Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Winter Soldier 2/Evidence

I will seek to show that TDC and Xenophrenic have edit warred extensively over a number of articles. I will also explain what role I have played in all this, in case the arbitrators wish to consider my actions as well.

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=151602706 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=151602706&oldid=151560986 this edit by TDC]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=151642002 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=151650712 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=151744541 TDC once again adds Mark Lane] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=151845120 removes the source] (consecutive edits)
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=152508306 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=152622374 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=152745870 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=153156923 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=153156923 this edit by TDC]

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151567955 TDC partially reverts] an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=151567955 addition of content by Xenophrenic]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151602266 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151638200 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151639968 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151642889 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=151650132 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=151650132 this edit by TDC]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153387156 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=152980564 this edit by TDC]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153649631 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153770594 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153786146 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153787637 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153790338 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=153967444 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=154031892 TDC again reverts] the wording "Ultimately, the WSI was an event..."
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154065583 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=154038012 this edit by TDC]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154086974 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154181866 Xenophrenic "expands", restoring some of his wording in the process]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154254951 TDC reverts] to the wording "key figure"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154255741 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154258078 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154261299 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154335631 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154488596 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154530921 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154604513 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154628830 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154630727 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154686729 Xenophrenic reverts] TDC's addition of a dispute tag and content: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=prev&oldid=154651828], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154673287]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154755366 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=154908910 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=155078091 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=next&oldid=155083179 Xenophrenic reverts]

Aftermath: An IP claiming to be TDC [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2F3RR&diff=154908120&oldid=154888690 reported] Xenophrenic for gaming the three-revert rule. I processed this report and determined that both parties were clearly edit warring and determined to block both. I originally planned to block both for 24 hours [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2F3RR&diff=155102553&oldid=155102173]; however, upon seeing TDC's [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:TDC extensive block log], I determined that a longer block was necessary and blocked him for one week ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR&diff=next&oldid=155102553], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Heimstern&page=User%3ATDC]) and Xenophrenic for 24 hours [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Heimstern&page=User%3AXenophrenic]. TDC later [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATDC&diff=155335717&oldid=155334939 informed me] about the previous Winter Soldier arbitration case and the checkuser report suggesting that Xenophrenic is same person the anonymous editor sanctioned in that case. This information led me to believe that Xenophrenic's history of edit warring was every bit as long as TDC's, so I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Heimstern&page=User%3AXenophrenic blocked Xenophrenic again] with a block timed to last exactly as long as TDC's. About a day later, he was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Gnangarra&page=User%3AXenophrenic unblocked] by an admin observing that the ArbCom remedies had expired and that a 3RR block should be twenty-four hours long. I expressed my disagreement with this admin's reasoning in a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHeimstern&diff=155554545&oldid=155553888 reply on my talk page], but did not reblock to avoid a wheel war. Instead, I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Heimstern&page=User%3ATDC unblocked TDC], believing it to be the most equitable thing to do. Xenophrenic continued to contest my block reasons, which I continued to defend, in a thread which I was particularly keen to archive soon.

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163783272 TDC reverts an earlier edit by Xenophrenic] (re-adds "allegations of", removed by Xenophrenic [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=prev&oldid=163780872 here])
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163820790 Xenophrenic reverts and adds a source]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163829162 Xenophrenic reverts again after his edit is reverted]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163871002 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163907044 Xenophrenic restores the source removed by TDC]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164094750 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=163973862 this edit by TDC] with some changes and says it's "per talk page"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164099391 TDC reverts] (back to "the veterans" and "not extensively covered")
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164100357 Xenophrenic reverts] (back to "honorably discharged servicemen" and "largely unmentioned")
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164183983 Xenophrenic reverts to this wording again] after it was changed by Badagnani [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=prev&oldid=164180853 here]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164208213 TDC wholesale reverts several of Xenophrenic's edits], for example, returning to the "veterans" and "not extensively covered" wording
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164213233 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164347970 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164349381 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164472482 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164507622 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164543103 Xenophrenic reverts again] after a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=prev&oldid=164543103 revert by JobsElihu]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164635673 TDC reverts] to "not extensively covered" again

Aftermath: The article was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164677482 protected] as a result of the edit war.

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169671062&oldid=168698823 TDC makes an edit, apparently against "POV"]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169671062 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169819085 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169875169 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169904073&oldid=169890156 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169904073 Xenophrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169904601 TDC reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=169931198 Xenohphrenic reverts]
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164094750 Xenophrenic reverts] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=prev&oldid=164094750 this edit by TDC] with some changes and claims they are "per talk page"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=next&oldid=164099391 TDC reverts]

Aftermath: Xenophrenic [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR&diff=prev&oldid=170002073 reported] TDC for a three-revert rule violation. TDC [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Ronnotel&page=User%3ATDC was blocked] as a result of this. When I saw this, I was concerned that the treatment was not equitable, and left the blocking admin [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARonnotel&diff=170053155&oldid=169777844 a note] to that effect. After mulling it over a bit, though, I decided this needed to go the next level, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=170055465 began a thread] at the incidents noticeboard. The blocking admin unblocked TDC to allow this discussion, which in turn led to this arbitration case.

In a previous arbitration case, TDC and an anonymous Earthlink editor 165.247.xxx were sanctioned for edit warring at Winter Soldier Investigation. This checkuser case says that Xenophrenic is likely the same person as 165.247.xxx, which would seem to be corroborated by Xenophrenic's modus operandi of edit warring with TDC. Although Xenophrenic denies being this anon, I find it highly unlikely a different person would show up with the same modus operandi and receive a "likely" checkuser result. This does not necessarily indicate abusive sockpuppetry, as it would be acceptable for the anon to create an account. But it does suggest that Xenophrenic, like TDC, should be treated as an editor with a history of edit warring who has been sanctioned by the committee in the past.

Please note User talk:Sam Blacketer/Archive 101-200#How about a little more info?, User talk:Xenophrenic#3RR, User talk:Sam Blacketer#Winter Soldier Investigation Talk Page and User talk:Xenophrenic#Latest 3RR report for an exchange which shows the response of Xenophrenic when the issue of his edit-warring with TDC was brought up.

Xenophrenic's [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Xenophrenic contributions] show article space edits to Vietnam Veterans Against the War, the Winter Soldier Investigation it organised, Mark Lane (author) who worked for them, and almost no other subjects.

Taking recent edits to Winter Soldier Investigation, there are reverts by TDC as follows:

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=163871086&oldid=163871002 19:35, 11 October], 1 minute after he was reverted, edit summary "no, he's right on this one"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=164100357&oldid=164099391 18:32, 12 October] also adding a minor citation, edit summary "here's the page #"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=164213233&oldid=164208213 05:02, 13 October] edit summary "hmmm, to many changes left undiscussed"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169875169&oldid=169819085 15:00, 7 November] edit summary "RV"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169904073&oldid=169890156 17:38, 7 November] edit summary "That wasn't very nice"
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169931198&oldid=169904601 19:27, 7 November] automatic edit summary only

Although TDC did edit the talk page, he did not explain his reverts. Nor did he attempt to discuss with Xenophrenic.

Although TDC frequently reverts, he is very careful to have only three reverts at the most within any 24 hour period. (Although this has not been enough to prevent his being blocked for 'gaming the system')

• When I began editing earlier this year, TDC requested and received a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Xenophrenic Checkuser] after I had made only a half-dozen edits on a single article. He falsely or mistakenly claimed the pretense of a violation of ArbCom parole, when there was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier no violation]. He cited a similar manner of editing, when those edits only restored text from other editors that TDC had deleted. I hadn't even made an original contribution of my own yet. The Checkuser came back as only "likely," but TDC apparently thought this justified spamming my user and talk pages with tags and harassment: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=106433193][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=106553819][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107075206][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107587075][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107638538][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107644885][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107651949][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107652084][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107993220][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107993331][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=107993359][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=108060200][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=108477305][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=108477415][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=108517803] He addresses me as Rob or Anon during this spam. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=prev&oldid=108518858 Here TDC claims my account has been confirmed as a Sock Puppet to avoid sanctions.] There has never been such a confirmation. There has never been a Sock Puppet check requested, and there has never been any evidence presented showing abusive use of multiple accounts.

• In August, TDC launched another attack via [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Reddi this] CheckUser request, claiming Xenophrenic is user Reddi. As in the previous request, TDC alleges an ArbCom sanction violation when there is none. As before, TDC starts in with the harassment, and even edits out references to Rob or Anon, and now [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=148956443 replaces] them with Mr. Redding! As in the previous attempt, no Sock Puppet check was requested, and there was never any evidence presented to show abusive use of multiple accounts.

• To this day, TDC insists on alleging other accounts, without providing a shred of evidence:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier_2#Statement_by_TDC "...Xenophrenic, is a sockpuuet of another user (yet to be clearly determined who that user is but obviously a sockpuppet), and no one, except for him naturally, disagrees with that."] He alludes to having evidence, but always falls conveniently short of producing it: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Reddi "I could provide much more anecdotal and circumstantial evidence on why I believe that the previously mentioned Anon, is User:Reddi, and is also the SPA User:Xenophrenic..."] Is Reddi or an Anon-IP editing the same articles I am? No. Are they stacking votes or swaying consensus with me? No.

• The harassment continues, and the fishing continues with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:TDC/Prize&action=edit this gem.] The attack page was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:TDC/Prize deleted], and the administrators remarked, "serves no purpose but to disparage; very poor taste; Screams WP:AGF issues, and possibly WP:POINT as well; This is just inflamatory." Nothing more was done.

• I am not the only target. When Starkrm made edits TDC didn't agree with, he too was subjected to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Nrcprm2026_%283rd%29 Checkuser] and Sock Puppet [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ADepleted_uranium&diff=168284779&oldid=168088610 harassment]. TDC would [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=167430837&oldid=166772074 revert war], with Edit Summaries stating only (rv banned user), even though Starkrm had never been banned. An admin even warned him that he [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=167465457 needed to provide evidence, not accusations, or he would be blocked for harassment]. Yet the harassment without evidence continues.

• Dlabtot also crossed editing paths with TDC, and was subjected to false accusations of Sock Puppetry without evidence of abusive conduct. Dlabtot was cleared by admins, but TDC pressed on, requesting that Dlabtot enable Wiki-email. After declining to enable his email, twice, and explaining that he did not wish to be contacted, TDC searched out his email through other sources and contacted him anyway. This is intimidation, in my opinion.

Conclusions: TDC uses frivolous Sock puppetry allegations and CheckUser requests to harass editors that stand in his way. Even if all CU requests came back "Absolutely Confirmed," there is still no abuse of process, violation of rules or evasion of sanctions involved here.

Just one example: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=154673287&oldid=154651828 this] slanderous insertion into a Biography of a Living Person was false. The citation given by TDC was false. I looked at that page in the book TDC cited, and it said nothing related to TDC's edit, so I reverted it. I verified with TDC several times that he had the correct page number, correct edition, correct book and he confirmed he did. He even offered to photocopy it "and upload it for all to evaluate." I have the book, and it is obvious TDC lied about seeing the page he cites. I am still waiting for that uploaded photocopy.

One example: TDC claimed his source, Tucker, indicated a membership of "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=117050230 around 7000]". The source is searchable online through Google Books, there is no mention of that number, and I pointed out he was in error. He recanted, and tried passing off this quote as from Tucker:

::Its leaders claimed a membership of several thousand, although it was not clear how many reported members really held active membership, how many were government infiltrators and how many had seen service in Vietnam pg 476 Tucker. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=153155611 here]

When I looked up his "quote," I found it had been modified from the actual wording in the book, substantially altering the meaning:

::By the time of the organization's dissolution in 1973, VVAW leaders claimed a membership of several thousand, although it was not clear how many reported members really held active membership, how many were government infiltrators and how many had seen service in Vietnam

By leaving off the first part of the sentence, TDC obscures the fact that Tucker was talking about the group in 1973 when they were breaking up, allowing TDC to falsely infer Tucker was speaking about "peak membership" numbers several years earlier. This form of deception is frequent with TDC, and it makes it difficult to maintain an assumption of good faith. He has even carried this practice of deceit here, to this ArbCom:

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier_2/Evidence#Xenophrenic_has_engaged_in_personal_attacks At this ArbCom], TDC misquotes me and claims I personally attacked him. He removed the part of the quote that puts it into context, and shows I was attacking not him, but his source I had discovered, which is known for doctoring and misrepresentation.
• [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier_2/Evidence#Xenophrenic_is_a_sockpuppet_of_another_user And at this ArbCom], TDC misrepresents a partial quote as being from me. TDC didn't even use the required ellipsis to indicate there was more to the quote - the clerk had to do it. TDC leaves out the original signature, and leaves out the part that indicates the quote was in response to urging by AllyUnion and JamesMLane to start editing controversial articles with a logged in account. If you read the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_2#VVAW_and_WSI_articles conversations]in full, and in context, you see the experiment mentioned wasn't to disrupt Wikipedia, but to test perceived prejudice against IP users. You will also find there were several students from a classroom editing using a shared Earthlink router, and apparently "Rob" had special safety concerns after this: "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Al_Hubbard_%28VVAW%29&diff=prev&oldid=9006118 Rob, dont be stupid, if that is possible. I used an advanced IP trace. I know your name home adress and telphone number. All the anons are you.] TDC 06:21, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)"

The only evidence brought against me in support of this charge are these 36 edits presented by Heimstern as simple reverts. Most of these edits dealt with information on the WP:BLP about Mark Lane, or with the sections of other articles in which he was involved. There was a lot of defamatory information, misrepresentation and falsification cleared out of these articles by these edits, as detailed in the edit summaries, talk pages and mediation (formal and informal) discussions. In contrast to the charge of "edit warring," those 36 edits represent legitimate edits in three articles over a four month period. Please see:

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier_2/Evidence/Editing_Conduct

Regarding Xenophrenic "likely" being editor 165.247.xxx, Heimstern states:

{{quotation|This does not necessarily indicate abusive sockpuppetry, as it would be acceptable for the anon to create an account. But it does suggest that Xenophrenic, like TDC, should be treated as an editor with a history of edit warring who has been sanctioned by the committee in the past.}}

Am I to interpret that to mean since TDC has a history of being on the wrong side of:

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Archive/Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress/History&diff=3653579&oldid=3653570#User:TDC_2 Vandalism in progress] reports
• RfC after RfC(2)
• Mediations and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&oldid=40838512#Depleted_Uranium_and_related_articles ArbComs] that go no where
• Banned for a year from WSI for edit warring, and while still under this ban..
• Earns yet another ArbCom sanction for edit warring. With all of this "history of edit warring" he got only: 1RR parole. And he went on to violate that, too.

Just to add insult to the situation, while under simultaneous sanctions from the Winter Soldier ArbCom & Depleted Uranium ArbCom, TDC [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=65766201 still] edit wars. And [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=62320336 again]. And yet [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=57116962 again]. This from just a cursory glance at the histories I've been going through. When his edit warring prompted an admin to ask, "Aren't you on revert parole?", multi-sanctioned TDC replied: "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=57110846 So block me for a day, you know I am.] Torturous Devastating Cudgel 02:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)"

The 165.247.xxx IP user, by contrast, was sanctioned once and respected the sanction (even amidst screams from the rabble that "you can't enforce it, and he knows it!!"). That deserves what treatment, in your opinion? Xenophrenic (talk) 00:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Xenophrenic has few edits. Period. Not even a couple hundred article edits yet, and at this rate, there won't be many more forthcoming very soon. That was already noted [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Xenophrenic here]. By contrast, Reddi would have link-spammed the bejeebers out of many talk pages by now, and the IP user would be edit warring across a couple dozen Vietnam-related articles while stuffing them with Copyright protected material. Big shoes to fill, I know. I don't see Reddi or the IP anywhere in the history of the Lane article; home of my most heated, but productive editing exchange. Quirky. Xenophrenic (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

A lot more from Xenophrenic coming soon.

I came into this situation between TDC and Xeno from a WP:RFPP for Xenophrenics user page[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=next&oldid=108600277] lodged by TDC on 16th Feb 2007[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=prev&oldid=108518858], The reason given was that Xeno was a sock of an editor subject to arbcom sanctions. For this reason I gave the initial block of xeno for 1 week, then extended it to indef as a sock puppet[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AXenophrenic block log of Xeno]. After discussions via email with Xeno I looked into the arbcom case and its resolutions.

The arbcom case[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FWinter_Soldier&diff=139824896&oldid=45226775 diff] said specifically that both TDC and the IP were banned from editing Winter Soldier Investigation for 1 year commencing 3rd Feb 2006 and finishing 3rd Feb 2007.

Xeno was a new editor who had not edited the winter soldier article, he had only edited the Vietnam Veterans Against the War article. We encourage IP editors to create accounts and from the article edit histories I saw no edits were Xeno edits had been supported by an IP address. from all of this Xeno had not violated WP:SOCK nor had he violated any arbcom ruling. Under these circumstances I unblocked Xeno with the comment (believe User isnt a sockpuppet, there has been more than 12 months between Arbcom case and the checkuser case).

When I unblocked Xeno I left [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=109576234 this] message with TDC, in short a bit of AGF and a request not to argue while I look into the situation. I also contacted an experienced admin Longhair over the issue asking for advice and guidence[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Longhair&diff=prev&oldid=109573740], he supported my position of unblocking and recommended that I keep an eye on the situation. During the next couple of weeks no major issues developed and my watching of them became secondary to other RL events.

In September I was contacted via email from Xeno who asked for assistance after a block was extended based apparently on the same Arbcom case. Looking at the situation I found the 3RR block warranted (though Xeno didnt) and a 24 hour block was fair. it was the extension based on the expired arbcom decision that wasnt reasonable both because of the timing and the application of the extension. I unblocked Xeno account and left a note for Heimstern, I had checked Heimsterns recent edits and noted he hadnt edited for over 3 hours, I didnt think it was reasonable to leave Xeno blocked for any further time[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Gnangarra&page=User%3AXenophrenic]. After leaving Heimtern a note about what I did and why[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Heimstern&diff=prev&oldid=155553888], he responded that he thought unblocking was a mistake but wasnt going to revert and that he will also unblock TDC[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Heimstern&diff=next&oldid=155553888], something I didnt think of checking at the time. Gnangarra 14:04, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

:I note TDC comment below and the text of the arbcom decision in Feb 07 has the section Banned from Winter Soldier Investigation[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FWinter_Soldier&diff=139824896&oldid=45226775]. What ever the reason for the misunderstanding of the Arbcom decision TDC used the arbcom decision to argue that it didnt apply to his actions in Feb[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TDC&diff=prev&oldid=108607832]. The difference between the my unblocks of TDC on the 16th and Xeno on the 20th was resolving the issue of whether Xeno had been a sock puppet. Gnangarra 00:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The checkuser request on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Xenophrenic Xenophrenic] returned with a “likely” result, and considering the focus and behavior of Xenophrenic, its certainly the same user. Every other user on the recent WP:ANI who chimed in on this subject came to the same conclusion.

Xenophrenic’s links to the anon from the prior arbitration, and comments made when editing from the IP’s make me believe that he is actually a sockpuppet of another user. I originally thought it was Reddi, but the checkuser turned out to be unrelated (although another editor did find merit in this at ANI). While editing as the Anon IP, this provocative and revealing comment was made:

{{quotation|...my not logging in under my registered psuedonym - please don't let that be a distraction from the real issues here. Almost 2 years ago there was an argument that resulted in a challenge to me, which then resulted in a little experiment, which is presently ongoing. I beg you to humor me on this. On a Wikipedia that claims anyone (even the unregistered) may contribute, and prides itself on the content of articles, not the contributors of them, this should not be an issue. I will continue to remain not logged in, while reserving my logging in for voting and other procedural matters as required...|Talk:Winter Soldier Investigation/Archive 2, #VVAW and WSI articles}}

Xenophrenic is also able to make timely appearances at the disputed articles, even after several days or even weeks of little or no activity from his account, and is able to revert an edit he does not like quickly ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=169809314&oldid=169671062], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=108438963], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=140969146], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=prev&oldid=151560986], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=153634778&oldid=153387156]).

Reviewing this evidence would seem to indicate that he has another account he regularly edits with and monitors these articles from.

Xenophrenics long abuse of Copyvio material is both well documented[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier_Investigation#Statement_by_User:Duk], extensive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_2#Plagiarism] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_2#Copyright_violation], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_2#copyvios], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_3#Copyvio_and_derivatives.2C_again][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War#Copyvio], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War/Archive#Copyvio_information],[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation/Archive_3#More_Copyvio_tinkering_from_the_anon] and has continued with this new account. This issue was never dealt with in the first arbitration, as I was unfamiliar with the methodology to do so.

A large section from an article was removed based on the fact that it did not come from the sources referenced in the article, but from a website, which was not attributed or cited, all of which was laid out in talk ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War#Copyright.2Fsourcing_issue]). When the material was removed and replaced with a short summary ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=153156923&oldid=152755159]), Xenophrenic reverted the edit ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=next&oldid=153156923]), after which Chaser asked me not to edit the material again, and instead take it to the notice board ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=153045780&oldid=153040963]); which I did ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2007_August_23/Articles&diff=prev&oldid=153055901]). The editor who looked over it said he would not touch it unless he had a copy of the book that the material supposedly came from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2007_August_23/Articles&diff=159392318&oldid=153246364]

Xenophrenic copyvios should have been reason enough to block him the very first time he reinserted them after being told not to.

Although it would seem that this dispute is only between Xenophreic, his anon IP’s and myself, Xenophrenic and his IP’s have edit warred with multiple users, on multiple articles.

• With SEWilco on VVAW: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=6088718&oldid=6088296]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vietnam_Veterans_Against_the_War&diff=25449303&oldid=6090288]

• With SEWilco on Winter soldier: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=4875520&oldid=4874553][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=prev&oldid=4874568], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=4892789&oldid=4892049], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=5893460&oldid=5891363], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=5916074&oldid=5906186], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=5924900&oldid=5917360], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=24307469&oldid=5940207], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=24307469&oldid=5940207], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=26367753&oldid=26366756]
• With Travb on WSI: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=27780884&oldid=27780408], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=27781776&oldid=27781741], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=29468226&oldid=29425190], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=29508114&oldid=29484877], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=29617572&oldid=29597331], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=29626660&oldid=29622089]
• With SEWilco on Russell Tribunal: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6496676&oldid=6480917], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6500757&oldid=6499090], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6509840&oldid=6504115], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6512576&oldid=6512119], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6513213&oldid=6512899], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6562339&oldid=6558434], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6566911&oldid=6565210], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6576317&oldid=6569343], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6581315&oldid=6578859], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russell_Tribunal&diff=6582214&oldid=6581889]
• With Duk on WSI: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=26162203&oldid=26155600]
• With Ed Poor on WSI: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=26385564&oldid=26381099], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=26310123&oldid=26307003], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=26324262&oldid=26316481]

• Any ArbCom dealing with the edit warring issues here is going to have to address these frivolous charges, resolve them, and get them out of the way before we get to the nitty-gritty of the real problem here. Warm up to that, please.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=170454129#Legal_threat_from_U.S._military.3F]

• Really? Please educate, lecture and enlighten me as to why it is inappropriate to educate, lecture and enlighten you. I'll just pull up a chair here and listen...[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=165297858&oldid=165290679]

• Bored? Got some time to kill? Feel free to exercise your keyboard in the space below. This space is reserved for a variety of activities! Tell a joke. Give a lecture. Attack someone while telling them not to attack someone! Remind someone that they must only comment on edits and not the editors, then comment about them! Tell them what to do and what not to do. Grab your wikicop hat and baton, and beat them over the head! Quote rules to them while you break those very rules, then smile sagely as you impart words of wisdom on your underlings. Spice things up a bit by taking someones edit, cutting it up, then yell at them when they try to put it back together again. Use your imagination. Pick a favorite sentence and repeat it over and over again. Use cut & paste if needed! Then repeat it again! When there is too much seriousness, have some wacky fun![http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=164927587&oldid=164876440]

• When I filed the first checkuser on Xenophrenic, his response to the Admin was: "...There is {{likely}} a mistake being made here, or possibly something more mischievous?..." ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=105759068 Requests for CheckUser/Case/Xenophrenic])

• There is nothing wrong with Jpgordon's judgement; he looked at whatever info was available to him and made the determination of only "likely." It shows a total lack of judgement, on the other hand, to take that same info and act upon it as if it read "confirmed." Let's hope it is an isolated incident, and not something that demonstrates a history requiring more preventative measures. Xenophrenic 06:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC) ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Heimstern/archive_7#user:Xenophrenic])

• Another "too busy to check" admin breezes through... ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Xenophrenic&diff=prev&oldid=163940799])

• Maybe if you email the Freep-heads, they will doctor up a photocopy for you. I'd suggest reading sources yourself; less likely to come back and bite you in the ass.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mark_Lane_%28author%29&diff=156882313&oldid=156363487]

One of Xenophrenic’s worst habits is modifying editors comments and using them to support his arguments, when they clearly dont, this makes the talk page generally unrepresentative of individuals thoughts, and amounts to disrputive editing. Examples: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AWinter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=164840734&oldid=164800702], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=164860781&oldid=164843154], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=165230569&oldid=165183650]

Xenophrenic also goads users when he feels he has a WP:POINT to make, belittle an individual, or just rub in a past mistake: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=165352148&oldid=165328850], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=165671768&oldid=165649233], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Winter_Soldier_Investigation&diff=165993673&oldid=165993487]

Xenophrenic ‘s claim that I have harassed users and gone on fishing expeditions using checkuser are without merit. James Salsman has used at least 45 sockpuupets [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Nrcprm2026][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Nrcprm2026], to continue editing Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/LossIsNotMore, and all user accounts I presented there fit his pattern of editing. In one case, User:Peter Cheung, he appropriated the identity of an individual to use on Wikipedia, a cardiologist in Texas named Peter Cheung who was not pleasantly surprised when he discovered this.

I have apologized to both user:Dlabtot and user:Starkrm for accusing them of being sockpuppets.

I did misrepresent the previous arbcom case, but this was not intentional because the previous case was so confusing that it was later clarified as several other users and members of the Arbitration Committee did not understand the final disposition either [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier#Ban_violations].

Despite Gnangarra claims above, my interpretation of the decision was apparrently so popular, that it was used three time to block me[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:TDC]:

1. on June 21, 2007 when Chaser blocked me citing the case
2. on February 8, 2007 William M. Connolley blocked me citing the case
3. and yes even Gnangarra, who has accused me of misrepresenting the Arbcom case, cited it when blocking me on February 16, 2007

The finality of the section of the Arbcom decision that Gnangarra alleges that I have been misrepresenting, has only been cleared up in September of this year by Thatcher and NYBrad.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Winter_Soldier#Ban_violations]. And think about it, had I been intentionally misrepresenting the Arbcom decision, wouldn’t I be the one whining the loudest when that misrepresented decision was being used on me not once, not twice, but three separate times?

TDC's certainty about those he suspects of sockpuppetry is a blatant violation of WP:AGF. Multiple diffs have already been provided by others. A request for checkuser confirmation that I was not a sockpuppet was not sufficient - TDC continued to badger me via email to prove myself. That is the antithesis of assuming good faith. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dlabtot#Email His apology] after I responded to his email was not an admission that his behavior was contrary to Wikipedia policies but rather a simple admission that the Request for Checkuser was correct after all. I don't believe TDC thinks he did anything wrong. Dlabtot (talk) 03:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ADepleted_uranium&diff=174278492&oldid=174277704 diff] Dlabtot (talk) 02:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

In this case, changing the wording, and meaning, of a Request for Comment. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ADepleted_uranium&diff=174766551&oldid=174765395 diff] I realize that WP:TALK is a guideline, not a policy, but it does say: Never edit someone's words to change their meaning. Which seems particularly applicable to a Request for Comment. Dlabtot (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Depleted Uranium: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=prev&oldid=176044435 diff] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=prev&oldid=176285320 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=prev&oldid=176296936 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=prev&oldid=176296936 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=prev&oldid=176302455 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Depleted_uranium&diff=next&oldid=176302897 diff]

Orlando Letelier - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=164213741 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=173800272 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=173884967 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=174268811 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=174361205 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=prev&oldid=174508890 diff], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_Letelier&diff=174593925&oldid=174577864 diff]

These are current edit wars, not old ones. Dlabtot (talk) 15:41, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.

{{NOINDEX}}