The Lyndon LaRouche supporters provide a good example of the way Wikipedia doesn't defend itself well against determined POV pushers. The arbcom ruled that original research emanating from the LaRouche movement may be used on articles "closely related" to LaRouche. A consequence of this is that the article [[Lyndon LaRouche]] now cites claims that LaRouche developed the Star Wars program, properly referenced to someone interviewed on LaRouche cable television. This is just one of scores of similar claims in the 17 articles on the LaRouche template, but you have to be knowledgeable to sort out which claims are LaRouche nonsense, because they're not always as obvious as the Star Wars one.
The LaRouche editors have already been through mediation. The purpose of mediation is to find a middle way between two sides. But this is inappropriate when dealing with someone like LaRouche, whose views border on insanity. The post-mediation articles were a compromise between what reputable journalists and scholars believe (that his movement is a fascist cult, and that he is arguably unwell), and what LaRouche supporters believe (that he designed Star Wars, is the greatest economist of his day, that the British royal household wants to assassinate him, and so on.) It's like saying "some believe that 2 plus 2 = 4, while others say it's 5" in a mathematics article.
They have also been through arbitration. The arbcom ruled that LaRouche publications count as "original research" but may be used as sources in articles "closely related" to LaRouche and his movement. As a result, the LaRouche editors have taken ownership of the 17 articles on the LaRouche template, and are constantly trying to bring other articles into the "closely related" fold. They regularly attack other editors who stand up to them, calling us "anti-LaRouche activists", which implies that we're out to get LaRouche, rather than out to protect Wikipedia. Most editors become disheartened and wander off. Some try to compromise, which is why nonsense like the Star Wars claim is allowed to sit there.
To have Wikipedia act against these people, other editors are going to have to return to the arbcom, make the case again, do all the diffs, maybe be asked to do an RfC first (which the LaRouche editors would love because it would give them a public platform to re-post all their insults), watch their own reputations be trashed by the LaRouchites, so that the process degenerates into claim and counter-claim, and counter-counter claim, all of it on public pages cached by Google. Who wants to face that?
What is needed in obvious cases like this is a "benevolent dictator", whether it's Jimbo Wales or the arbcom, to examine the editors' contributions then ban them, because these are not bona fide Wikipedians who happen to have a strong POV. They are fanatics acting to promote the views of a poltical cult, and they're here for no other reason. Yet here they remain, making a mockery of everything Wikipedia stands for.
Slim