Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Bogdangiusca

In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: ~~~~), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 16:18, 22 April 2025 (UTC).

Bogdangiusca (talk · contribs · logs)

Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.

Statement of the dispute

This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.

The user Bogdangiusca, who is an Administrator, moved unilaterally a page whose name has been very controversial, against the Wikipedia policy.

Desired outcome

This is a summary written by users who have initiated the request for comment. It should spell out exactly what the changes they'd like to see in the user, or what questions of behavior should be the focus.

We want this admin to understand that even he must follow the Wikipedia policies, and we want his move to be undone.

Description

{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries, other than to endorse them.}

The user Bogdangiusca moved the page Romani people to Roma people, disrespecting the policy for requesting potentially controversial moves. This article attracts many users, which discuss on its talk page all kind of issues concerning its format, including the name of the article (in fact this issue itself makes up an important share of the discussions there). He only posted on the talk page his opinion after he moved the page. He also marked the move as minor edit despite the controversy surrounding the title.

Evidence of disputed behavior

(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)

[1]
[2]

Applicable policies and guidelines

{list the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct}

WP:RM
WP:CON

Evidence of trying to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

[3]
[4]

Evidence of failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links to demonstrate that the disputed behavior continued after trying to resolve the dispute)

He simply refused to talk about the problem.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}

Other users who endorse this summary

Response

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Outside view

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

Users who endorse this summary:

Discussion

All signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to this page's discussion page. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page.

Conclusion

Due to inactivity, I'm closing this case. Since the dispute is primarily editorial, I encourage editors to go to WP:MEDCAB or WP:MEDCOM to sort it out. Wizardman 23:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]