[WikiEN-l] The Larouche issue: Strawman criticisms

Sat Nov 27 21:56:57 UTC 2004

Snowspinner writes:
> 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.
>
> ....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 is a false charge. You are making this up. No one is
claiming that an NPOV description of LaRouche's point of
view is original research, or is forbidden. Your claim is
nonsense.

The problem here is that many Larouche supporters violate
Wikipedia editorial policy by shoving in their own original
research, or pushing their own personal point-of-view as
fact. Further, they systematically distort many Wikipedia
articles by pushing the Larouche POV in places where it has
no meaning or relevance.  They are taking the POV of a
fringe, cult-like convicted criminal, and falsely
presenting it as a POV that is just as widely accepted as
those of any mainstream political party.

One could do the same thing with any of a dozen other
fringe self-styled political leaders who have been
convicted of crimes. However, the views of a self-styled
political messiah with little following does not deserve
the grand attention and treatment that a handful of
LaRouche supporters are giving it. Further, his views
certainly must be presented in an NPOV way without any
original research, which is not what his supporters do.

> 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. 

Nonsense. This is a strawman argument against a position
that no one has made.

> 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.

Nonsense. You are arguing a strawman criticism that a
number of LaRouche supporters have been doing here for some
time. We aren't falling for it.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail