User talk:Phoenix and Winslow/WLRoss

The following is an evidence page for the current ArbCom proceeding on Tea Party movement. WLRoss has been Wikistalking me in retaliation for actions that I took against him, regarding his BLP violations at Franklin child prostitution ring allegations.

I first encountered him at the Franklin child prostitution ring allegations article and, as the name implies, it was a minefield of BLP violations. Wayne had partnered up with another fringe POV-pusher, User:Apostle12, whose post-Franklin editing activities were recently discussed at the "Race and politics" ArbCom. They had found a fringe POV "reliable source" that had been published by a small, very fringey publisher, and they were basically using it as a roadmap to write the Franklin article. I took them to WP:RSN, and got the source declared unreliable. ArbCom members User:FloNight and User:NuclearWarfare then stubbed the article, because so much negative material about living persons had suddenly become unsourced.

Ever since then, Wayne has been stalking me. He follows my contribs and whenever I become involved in good faith in a content dispute, he joins the content dispute on the opposite side. This originally happened at Talk:Ugg boots. I was already working steadily on the Ugg boots article in July-October 2010, and was also very active on the Talk page. On the afternoon of October 20, 2010 Wayne made some edits to the article mainspace, but then left immediately and didn't return for more than four months. We were two ships passing in the night. And for all practical purposes, he had moved on and abandoned the article. I was still there. The head-on collision started in January and February, 2011 at the Franklin article, where he was on the other side in a content dispute. In March 2011 he returned to Ugg boots — after very brief appearance one afternoon in October and an absence of over four months — on the other side in a content dispute. In April 2013 he showed up for the first time at any article about American politics: Tea Party movement, on the other side in a content dispute. If I was working on a larger number of articles or involved in a larger number of content disputes, or if I hadn't walked away from Wikipedia completely for about a year due to Wayne's tendentious POV-pushing, I think his Wikistalking would have become obvious a lot sooner.

Wayne's behavior at the multiple Ugg boots articles is best described in a small but representative sample by User:Dpmuk, in addressing Wayne's improper closure of an RfC: Wayne went to the User Talk page of an ally to stir up a dispute against me: He also went to the User Talk page of another editor on my side in the content dispute, and badgered and intimidated him:

Wayne's Wikistalking has now spread to Talk:Tea Party movement, hence Wayne's appearance in this ArbCom. On May 27 he visited Xenophrenic's User Talk page in an effort to join forces with him against me. ("I'm continually amazed that he hasn't yet been permanently banned.") Following are examples of Wayne's generally combative and tendentious behavior in pursuit of his agenda:


 * My initial report of Wikistalking against Wayne. Many details described in this ANI thread, with links.


 * Wayne was taking the side of an obvious SPA, User:Thomas Basboll regarding a 9/11 related article. Thomas was an obvious tendentious SPA editor with an agenda.


 * Wayne was pushing his 9/11 truther arguments on MONGO's User Talk page, citing his experience "as a consultant for the fire protection industry and (former) member of the National Fire Protection Association."


 * At WP:ANI, Wayne complained that User:Jayjg was making personal attacks against him on the Khazars article Talk page.


 * Most recent discussion of Wayne's Wikistalking at MONGO's User Talk page, where Wayne promised that he would stop editing Talk:Tea Party movement because it had become a Wikistalking issue. "I stopped editing Tea Party as soon as it was brought up." Six weeks later after the ANI thread was archived and the heat had died down, he was back at Talk:Tea Party movement, taking the other side in a content dispute.