Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alfrem

Case Opened on July 13, 2005

Case Closed on 22:08, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) 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 evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at /Workshop and voting on proposed decisions at /Proposed decision.

Involved parties

 * Party 1


 * Party 2



Statement by party 1
Please limit your statement to 500 words

Statement by party 2
Please limit your statement to 500 words

Summary: The main issue is that User:Alfrem constantly removes the words Political Philosophy from Libertarianism. We feel that he is POV-pushing and ignoring the other views and edits of other editors.

User:Alfrem constantly removes the words and wikilink "political philosophy" from Libertarianism. When he demanded evidence, this was provided in the form of a footnote: we reference the Encyclopedia Britannica, MSN Encarta and the opinion of Don Franzen, who wrote a review of "Neither Left Nor Right" in the Los Angeles Times Book Review Desk.

Several editors have asked him to provide evidence that Libertarianism is not a political philosophy, however each time Alfrem has apparently dodged the question. When I pointed out to him that we have sourced this fact, he replied that we have not provided evidence! The foonote is clear, however. Alfrem is well aware of the footnote, because he keeps removing it.

I put to the community that Alfrem's behaviour should have been accepted the first time he removed the phrase, this is only fair. However, many of us have left messages on his talk page asking for sources to back up what he is saying, and we have debated this with him considerably on the talk page, to no avail. Every time that Alfrem removes the wikilink to political philosophy, one of us has to put it back again, and this is highly disruptive to Wikipedia.

I would also like to raise the concern that Alfrem, when he starts to lose an argument, starts to call others "trolls". This is a personal attack, and ad hominem besides. Alfrem seems to have also expressed a desire "win" his POV by constantly reverting. He stated on the talk page that "Your edit war don't will get any end. --Alfrem 20:30, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)"''

Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 08:48 (UTC)

There is lots of evidence (with links to specific diff pages) in Requests_for_comment/Alfrem. If asked, I will recopy them here. The "highlights" are that we provided him with at least twelve sources and he came up with zero, yet continued his revert war, and that he called me an "idiot," and my arguments "silly" and "bullshit". Nearly all of his edits have been POV warring on libertarianism and related pages (anarcho-capitalism], non-aggression principle, etc.) Dave (talk) July 7, 2005 13:08 (UTC)


 * Note: My above statement about "nearly all" of his edits being edit wars (while true if you look at his whole edit history since joining) may not be true of his more recent behavior, some of which has been constructive. He seems to have produced a few good edits to Anarcho-capitalism in recent days.  I would still argue that unless he significantly changes his behavior, he will remain a net drain on the project, however this change gives some hope.  July 7, 2005 13:21 (UTC)


 * As of this morning he's still reverting edits in Libertarianism and calling Ta bu shi da yu's edits vandalism, even thought they are just reverts, in his edit summaries. --Malathion 9 July 2005 13:06 (UTC)


 * His edits on libertarianism mentioned in the above comment included adding a politics template (which looked like this at the time) to the article to spite me. The fact that he immediately went back to removing references to politics means that NPOV is not his goal in this issue: stirring up trouble is.  Additionally, he reverted my actions on my talk page and reverted the template:elections talk page 4 times in 8 hours--which I consider vandalism.  Dave (talk) July 9, 2005 15:48 (UTC)


 * Concur with compaint. User:Alfrem is a reactionary reverter without providing ANY coherent justification for his edits.  Further, on his edits, he is either purposely attempting to stir up trouble or just does not understand simple things.  The other editors have information that seems to indicate a little of both.  --17:00, July 11, 2005 (UTC)  (note, this was written by user:noitall  )

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/0/0)

 * Fred Bauder July 7, 2005 22:42 (UTC)
 * Accept &#10149;the Epopt 23:07, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. &rarr;Raul654 23:40, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 17:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Note: As a new Arbitrator, I am automagically recused from all pre-exisiting cases, to avoid swamping; I hereby waive that for this case. James F. (talk) 18:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Alfrem banned from Libertarianism
Enacted on 19:58, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Pending resolution of this matter is banned from editing of Libertarianism. It shall be presumed that any user, such as who makes Alfrem's trademark edit, removal of the phrase "Libertarianism is a political philosophy," from the article is a sockpuppet of Alfrem. Such sockpuppets may be banned indefinitely if practical.

=Final decision = All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)

Edit warring
1) Edit wars are usually considered harmful, because they cause ill-will between users and negatively destabilize articles. Users are required to respect the three-revert rule and to avoid edit-warrior behavior, and are encouraged to explore alternate methods of dispute resolution, such as talk page discussion, negotiation, surveys, then requests for comment, mediation, or, finally, Arbitration.


 * Passed 5-0

Reasonableness and disruption/Ownership of articles
2) Editors are expected to behave reasonably with respect to editing and dealing to other users. Editing practices that cause disruption to the normal functioning of Wikipedia&mdash;such as the persistant removal of a phrase or sentence, and the reversion of its restoration&mdash;will not be tolerated. In addition Wikipedia articles, do not have 'owners' or 'custodians 'who control edits to them. Instead, they are "owned" by the community-at-large, and come to a consensus version by means of discussion, negotiation, and/or polling.


 * Passed 5-0

Removal of references, sources, and explanatory material
3) Removal of references, sources, and explanatory material from articles without a compelling reason, especially when other users object, is generally considered inappropriate.


 * Passed 5-0

Conflict with other editors
1) has come into conflict with multiple Wikipedians over his edits to libertarianism, Template:Elections, anarcho-capitalism, and non-aggression principle. These users include, , and.


 * Passed 5-0

Inappropriate editing habits
2) has exhibited inappropriate editing habits on libertarianism, Template:Elections, anarcho-capitalism, and non-aggression principle, through a hostile attitude towards other users, the removal of endnotes and explanatory material, and many reverts.


 * Passed 5-0

Violation of official policy/three-revert rule
3) has violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines, especially as it relates to the three-revert rule. This has led to his blocking on several occasions.


 * Passed 5-0

Use of IP address to circumvent ban
4) has used the IP address  to circumvent a temporary Arbitration-ordered block on editing the libertarianism article.


 * Passed 5-0

Remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Three-month ban on editing libertarianism-related articles
1) Due to a pronounced inability to work productively with other users, is hereby prohibited from editing libertarianism or libertarianism-related articles for three months. If Alfrem edits libertarianism or a libertarianism-related article, any administrator may block him for a period not less than one day and not exceeding two weeks. This does not include talk pages.


 * Passed 5-0