Hi, Tony Sidaway sez: === *do not engage in an edit war* And if and when there is a discussion. *listen* to what people say. Everybody loves to be listened to. And then, when you've done enough listening, if you're still sure that your edit enjoys so much support that it's the right thing to do, *ram that sucker in again* and *invite people to revert it if they think that is the right thing to do.* If this doesn't work for you, it's probably because you haven't yet learned how to build a consensus. === This works 99% of the time. But the LaRouche supporters are not interested in consensus. They firmly believe that LaRouche is the world's greatest economist and thinker. They are on a mission. They believe that everyone who has ever written an article critical of LaRouche is part of a conspiracy that began in ancient Babylon. As Winston Churchill said: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." The material the LaRouche supporters post is overwhelmingly from LaRouche publications. They make fantastic claims. The repeatedly engage in personal attacks. They make claims that are false simply based on their one statements on the Talk pages. They will lose some text in a discussion and it appears a few days later, or they arbitrarily delete text that is appropriate. In my case they keep claiming I have invented, misrepresented, or cooked quotes. I have posted whole blocks of text online to show the context, and then they demand that I post an image file to make sure I am not lying. On the page explaining NPOV it states "Many POV battles would be made much easier through the practice of good research. Facts are not points of view in and of themselves. So an easy way to avoid making a statement that promotes a point of view is to find a reputable source for a fact and cite the source. This is an easy way to characterize a side of a debate without promoting a view. The trick is to find the best and most reputable source you can. " LaRouche material should be cited when appropriate, but it is taking over page after page on Wikipedia without proper balance or clear discussion of what reputable majority views are about LaRouche and his group. We can be fair to the LaRouche point of view but only if there is some way to resist their constant bullying. I invite everone to visit the LaRouche-related pages and see what is going on. It is not a situation created because we have not "learned how to build a consensus." Chip Berlet (Cberlet) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l