Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche

223:

promote his organisation. This varies from edits which add external links to articles in LaRouche publications to adding paragraphs to articles making elevated claims about the importance of LaRouche to a particular issue or theory or project. These edits tend to be of dubious value and make dubious claims which do not withstand scrutiny. Herschell's article for instance consisted entirely of information culled from the LaRouche organisation and is completely unsupported by outside sources. Herschell's attempts to prove the claims made in the article have been debunked ( see

209:

movement will recognise his style and tactics. John, Homey and I have been trying to write a proper encyclopaedia article about LaRouche, a difficult task given the limited sources, but one I think we have done a reasonable job of. I am confident that anyone who reviews the whole history of this matter will conclude that Herschelkrustofsky is no more than a partisan pest, who ought to be firmly told to desist and let genuine Wikipedians get on with the job.

79:

in fact, boasted that he habitually deals with this sort of situation by protracted revert wars, and that he has historically gotten away with it. Today (June 30) the article was unprotected, and I made edits on Adam's article that I think will stand up to the harshest NPOV scrutiny. Adam immediately reverted to his version. I am asking for arbitration because I believe that Adam's behavior constitutes vandalism.--

350:: An examination of that talk page will show that I did provide outside sources. I did so in a hurried fashion, and some of the citations I provided were not relevant, while others were. Homey in fact acknowledges the relevance of those latter citations (contradicting his assertions above), while proceeding to nit-pick them. I invite arbitrators to visit this talk page and draw their own conclusions.-- 410:: LaRouche delivered an address on this topic in 1975 at the Baath party conference in Baghdad. The government of Iraq was to have sponsored a conference on this topic later that year at its embassy in France, but the conference was cancelled due to pressure from the U.S. Department of State. Several presentations on the Oasis Plan have been made during the past several years at the 55:. LaRouche is undoubtably an unusually controversial person; I began editing an article that had obviously been subject to many, many edits already. I was scrupulous about acknowledging the controversy, and the existence of opposing viewpoints; I concentrated on addressing outright falsehood, or dubious assertions made without documentation. 378:: The importance of LaRouche with respect to that article, is that he has pretty much singlehandedly resurrected American System Economics from obscurity. I invited Homey to name a more prominent advocate of the American System, and he did not respond (I won't say he "refused", as Homey would do in my place). Homey also linked 258:

Herschell is editing at cross purposes with the goal of wikipedia. His edits do not help wikipedia become a serious, comprehensive encyclopedia but instead are designed to promote Lyndon LaRouche. If he is successful and his edits go unchallenged he will bring this project into disrepute by having it

254:

Hershell added a reference to Lyndon LaRouche's peace plan (The "Oasis Plan") for the region, a plan which has not been taken under consideration by either side or indeed by anyone outside of the LaRouche movement. The only purpose in referencing this plan is to elevate the importance of LaRouche and

78:

In subsequent discussion, John (who is a sysop) became somewhat more open to negotiation, but has not participated now for several days. Adam has indicated that he has no intention of negotiating anything, and his comments on the talk page have degenerated to the point of mere invective. He has also,

280:

where he has added Lyndon LaRouche as the third major school of criticism of the Frankfurt School. He is relying on Page Protection to enforce his view and refusing to engage in the sort of discussion on Talk which Page Protection is supposed to create time and space for. He is thus failing in his

106:

Can someone be added retroactively once a request has already been made and without the opportunity for mediation? And I have not been "reverting every edit (Hershell) ever made" I've been removing paragraphs which had been inserted into disparate articles with the intent of artificially inflating

246:

article Herschell made the following claim: "The most outspoken proponent of American System Economics in the early 20th Century was Dr. Sun Yat-sen. Today, it is the American politician and economist Lyndon LaRouche" a claim that is not supported by any neutral parties and which ignores the fact

222:

Herschell admits to being a follower of Lyndon LaRouche, a controversial political figure who many in the mainstream have accused of being a cult leader. He has systematically edited Knowledge to insert a pro-LaRouche POV and to elevate the importance of LaRouche and his organisation or otherwise

319:

It is of course true that neither Homey not I had previously edited the various articles we have been vetting for LaRouche propaganda. It is a pity that other editors have not been sufficiently vigilant (or well-informed perhaps) to have undertaken a similar project. But the importance of such a

328:

Adam's sophistry is almost entertaining; he laments the fact that his particularly inflamed and arrogant POV is not shared by other editors at Knowledge, and if only the other editors would get on the stick, he wouldn't have to go charging around, reverting anything that he disagrees with. The

208:

Do I get to comment here? The facts of this matter are perfectly simple, and were recently set out by me at some length at the article's Talk page. Herschelkrustofsky is a LaRouche activist whose sole interest here is protecting the LaRouche fantasy biography. Anyone familiar with the LaRouche

320:

project is shown by the amount of blatant LaRouche propaganda and total arrant nonsense we have found in and deleted from these articles. In my view every edit Krusty has ever made to any article needs to be vetted, and on current evidence two-thirds of them will need to be deleted.

111:

eg LaRouche as the foremost proponentof the "American System" alive today, the Voting Rights Act being defunct because the courts ruled against LaRouche in the 1980s, LaRouche's "peace plan" for the middle east in an article on attempts to improve Arab-Israeli relations etc,.

694:

1) Knowledge users who engage in re-insertion of original research which originated with Lyndon LaRouche and his movement or engage in edit wars regarding insertion of such material shall be subject to ban upon demonstration to the Arbitration Committee of the offense.

62:

simply eliminated the article, and posted a new one, which is a fanatical attack, and would be considered libelous back in the days when libel laws were taken seriously. He simultaneously proclaimed his intention to pursue a revert war. He was supported in this by

664:

4) Supporters of Lyndon LaRouche are instructed not to add references to Lyndon directly to articles except where they are highly relevant, and not to engage in activities that might be perceived as "promotion" of Lyndon LaRouche.

305:). I think a careful examination of the page histories of the pages where Homey has attacked my work, will demonstrate that Homey had no interest in any of them, prior to his decision to launch an editing vendetta against me. 705:

3) If an article is protected due to edit wars over the removal of Lyndon-related material, Admins are empowered (as an exception to normal protection policy) to protect the version which does not mention Lyndon LaRouche.

70:

As soon as I reached the conclusion that Adam would not discuss, only revert (it appears that he has an history of this approach to disputes), I posted a request for mediation. The page (Adam's version) was protected by

31:

Please do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case. Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at

239:

to find some neutral third party sources such as law books or journals which would support his case that the LaRouche trial has any bearing on the act or is at all important he was unable to do so.

484:(same numbering). Below are the items that have passed with a majority of arbitrators as of 2 August 2004. Additional items will be placed here when and if they reach a majority in favor. 481: 40: 530:

4) Personal attacks which occur during the course of arbitration either on the arbitration pages or on the talk pages of the arbitrators fall within the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.

308:

Also, Homey is misrepresenting my responses to his allegations on the various talk pages, particularly when he alleges that I am "refusing to provide supporting evidence" for my edit in

302: 259:

pass off claims that no one in the real world, let alone the world of academe take seriously. At best he is a nuisance, at worst he is a threat to the integrity of Knowledge.

282: 33: 583:

2) User Herschelkrustofsky has engaged in a pattern of political advocacy and propaganda advancing the viewpoints of Lyndon LaRouche and his political movement.

601:"Because LaRouchism is a cult, its adherents are incapable of objective thought on any subject, let alone the subject of the cult leader's own biography." See 636:

1) Original work which originates from Lyndon LaRouche and his movement may be removed from any Knowledge article in which it appears other than the article

431: 187: 312:. His arguments are highly sophistical and self-serving; I encourage the arbitrators to read the relevant Talk pages and draw their own conclusions. -- 301:

Homey seems to have developed a heartfelt interest in the articles he cites, only after having launched his "edit cleansing" campaign against me (see

341: 329:

arbitrators should please note that I am not the first Wikipedian to be subjected to Adam's "robust tactics"; he practically brags of this in

235:

article claiming that the Act was "effectively nullified" by the judgement in a legal case involving Lyndon LaRouche yet when I asked him in

95:

to this request, as he has joined with Adam and John and has now begun a campaign of systematically reverting every edit I have ever made. --

290: 267: 260: 175: 161: 113: 92: 411: 296: 191: 251: 266:

I suggest that Herschell's habit of inserting LaRouche propaganda throughout wikipedia should be considered a form of vandalism.

728: 17: 602: 507: 67:, who also took the position that no article should be permitted that was not a full-on character assassination. 571: 608: 494: 564: 247:

that LaRouche is not a trained economist and would not be considered an "economist" by others in that field.

243: 160:

I've decided to decline mediation as well so please continue to include me in this arbitration as a respondent

415: 330: 169: 125: 555:

1) User Herschelkrustofsky has engaged in a pattern of adding original material, not his own, but that of

217: 379: 84: 469: 149:

of the article's talk page for the discussion regarding mediation, as well as the current version on

146: 573:

which form a pattern of attempting to insert the original work of Lyndon LaRouche into Knowledge.

676: 419: 399: 367: 351: 334: 313: 179: 138: 96: 80: 232: 510:

which states that Knowledge articles are not to used for "Propaganda or advocacy of any kind".

363: 448: 286: 684:

Passed with 5 of 8 active arbitrators on 17 August 2004. No votes against and no abstentions

540:

5) Personal attacks are not excused or justified by offers of demonstration of their truth.

711: