[WikiEN-l] Arbcom Overstepping

[Fred Bauder]

It is not that Lyndon LaRouche is not important or significant or that an
article which concerns him or his political activities are not subject to
the NPOV policy. The decision is based on experience with his supporters
which involve insistance that the LaRouche perspective be included articles
which relate to him only in peripheral ways. However, it is quite possible
that [[User:C Colden]]'s edit warring on behalf of that perspective was
engaged in without knowledge of the ruling and perhaps a warning would have
been appropriate first.

"The three users are inserting claims into [[Lyndon LaRouche]] and
[[Frederick Wills]], without third-party attribution, which are designed to
enhance the image of Lyndon LaRouche, and have reverted deletion of the
claims three times in the last 16 hours.

Frederick Wills was a former Guyana government official who later in life
became a member of the [[Schiller Institute]], which is part of the LaRouche
movement. In 1976, before there is evidence of his involvement with
LaRouche, he apparently gave a speech to the U.N. advocating a third world
debt moratorium.  The above users are inserting that he gave this speech
only after coming into contact with LaRouche, and that the speech was
designed to promote LaRouche's proposal. They've provided no evidence to
support this claim. Wills has died and therefore can't be asked what's true.
This is an attempt to claim ownership on behalf of LaRouche of Wills'
proposal on debt relief."

See 
[[Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Admin_enforcement_requested#Enough
_is_enough]]

The problem is that LaRouche has over a long career taken a number of
positions, a very great many of which have been noted by no one outside his
movement or those who oppose him, but arguably could be included in a great
many Wikipedia articles. His endorsement of third world debt relief is
typical. He didn't propose it first, no one of significance noted his
endorsement of it, but according to him, he is a noted statesman with
respect to this issue. This particular article is somewhat ambiguous as
Frederick Wills did eventually affiliate with LaRouche activities.

That said, the proper course of action for Caroline Colden is to appeal to
Jimbo.

Fred

> From: Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:57:58 -0600
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbcom Overstepping
> 
> I'm seriously concerned about a recent arbcom enforcement. A ban was
> ordered against [[User:C Colden]] as per the ruling in the case of
> Lyndon LaRouche.
> 
> C Colden was not a Wikipedia user when the LaRouche ruling was made. He
> was not a party to that case. However, the ruling of the case,
> apparently, was a ruling against the insertion of "original research
> originating with the LaRouche movement" (Which seems to be an
> interchangable phrase with "the LaRouche point of view") into any
> article by any user.
> 
> This seems to me to reflect a hard arbcom ruling that the LaRouche POV
> is not something that need be included under the Wikipedia NPOV policy.
> As loathesome as I find the LaRouche movement to be, I am seriously
> troubled by the notion that the arbcom can and will make blanket
> rulings that certain perspectives are not part of NPOV.
> 
> -Snowspinner
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l