User:Ecemaml/Arbitration evidence

Gibnews engages in deliberate misrepresentation of other people's editions in order to discredit them
According to Gibnews I have been banned for harassment or "stalking". This is my block log (nothing to be proud of... but no harassment). However see Gibnews block log. Also I've been told to abuse of my role as admin in the Spanish wikipedia (see that the illegal block I allegedly did was done by other admin ). He also asserts that I claim that "Gibraltar does not exist" (the diff provided by Gibnews clearly states that I was referring to International Public Law, where only sovereign states are actors; the discussion was about territorial waters, a IPL issue).

On the other hand, here you have a typical situation (Talk:Gibraltarian people): Gibnews makes a extraordinary statement : "The term [Gibraltarian] only applies to the current population of Gibraltar and its application retrospectively is inappropriate". However, he's not only unable to provide a extraordinary source WP:REDFLAG, but simply a source. The rest of participants provide different sources (they may be good or not). However, no consensus may be achieved, as the provided sources must be dismissed in favour of Gibnews personal opinion, not supported by any source.

Gibnews engages in WP:COI
Gibnews has a serious and undeclared conflict of interest. It can be not only a COI but a case similar to that of the Scientology in which Scientology members coordinated their actions from the organization equipment, as I'm referring to organizations heavily involved in the political activity of Gibraltar and with virulent anti-Spanish agenda.

With regard to the alleged outing, I explained everything in my unblock request. I don't feel concerned about Narson's constant mentions to outing as a part of a harassment process against Gibnews, carefully avoiding any mention to the real issue, Gibnews' COI (and I remember that we have also a policy on that), but I'd like to emphasize some points (I'm speaking for myself): I'm not interested at all in Gibnews real identity (see the way I tried to handle the issue  and the way in which I very naively revealed some information I should have done, after some "warnings" from Justin... a warning should be a mention to the policy, not several questions openly suggesting several names  , something strange as Justin knows Gibnews real identity ). However, I simply notice that failing to declare his COI while engaging in a masive agenda pushing, as shown below (the agenda of the political organization he not only belongs to but is a prominent member of) is a blatant breach of such policy. Moreover, Gibnews has openly provided the information about his real identity in the past. Anyway, all the information has been provided to the ArbCom privately. They'll decide, but unfortunately the proofs are strong and not only related to Gibnews activism, but to their websites.

Lack of real (wiki) interest in Gibraltar
Only two people are currently working in the Wikiproject Gibraltar, and me. We've jointly created about a dozen of articles (all the Gibraltar related articles in User:Ecemaml, with three as DYK articles, Our Lady of Europe, proposed as Good Article , Giovanni Battista Calvi and Tommy Finlayson , the historian of the evacuation of the civilian Gibraltarian population during WWII, a key element of the Gibraltar history). We've rated almost all the articles of the project. Besides, I've reviewed hundreds of Gibraltar-related images (most of them uploaded by Gibmetal) and uploades some on my own (User:Ecemaml/Gibraltar images). However, when I asked for cooperation in the rating of articles, nobody showed the slightlest interest (well, only Gibnews, who complained, as he was not interested in "rants or sermons" ).

It's really annoying to invest even modest amounts of money in documentation and not seeing ever a mention to a source outside the Internet (not to talk about Gibnews and his self-published "reliable sources").

Productive editors expelled
With regard to me "If you only have trouble with Gibraltar do something else where your efforts are appreciated"

Response to evidence by Justin
I've focused only in the diff supporting "Accusations of censoring". It's clarifying to see that the diff actually refers to my complain about the removal the British POV on the independence of Gibraltar, as you can easily see. In fact, it's interesting to note that the position of the administrative power (UK) on the future status of Gibraltar (excluding independence) has been wiped from wikipedia since late 2008 ( note the absurd rationales!). Today I could not have named Gibnews removal as "censorship", but a mere "agenda push", but it does not change the facts.

It's also noticeable his insistence in mentioning my admin status in the Spanish wikipedia. Especially when my only recent admin action with regard to this area was the unblock of Justin, blocked by his engagement in an edit war, appreciating his good faith.