Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/168.209.97.34

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Case Closed on 22 January 2005

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 /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

Contents

[edit] Parties

Parties include User:OneGuy who has filed a complaint against the anonymous user User:168.209.97.34 who also edits as User:196.2.134.163, User: Lothario-- and User:-lothario- who has filed a countercomlaint against OneGuy.

[edit] Statement of complaint

The anon user (168.209.97.34 also has used 196.2.134.163, Lothario-- and -lothario-) is a tenacious pusher of anti-Islamic POV and is known for disfiguring the articles. For months, he has insisted on inserting the same highly slanted texts, phrases, and words in articles such as Margaret Hassan, Allahu Akbar, Nick Berg, Jihad, Muhammad, and Aisha causing some of them to be protected. He even vandalized my user page User:OneGuy. He makes minimal effort to engage in dialog on Talk pages.

Examples of abuses

On 9 Nov 2004, he added out of context verses to Jihad page. One example, "Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies." Surah 8:60 .. The verse with context reads, "Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies. But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things)." Surah 8:60-61. After this was pointed out by the User:Mirv and me, 168.209.97.34 went into extensive revert war, refusing to allow the correction.

On 17 Nov 2004, he changed the last sentence in Margaret Hassan article, "handgun by a masked man" to "handgun by a masked Muslim man." (made bold by me). After the word "Muslim" was removed from the killer description by other users, he continued this for the next two or three days. (without discussing it on talk page).

Since 17 May 2004, to the article Allahu Akbar, he has been adding phrases like, "when they attack people of a different religion" and a link to a hate site with text, "hooded Muslim Men yelling "Allahu Akbar" while cutting off a civilian's head", "the phrase invokes fear as the phrase is often spoken by Muslims while attacking others", and on and on. This continued for many months.

On 28 Sep 2004 he added irrelevant links to Nick Berg and continued revert war with other users. Plus many other abuses followed after that on that page.

On 25 May 2004, to the article Aisha, he added the highly offensive and POV phrase She "was raped by Muhammad when she was nine." He continued this abuse for days. Later around 17 Nov 2004, he started deleting arguments from the article that some Muslims use to show Aisha was older than nine.

He also has a long history of disfiguring Muhammad article and adding anti-Islamic POV to that page. See the history and talk page.

Moreover, he vandalized my user page three times.

The IP used in above examples was 168.209.97.34

I request disciplinary action against this user: 168.209.97.34, 196.2.134.163, Lothario--, -lothario-. -- OneGuy 09:29, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Further statements by complaining party

The complete history is here for anyone to make the decision; inserting abusive language, deleting counter evidence (and the quotes are on the page, so I didn't "lose"), adding out of context verses and then reverting them, vandalizing user page, adding the words "terrorist," "rape," "incestuous" and "Muslim" to killer description to disfigure and slant articles, and everything else documented above. OneGuy 11:17, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Statements by affected party

LOL - This is funny. Please look at the history of OneGuy and you will see he has blind faith in Muhammad and is an extreme Islamic apologist. OneGuy constantly ignores the 3 revert rule and wherever he goes a protected page is bound to follow. He reverts without explanation and will revert a users entire contribution even if he only disagrees with one segment of it. In the past, wherever there was a revert war and page was protected, OneGuy actually loses out because the resulting page that's put up after arbitration is more neutral than before. With Aisha, he hid the facts and quotes that showed she was indeed 9 at the bottom and put his quotes (actually, not even quotes since the book he is quoting doesn't even talk about Aisha) on top. This caused a revert war which he lost. He also lost the revert war in Muhammad too. -lothario- 11:00, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Dialogue between the parties

LOL - This is funny. Please look at the history of OneGuy and you will see he has blind faith in Muhammad and is an extreme Islamic apologist. OneGuy constantly ignores the 3 revert rule and wherever he goes a protected page is bound to follow. He reverts without explanation and will revert a users entire contribution even if he only disagrees with one segment of it. In the past, wherever there was a revert war and page was protected, OneGuy actually loses out because the resulting page that's put up after arbitration is more neutral than before. With Aisha, he hid the facts and quotes that showed she was indeed 9 at the bottom and put his quotes (actually, not even quotes since the book he is quoting doesn't even talk about Aisha) on top. This caused a revert war which he lost. He also lost the revert war in Muhammad too. -lothario- 11:00, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The complete history is here for anyone to make the decision; inserting abusive language, deleting counter evidence (and the quotes are on the page, so I didn't "lose"), adding out of context verses and then reverting them, vandalizing user page, adding the words "terrorist," "rape," "incestuous" and "Muslim" to killer description to disfigure and slant articles, and everything else documented above. OneGuy 11:17, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Visit http://www.dictionary.com and look up those words. I was just calling it what it was. A 9 year old girl is not old enough to concent to sexual acts and is called statutory rape. Marrying a family member is incest. Fact is that the person who shot Hassan was Muslim (I know some Muslim apologists are blaming the Mossad, CIA, etc.) You have also started multiple revert wars and clearly ignored the 3 revert rule and ignored other people warning you about it. You should be banned. -lothario- 11:34, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Well, we let the arbitrators decide whose edits have been violating wiki policy of NPOV (for months now) and who vandalized the user page. Most of your edits were reverted by everyone else, actually, not just me. Easy to check that by examining the history. Anyway, have a nice day :) OneGuy

[edit] Countercomplaint

Arbitrators, please also investigate OneGuy's history. He has been warned many times about the 3 revert rule and ignores each and every one of them. It's either his way, or no way. In most (all?) cases, at the end of the edit war the rest of the wiki users agreed with my version. He constatly removed facts that paint Mohammad in a unfavorable manner. He demands that all changes/reverts be discussed in talk before taking action, yet he doesn't even follow his own advice. He has also given me veiled threats by tracing my IP with name dropping the technical contact of the netblock my IP is assigned to by Arin. His clear disregard of the rules should not go without reprimand. -lothario- 14:13, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Further dialogue

In response to comments by arbitrator James F below, according to dispute resolution page, "Vandalism and flagrant violations of Wikipedia policies and behavior guidelines by repeat offenders may be handled using expedited procedures." I believe 168.209.97.34 behavior has been vandalism (he vandalized my user page three times) and flagrant violations of wiki policy of NPOV.OneGuy

Three words: Pot, kettle, black. OneGuy has started numerous revert wars causing the said article to be locked. Even after several warnings about his constant violation of the 3 revert rule he continues on knowing full well what is he is doing is wrong. He uses POV terms (calling Jews killed by Muhammad "traitors" and such). I feel the major reason for this request for arbitration has less to do with him wanting a resolution and more to do with an armchair-jihadist doing an online slaying of an infidel. The timing is also suspect since I have had no interaction with OneGuy for several days. Previously he would look at my contributions and follow me around. -lothario- 07:22, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"armchair-jihadist doing an online slaying of an infidel". See: Wikipedia:No personal attacks. This can be added as another example of abusive behavior. This should also be a hint to his anti-Islamic POV on wiki. I told him several times that I am not Muslim, but even if he doesn't believe me, the above statement is clearly abusive behavior OneGuy 15:09, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sure. It can be verified who has been flagrantly violating NPOV policy by examining the history and evidence, including vandalizing my user page. Moreover, there were dispute resolution attempts. I and others left messages on talk pages, such as on Talk Jihad (which is now mess but the evidence should be on archive page) and Talk Aisha, "Ready to Comprise," asking him to comprise, but 134 ignored them and continued with deleting material from the article until the article got protected. Please examine the complete history, including the evidence I posted above and his vandalism of my user page. I request disciplinary action. OneGuy

Since 168.209.97.34 filed a counter complaint against me, where is his evidence? He claims that I am pushing pro-Islamic POV, but he has not submitted any evidence. Deleting his anti-Islamic POV and making articles balanced and NPOV doesn't mean I am pushing "pro-Islamic" POV. He didn't submit evidence for "veiled threats" either. He also complained that I violated 3 revert rule. True, but this happened only with 168.209.97.34. Other than that, I never had this problem. Main reason for that is that 168.209.97.34 edits are blatantly POV bordering vandalism, and he refuses to comprise OneGuy 16:28, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Preliminary decision

[edit] Votes and Comments by Arbitrators (5/0/0/0)

  • Accept Fred Bauder 13:11, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Forgive me for perhaps being somewhat dense, but I see no evidence of attempts at earlier steps in the dispute resolution process, upto and including Mediation. James F. (talk) 21:19, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC) Accept. James F. (talk) 11:19, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Accept --the Epopt 01:05, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Accept The Cunctator 23:56, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC) Disputants might want to consider avoiding topics that they care so deeply about.
  • Accept Jwrosenzweig 23:24, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC) (And amen to what Cunc had to say.)

[edit] Temporary injunction (none)

[edit] Final decision

All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts are there as well)

[edit] Principles

[edit] Discourtesy and personal attacks

1) Wikipedia editors should conduct their relationship with other editors with courtesy and avoid personal attacks.

Passed 9-0.

[edit] Edit warring and the three revert rule

2) Editors are expected to avoid edit wars and to respect the three revert rule consulting with one another on talk pages in a courteous manner regarding the content of articles.

Passed 9-0.

[edit] Caching servers

3) In our decisions we should avoid requiring permanently blocking Proxy/caching servers that belong to an ISP if possible. (See User:202.72.131.230.)

Passed 8-0.

[edit] Findings of fact

[edit] Vandalism of userpage, trading of personal attacks

1) On September 9, 2004 a user with the IP address 168.209.97.34 repeatedly vandalized User OneGuy's user page, blanking it and inserting language insulting to OneGuy and to Islam, see [1], [2], [3]. User OneGuy responded with this edit [4], terming 168.209.97.34 an "anti-Islamic bigot".

Passed 9-0.

[edit] Edit warring and violation of the 3 revert rule

2) On November 17, 2004 User OneGuy and a user with the IP address 168.209.97.34 engaged in an edit war at article, Aisha each party reverting the article about 10 times, see edit history.

Passed 9-0.

[edit] 168.209.97.34 as a caching server

3) The IP address 168.209.97.34 belongs to an ISP's caching server in South Africa; as such, many users can be considered to be editing as that IP address.

Passed 8-0.

[edit] 168.209.97.34's identity

4) Given comments on the original case page, the user from 168.209.97.34 identified above in 1) and 2) can reasonably be assumed to be User:-lothario-.

Passed 8-0.

[edit] Inserting anti-Muslim POV

6) -lothario-, editing as 168.209.97.34, has engaged in a pattern of inserting POV into articles that appears to disparage Muslims and their beliefs in ways that violate the Neutral Point of View policy. [5], [6], [7], [8] (note ref to number of times 'kill' is in the Quran) Another example: On 9 Nov 2004, he added out of context verses to Jihad page. One example, "Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies." 4. Surah 8:60 .. The verse with context reads, "Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies. But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things)." Surah 8:60-61 For more see evidence page.

Passed 6-1.

[edit] Remedies

[edit] -lothario banned for vandalizing user page

2) -lothario- is banned for three days for repeatedly vandalizing OneGuy's userpage with personal attacks.

Passed 7-1.

[edit] -lothario- on POV parole

3) -lothario- is placed on POV parole for up to and including one year. If he re-inserts any edits which are judged by a majority of those commenting on the relevant talk page in a 24-hour poll to be a violation of the NPOV policy, then he shall be temp-banned for a short time, up to one week.

Passed 6-1.

[edit] Oneguy admonished

4) Oneguy is admonished not to respond in kind even to severely provocative personal attack.

Passed 7-0.

[edit] Enforcement

[edit] Further vandalism to any page

1.2) Further vandalism by -lothario- may result in temporary blocks of up to a week by any administrator at the administrator's discretion. The blocking administrator has the authority to determine what constitutes "vandalism."

Passed 7-0.