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(a)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(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l