally ban me. Please delete my global ban talk as I want to continue creating entries with books of the Bible.

Leonardo José Raimundo (talk) 10:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After this global ban discussion started, you got blocked for 1 (one) month on ptwikisource for intimidating behavior and harassment that has nothing to do with the 'thank you' feature or "excess of gratitude". You sir tried to threaten and intimidate me for starting this discussion in a rather disrespectful way (1, 2, 3, ...). You then proceeded to pester administrators of other portuguese projects (1, 2, 3, 4, ...). You are now indefinitely blocked on ptwiktionary too. The main reason for that block, although it mentions 'abuse of thanks feature', also has nothing to do with it, but with your unacceptable behavior, disruptive editing and other reasons already mentioned. Chico, sysop and bureaucrat of ptwikiquote, has replied to you: "Em qualquer espaço comunitário há regras que precisam ser seguidas por todos. Até mesmo dentro da igreja. Por isso não vale somente o que "eu acho" ou o que "você acha" mais adequado. Dentro de cada comunidade devemos seguir as regras da comunidade". Unfortunately you show no intention of amendment. — Elton (talk) 14:27, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, boldly updated #Further blocks on other projects above. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:29, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I have now reworded and clarified this. — Elton (talk) 19:09, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Support

[edit]
  1. Support Support per nomination — Elton (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Support (I am the person who blocked him on eswikt). Peter Bowman (talk) 08:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Support per nomination. FusionSub (talk) 11:44, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks like he also may be going insane, not exactly sure though so i'm not factoring that in to my decision FusionSub (talk) 08:06, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Support * Pppery * it has begun 01:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support 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)[reply]
  6. Support Support --Mighty Wire (talk) 01:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Support Gremista.32 msg 01:58, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support 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)[reply]
  9. Support 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)[reply]
    • 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)[reply]
      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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  10. Support 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)[reply]
  11. Support Support per above. -JacobSanchez295 (talk) 02:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Support Disruptive, often aggressive behaviour in every project he participates, proselytism, complete lack of understanding of the purpose of the Wikimedia projects. Should have been locked aeons ago. About his mental condition, whatever it is, we are an encyclopedia, not a psychiatric hospital.--- Darwin Ahoy! 02:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sigh... vote whatever you want, but at least take care of your tone of voice. You're giving a textbook example of how not to handle this. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 17:14, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Steinbach Why? Have you noticed the utter absurdity of a bunch of random people around this kind of coffee table that formed here, discussing how the mental state of someone else, that they have not the least idea what would be, should mitigate or aggravate the lock request? One could even suppose that we are at the ward of some psychiatric institution listening to real physicians and psychiatrists - but no, it's just the regular Wikip(m)edia folk and our regular encyclopedia. So, unless you could prove the health condition of said person, your capability to elaborate about it, and what has an encyclopedia editorial body to do with all that, I would suggest you - and others - stop making these sort of considerations, which are not helpful in the least. We have a case of a very disruptive editor, we deal with it. His mental condition, whatever it is, is very much irrelevant to the point. - Darwin Ahoy! 17:54, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Once again, it's the tone of voice. You are being aggressive and it's completely unnecessary. You don't have to come up with phrases like "psychiatric hospital" to clarify your vote. These phrases are only meant to demean this user. To an autist, your edit and those of several others spell "fuck you from all of society". Such a message would drive me to utter despair - in fact, I'm sure it would trigger the very darkest of thoughts in me. I hope this is not something you want to be responsible for. And don't say he saw it coming. Nobody deserves needless personal attacks like these, especially not those who mean no harm even if they cause it. You can leave all this humiliation for yourself and still cast your vote, okay? Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 20:11, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @Steinbach Why do you insist on "diagnosing" the mental condition of Wikimedia editors? I believe that's very much against the friendly space policy of our projects, please stop doing that. - Darwin Ahoy! 10:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Both of you make good points against each other, @Steinbach shouldn't be 'Diagnosing the mental condition of wikimedia editors" but you also made back-handed remarks that are generally seen as offensive in the autistic community. FusionSub (talk) 11:02, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @FusionSub Can you please explain why you disagree with the affirmation that the Wikimedia projects are not psychiatrics institutions or psychiatric hospitals capable of diagnosing and dealing with disruptive and aggressive mental conditions, as it is being done here? I never mentioned the autistic community, who I don't think is disruptive at all by default, as everyone else. You have done that. - Darwin Ahoy! 11:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Your wording is the main issue, you're saying it as if it is a remark against them (who has referred to himself as autistic in some of his essays) FusionSub (talk) 11:10, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @FusionSub Nor I nor you nor @Steinbach have the least idea of the real mental condition of this person, and I really fail to understand why you keep insisting in bringing it to this discussion. We are dealing with disruptive and aggressive behavior, which may be (or not) caused by a mental condition. Since we have no idea of the cause, and no way to interfere on it, can we please be objective and stick to the point, and stop playing the almanac psychiatrist? - Darwin Ahoy! 11:14, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @FusionSub BTW, in my case it's not really "them", as I was diagnosed as an autist when I was a child, though I don't identify nowadays as an autist. I have no idea if we are dealing with autism here or not, and I don't really understand why you think it is relevant to deal with this case, even if we knew. - Darwin Ahoy! 11:22, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @DarwIn The only problem I had was wording, lad. Also, what's an 'autist'? With your context it looks like you mean 'autistic'. FusionSub (talk) 11:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      @FusionSub Yes, probably. I'm Portuguese, the word here is "autista". I've eventually oversimplified the English one. - Darwin Ahoy! 11:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Ah, sorry about that, I tried learning Portuguese once and never got this far. FusionSub (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Support per above. Very disruptive behaviour. The person who loves reading (talk) 04:27, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Strong support Strong support LTA. AlPaD (talk) 05:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Support Bedivere (talk) 15:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Support I don't like to see new global ban requests become necessary but they don't seem to be getting the message, as evidenced by their new return to abusing the "thanks" feature. I reluctantly support this request. --TheSandDoctor Talk 15:57, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Thanks―uh, I mean, Support Support. Clearly this person is a net negative to the project, and spamming thanks over the project (including for my edits) while there's a global ban discussion isn't helping the cause. LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 00:00, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Support This user has caused disruption across multiple projects. Partofthemachine (talk) 03:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Support, per Darwin. Érico (talk) 22:09, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Support blocked on several projects for disruptive behaviours. Lemonaka (talk) 09:08, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Support Reading respond from this user, it is hard to expect that user's severely disruptive behavior and attitude will be better. --LR0725 [ Talk | Contribs ] 19:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

[edit]
  1. Oppose 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    Leonardo tried several times to enter a medical university (one of the most difficult to get admitted to in Brazil), as he shows by creating these pages about himself in various projects, this still exists on Wikibooks [1]. It doesn't seem to me that I'm so disabled since I managed to study all the education until university. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 07:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a pity, eventually he was (definitively?) rejected in 2015. It seems he never tried again. Although I don't have any clue of psychology, I think Leonardo must have a very extroverted personality, when he makes the history of his failure public. YaganZ (talk) 09:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @DARIO SEVERI: One of the reasons people have offered for this global ban is to protect him against "a lack of care for his own privacy". In that case, wouldn't it be better not to repeat details like these here? Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 14:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, you confuse (intentionally or unintentionally) two very different forms of intelligence. Autism is a spectrum of developmental disorders, which impair social intelligence. They don't easily blend into society and grasp social norms. To get into medical school or any other school, you require other kinds of intelligence. People with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) can have all levels of technical intelligence, up to sheer genius. So the fact that this user finished school does not disprove his mental disability. Steinbach (formerly Caesarion) 09:10, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose A global ban would automatically imply a ban on editing Dutch Wiktionary (WikiWoordenboek). I see no sufficient reason for this latter step. I can understand why the behavior of Raimundo may have resulted in blocks on other projects, but our experiences with him on WikiWoordenboek are similar to those described by Steinbach below. --MarcoSwart (talk) 10:42, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @MarcoSwart: Leonardo used to copy translations from Glosbe, for which he received his first block on eswiktionary in 2016. It is quite possible he continued doing so elsewhere. Peter Bowman (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The lemmas he initially contributed were in Dutch that did not have the quality expected from a Dutch dictionary (or Glosbe, for that matter). After I pointed this out to him in a clear and friendly way, he mostly focused on providing translations of the names of Bible books, probably by collecting them from other Wikimedia projects. His last streak of edits on WikiWoordenboek was about one and half year ago and gave me no reason to worry about his future edits. MarcoSwart (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Copying translations from other Wikimedia projects was the reason for his second block on eswiktionary. Please note Glosbe is an aggregator of translation services and online dictionaries, such as Google Translate and Wiktionary itself. Those are usually deemed unverifiable sources. Peter Bowman (talk) 17:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I am aware, Wiktionaries (eswiktionary included), generally accept users adding translations without providing a source. We do try to offer sources on the lemmas describing those translations. Anyway, it may very well be that eswiktionary and WikiWoordenboek have different policies and different experiences with Raimundo. We were explicitly informed about this discussion in our Village Pump (De kroeg), so I took it upon me to check Raimundo's contributions to WikiWoordenboek and report here accordingly. These contributions are modest, but they are in no way a threat to our project. If I found otherwise, I would say so. MarcoSwart (talk) 20:34, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

[edit]
  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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Questions

[edit]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    Ok. The notification procedures have been done. If not, please let me know. — Elton (talk) 01:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • I'm not sure whether such a sanction to them is fair in regards to their Incubator contributions, where their contributions on some "local languages" are somewhat good (at the very least, nobody did nominate their contributions for deletion). Indeed, they also abused the thanks feature, but then, who really concerned? I only saw their meta talk page got warned for several times about this thing but indeed, nothing elsewhere, flooding usages of thanks shall be discussed via mw:Project:Support desk for a solution. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:19, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Requests_for_comment/Global_ban_for_Leonardo_José_Raimundo&oldid=27686955"