Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jimmyvanthach

Case Closed on 12 Nov 2004

Please do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case. 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 a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

Statement of complaint
See Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba -- I think the impersonation of Professor Lindgren, and the real Tran Van Ba by Jimmy Van Thach shows that this guy is inherently untrustworthy. He appears to be a crank who is promoting his own POV that he is a member of some otherwise extinct Vietnamese Imperial order that appears to be otherwise unrecognised (it's all a bit confusing). He also tried mediating with himself via a sockpuppet(!). At the very least, the userpages should be deleted. (I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but wanted to bring it to the attention of the arbitration committee). Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 22:30, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I think that the User:celindgren and User:Tran Van Ba usernames should be banned and their edits reattributed to User:Jimmyvanthach.  I also think that Jimmyvanthach should then be hard banned (sorry for not making that clear before; the first three votes are for the above version in which I did not make that clear).  Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 10:47, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Statement by affected party

 * hello, I have told the Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba that I am not a sockpocket.

I work with Tran Van Ba and I had given him work that I prepared for him to give information concerning the topics. I was unaware of POV rules and have updated and removed all POV related statements, please tell me what other course would you like me to do, to clarify and correct and I would more than be happy to do this. This is a misunderstanding but I am here to work out the issues at hand. thank you Jimmyvanthach 18:53, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I will be online today and can be contacted via my email also jimmyvanthach@hotmail.com please feel free to contact me I will change anything that you feel is POV immediately to mediate through this situation. Also please look at my addition; I removed all POV statements concerning the topics. I am commmited to the rules and regulations of Wikipedia Jimmyvanthach 19:05, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

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

 * 1) Gut says accept. Martin 23:44, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Accept Fred Bauder 01:22, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Accept. --the Epopt 05:17, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Accept. Jwrosenzweig 14:08, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Principles
1) Wikipedia is not a vehicle for Propaganda or advocacy of any kind, see What Wikipedia is not


 * 7 for 0 against

Findings of Fact
1) User:Jimmyvanthach has edited a number of articles (user contributions) which relate to the former royal family of Vietnam in a manner which is associated with the viewpoint advocated by the website of the Imperial Nguyen Dynasty and The Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League and has advocated that viewpoint although his exact identity and connection with that group is uncertain.


 * 7 for 0 against

2) User:Jimmyvanthach or someone with the same point of view and history of advocacy has also used the accounts Contributions Celindgren (the actual C.E.M. Lindgren has no connection with this account, see Requests_for_comment/Tran_Van_Ba), and Contributions Tran Van Ba as well as the anonymous ip 198.26.120.13


 * 7 for 0 against

Remedies
1) User Jimmyvanthach, User Celindgrenand and User Tran Van Ba are banned from editing articles which relate to the royal family of Vietnam and articles which relate to the recent history and politics of Vietnam.


 * 7 for 0 against

Enforcement
1) Edits by User Jimmyvanthach, User Celindgrenand and User Tran Van Ba to articles which relate to the former royal family of Vietnam or to the recent history and politics of Vietnam may be removed by any user. In the event the banned users attempt to restore removed edits they may be banned by any administrator for a brief period (a day or less but up to a week in the event of repeat offenses).


 * 7 for 0 against