The ruling was that original research developed by Lyndon LaRouche was not to be inserted into articles which did not concern Lyndon Larouch and his political activities.
Lyndon LaRouche has put forth a great many creative ideas regarding economic and political issues. His partisans, in our case User, Herschelkrustofsky, as a mean of promoting Lyndon LaRouche, inserted the ideas Lyndon LaRouche has developed into articles on which Lyndon Larouche had expressed ideas which were not significant form the point of view of the articles.
==Remedies
1) Original work which originates from Lyndon LaRouche and his movement may be removed from any Wikipedia article in which it appears other than the article Lyndon LaRouche and other closely related articles.
4) Supporters of Lyndon LaRouche are instructed not to add references to Lyndon directly to articles except where they are highly relevant, and not to engage in activities that might be perceived as "promotion" of Lyndon LaRouche.
==Enforcement== 1) Wikipedia users who engage in re-insertion of original research which originated with Lyndon LaRouche and his movement or engage in edit wars regarding insertion of such material shall be subject to ban upon demonstration to the Arbitration Committee of the offense.
3) If an article is protected due to edit wars over the removal of Lyndon-related material, Admins are empowered (as an exception to normal protection policy) to protect the version which does not mention Lyndon LaRouche.
Fred
From: "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" jwales@wikia.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 02:19:26 -0700 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] pirate radio station as source (was: Zero0000 has blocked Lance6Wins)
Phil Sandifer wrote:
I don't think the small but hardcore following necessarily makes their views encyclopedic - consider the case of Lyndon LaRouche, which the arbcom has ruled ought not be mentioned in articles that do not directly pertain to LaRouche. So I would still lean towards this not being encyclopedic.
Has the ArbCom actually ruled that LaRouche ought not to be mentioned in articles that do not directly pertain to LaRouche? Or is it more accurate to say that one particular user with a history of problems was instructed not to do that? It's an important distinction, because it is not for the ArbCom to make broad rulings on matters of content alone.
--Jimbo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l