I think it is especially important to clarify if a LaRouchite POV is a acceptable component of a pages NPOV, and if editors known to promote the inclusion of a LaRouchite POV are blockable for that alone.
Jack (Sam Spade)
On 7/13/05, Snowspinner snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
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@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l