[WikiEN-l] Odd

Wed Jul 13 01:05:10 UTC 2005

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 at 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 at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>