Dreadstar (T-C-L-K-R-D) is a name which has come up in these parts in conjunction with assorted DICKery. However, it appears that he has now left the building, in a petulant response to getting a one week incivility block from Risker. The incident did attract a pack of drahma-hounds here.

From skimming that discussion, it seems like Dreadstar got blocked for repeatedly calling Doc James "a liar". This all comes out of the imbroglio about having an image of the side view of a naked pregnant woman in the lead of Pregnancy. Both sides in the dispute seem to be accusing the other of abusing process.

I sometimes call out what I see as gratuitous use of nudity or explicit images on WP, but there's a point where this gets silly. Having a medical doctor arguing against using a rather inoffensive image to illustrate pregnancy seems a bit odd to me.

I'm just asking that they find a similar image, but with a well-coiffed hairdo!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=460643872

The sole purpose of adding that Wiktionary link is to highlight the word "liar" by making it blue and noticeable. As everyone over two years of age knows what a "liar" is, he didn't add the link to help others learn its definition. Dreadstar wanted to draw attention to his or her accusation against Jmh649.

Nevertheless, I don't believe that the situation was handled properly. The AN/I thread was created by the alleged victim of the episode, and Risker didn't wait for a second opinion before making the final decision. Dreadstar wasn't notified of the discussion, and he or she didn't receive a warning. Dreadstar wasn't given a chance to defend him or herself.

The issue could've been resolved without an AN/I discussion or a block. As it occurred on a talk page, Jmh649 had the right of reply, and he or she could've tried to refute Dreadstar's claims instead of seeking action from a sysop.

what is up with the talk page history. I can view the older versions when I got his contribs but none of them show up when viewing the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...alk%3ADreadstar

When Dreadstar archives his talk page, he moves the page along with its edit history to a new location. For some reason, Dreadstar decides to not leave behind any redirects, which results in users checking the page history without checking the page logs as well not noticing that the page had been moved.

Users with the "suppressredirect" bit have the option to not leave any redirects behind when they move a page, which is helpful when reverting page-move vandalism. On MediaWiki installations (eg. encyclopediadramatica.ch, Wikia wikis), the "Leave a redirect behind" box is usually checked by default, so either Wikipedia is configured differently or Dreadstar consciously decided to uncheck the box.

Leaving behind redirects or not wouldn't matter here as the redirect would point to the archive, which sort of defeats the purpose of move archiving. I do find it funny that dread archived right after getting blocked.

edit: clarification

Agree, and Blocking ip he used to add "retired" template to his user page was not needed either. Not such a big deal block evasion to add "retired" template to your own user page.

Yes. That's a Will Beback-style victory dance over a fallen opponent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

I meant that Dreadstar could've done what I do and start a new talk page on top of the redirect. Users viewing the page history for my user talk page can clearly see that the page had been moved in the past and where it had been moved to without having to look it up in Special:Log.

A one week civility block was too harsh.

Instead, they should have blocked him for a month for blatantly trolling. The people who are trying to push for a naked image in the lead are trolls. There is no legitimate reason for it.


By the way, if they honestly wanted to show a pregnant stomach, they could easily have cropped out the breasts. Furthermore, you don't see a fetus via the picture regardless, so what is the difference between skin and a dress? Most pregnant women don't walk around naked, so it wouldn't even match the cultural norms for it.

No offense Hersch, but do you really think 2 days is long enough to consider a junkie wikipediot to be out of the building? Chances are he just got drunk after the block and is too hungover to get past making himself a hotpocket for breakfast.

Mod note: rehashed debate about the pregnancy article image moved somewhere else.

Dreadstar is/was one of the most level headed administrators with controversial subjects in the project until very recently when his wiki persona started to change the last few months. Looking at the block, a week block seems like the only solution because comments like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ludwigs2&diff=prev&oldid=450568912 this] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pregnancy&diff=450568689&oldid=450568637 from this] is unacceptable.

I don't consider calling an editor a liar to be a blatant personal attack, but obviously the comments he said to Doc James, and other editors for the past few months in the pregnancy article, its clear that Dreadstar was burning out as an editor. Unless Dreadstar takes a much needed wikibreak with this block and avoids controversial subjects in his return, I see him as an desysopping waiting to happen.

Not necessarily. I was just making conversation.

If by "level-headed" you mean "single-purpose, agenda-driven, promoting New Age beliefs as though they were deep universal truth".