RK,
Please don't personalize the issue as if Zero were the only one who
disagrees with your text. It is wrong on many accounts, accounts which I
have described on the talk page. I have repeatedly indicated my
willingness to use mediation to try to improve the discussion, in an
attempt to lead to a better article. Zero was hesitant, but said he would
try it. Will you join us?
--Dan Keshet
Robert wrote:
For over a year now Zero has been taunting me with
personal
attacks, slander, and taunting with attacks on any Jews who
differ with him. Zero constantly deletes chunks of
articles, in order to censor facts that he disagrees with.
Shockingly, the deleted material isn't even contested; Zero
flat out admits that the groups mentioned have the views
presented.
In recent days Zero has unilaterally (again) removed large
amounts of verified facts from the article we have on
Israel Shahak; the text he removed was on the one subject
for which Shahak is most well known. Shahak today is known
for his writings against religious Jews, which have been
rejected by mainstream historians. Today, not a single
maninstream historian relies on Shahak; his work only
exists on Nazi, Christian Identitity and White Supremacist
Websites. (Please do not take my word for this; check out
Google and see for yourself.)
Long time members will recall that certain people
attempted to sabotage our articles on Richard Wagner and on
Holocaust denial. They repeatedly denied that any
anti-Semitism existed in Wagner or in Holoaust denier. They
claimed that it was a "strawman" that the ideas about Jews
of Richard Wagner and of Holocaust Deniers were rejected by
all historians, and were only accepted today by Nazi,
Christian Identitity and White Supremacist Websites.
Fortunately, at the time, sane voices here prevailed. A
number of us noted that one's personal feelings have no
place in Wikipedia articles. Our NPOV policy demands that
we phrase all facts in NPOV terminology.
Thus, for the Richard Wagner article we extensively
discussed Wagner's views on Jews, giving direct quotes so
that readers could judge for themselves. The article then
noted that these views were not accepted as factual, yet
were adopted as truthful by Nazis and other similar groups.
While the anti-Semitic Wagner supporters screamed bloody
murder, the rest of us Wikipedians kept this NPOV
discussion. The facts were there in NPOV format, and the
readers could judge for themselves.
Now the same thing is occuring here in the Israel Shahak
article. Thus the article discussed Shahak's views on Jews,
giving direct quotes so that readers could judge for
themselves. The article then noted that these views were
not accepted as factual, and have been rebutted by
virtually the entire Jewish community, from secular to
Reform to Orthodox to the ADL.
The articles states (when not censored by Zero) that
Shahak's claims are only accepted by anti-Semitic groups.
This is a fact. However, Zero is screaming bloody murder,
and on the talk page has engaged in bashing against me, and
then against the Jewish community. He now is trying to get
me banned, and he keeps reverting the page.
Wikipedia needs to insist that NPOV policy be followed,
even on articles for Richard Wagner and Israel Shahak. We
cannot let Zero mass revert everything that he wants to
keep hidden, and we cannot let him slander the Jewish
community (or the blacks, or the gays, etc.) We cannot ban
people just because they want articles to contain verified
factual information in NPOV format.
Obviously I and others are flexible on the specific wording
of said facts (as I have stated on the articles' talk pag)
The problem is that Zero has repeatedly stated that he
won't let the issue even be discussed, which is a serious
violation of Wikipedia ethics.
Robert (RK)