User:DigitalC/sandbox/ArbCom/

User:QuackGuru has an extensive blocklog based on disruptive editing, and has a previous WP:RFC/U which was filed but s/he failed to participate in. Mediation has been attempted. S/he was cautioned multiple times, about tendentious editing at articles covered under Pseudoscience sanctions, and subsequently blocked for 2-weeks for violating the sanctions. S/he was further topic-banned for 6 months from Chiropractic-related articles due "Due to persistent edit warring and general disruption of the editing and consensus process,".

This behaviour continues, and continues to be in an area that appears to be covered under the ArbCom sanctions.


 * 1) On July 7, QuackGuru made a mass of sweeping changes to the Chiropractic article, including removing sourced text without consensus, where this text had consensus to be included not only in the article, but in the lead . The lack of consensus to change this part of the article had been noted earlier the same day [ When this exceptionally bold removal was reverted, instead of taking his controversial edits to the talk page, he instead re-reverted.
 * 2) There has been extensive discussion at Talk:Pseudoscience and WP:FTN  over the use of a source (Matute et al.) to verify text inserted into the article. There was consensus that the source was not suitable in the way it was being used, or at the very least no consensus for its use. On July 8th QuackGuru made major changes to the article without discussion on the talk page, and in doing so inserted the Matute reference without consensus . When this was reverted - noting the lack of consensus -, QuackGuru re-inserted the text again . When reverted by another editor , QuackGuru re-reverted (2rr) - and claimed that that editor supported the use of Matute.
 * 3) There has also been disruption at Vertebral artery dissection. QuackGuru has proposed a change in text (in regards to chiropractic manipulation), which was not supported by editors on the talk page. This again centered around the use of a particular source, and spanned multiple subsections of the talk page. The article was stable for quite some time, but QuackGuru then proposed at an unrelated article talk page to change the article. Despite having no consensus to make the change, and apparent consensus to not make the change, QuackGuru made a major controversial change to the article . This contentious edit was reverted, to which QuackGuru made a similar edit . This was reverted by another editor , but QuackGuru made the change again . This lead to the article being locked.

[Edit: It has come to my attention that the issues at Pseudoscience have previously been referred to ArbCom as well - see Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration_Enforcement_sanction_handling/Evidence&oldid=427621620 & Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration_Enforcement_sanction_handling/Evidence&oldid=427621620 ] DigitalC (talk) 18:42, 10 July 2011 (UTC)