[WikiEN-l] Odd

[Snowspinner]

The exact standing of that arbcom ruling is in some doubt - mostly  
because it did kind of consist of the arbcom making a content ruling  
of the sort that they theoretically don't make. I know it came under  
some fire (from me, largely) when it was applied to C Colden, who  
appeared to be a new user, and who was blocked for violating the  
ruling, despite not being covered by it. Of course, Colden turned out  
to be a sock, but that's neither here nor there.

A request for clarification on whether or not the parts of the ruling  
regarding the status of LaRouche sources are still in force would  
probably not be out of line.

-Snowspinner

On Jul 12, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Geoff Burling wrote:


> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Skyring wrote:
>
>
>
>> I've just spotted this on the talk page of a user: "I will revert all
>> edits to all articles on my watchlist by the LaRouche cult "editor"
>> Cognition, or any other recognisable LaRouche editor. I will do this
>> until either the LaRouche cultists are banned from Wikipedia or I am.
>> I don't much care which, since an encyclopaedia which allows crackpot
>> cultists to edit its articles is not worth writing for."
>>
>> Now, to my poor understanding, this user is threatening to revert any
>> edits made to any article on his 1000+ witchlist, regardless of  
>> merit,
>> so long as that edit is made by someone he identifies as a particular
>> sort of crackpot.
>>
>> What I know about LaRouche could be summed up in one word, but surely
>> Wikipedia is not going to be destroyed by the presence or absence of
>> one particular editor?
>>
>>
>>
> Well, I happen to know that a case came before the ArbCom concerning
> LaRouche followers who tried to add citations from their leader to a
> number of unrelated articles, which resulted in a decision that was  
> not
> in their favor.
>
> And I seem to remember that one of the editors involved in limiting
> their attempts to flood Wikipedia with pro-Larouche citations was Adam
> Carr. These wouldn't be Carr's words, would they?
>
> I suggest you do more research: the ArbCom concluded these people
> were POV-pushers, & a danger to Wikipedia. I doubt you will find much
> support criticizing the person wrote this, no matter how ill-tempered
> that editor might be.
>
> Geoff
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>