Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Trey Stone and Davenbelle/Evidence

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form:.

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs, a much shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and answer and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues.

If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user.

Be aware that the Arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the Arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

Evidence presented by User:Trey Stone
User:Davenbelle has shown no willingness to compromise in this encyclopedia in order to remove the transparent left-slanted bias from his constant reverting and edit warring. Primarily, he has not explained his uninterrupted reverting, has utilized unreliable sources, has continued to add in shaky information conforming to his POV, and has continually violated NPOV standards.

I'll detail the evidence... after this commercial break.

Corporate media
This article is quite illustrative of Davenbelle's disdain for NPOV. His edits are generally tilted toward favoring Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman's self-described "propaganda model," as well as presenting pro-corporate bias as "apparent."

December 27

 * 04:40, 27 Dec 2004
 * Davenbelle edits the article to describe News Corporation as "massively right-wing," putting mass media "news" in quotes, and a POV characterization of such "news" as definitively "controlled by large corporate interests." He does not source the News Corp. claim, and the other edits are clear POV in favor of the "corporate media" thesis, without any balance.

May 10

 * 22:56, 10 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my edits again, this time with a new-and-improved POV version. He characterizes promulgators of the term "corporate media" as "media critics" without mentioning their predominantly left-wing line of thought, changes "commerical interest" to "corporate agenda," puts quotes around "News" in Fox "News" Channel, claims that News Corp. has staunch "right-wing politics," and describes the bias as "apparent." This is a clear violation of NPOV standards.


 * 23:00, 10 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts again with no explanation. He continues to do so for the next few days.

May 15

 * 03:59, 15 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts again. The only improvement is that he has taken out the blatantly POV characterization of FOX as "news."

Allan Nairn
This article is another good example of clear anti-American POV that uncritically accepts Nairn's views as fact without citing sources to back up the journalist's claims.

May 10

 * 23:33, 10 May 2005
 * I edit the article to provide more background for Nairn's allegations, particularly the controversial ones regarding unambiguous U.S. support for FRAPH.


 * 23:45, 10 May 2005
 * Davenbelle changes my edits regarding FRAPH back to the version that uncritically accepts Nairn's claims as objective truth.

May 12

 * 01:17, 12 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my FRAPH edits again. He does so 4 more times over the next week, without explanation, and without addressing the changes on the talk page.

Death squad
Another article in which Davenbelle & co. have uncritically presented supposed U.S. support of FRAPH as unambiguous, while failing to cite sources, provide a neutral perspective, or take steps to resolve the dispute other than wholesale reversion.

May 11

 * 00:07, 11 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my edits to say that FRAPH was "organized in mid-1993 with U.S. backing." No objective sources are provided to back up this claim, which is rather suspect considering U.S. restoration of Aristide in 1994.

May 12

 * 01:23, 12 May 2005
 * Same reversion occurs with no explanation or discussion.


 * 06:42, 12 May 2005
 * Same.


 * 07:05, 12 May 2005
 * Same. (keepin' this succinct)

Isle of Youth
Another illustrative example of Davenbelle's failure to provide NPOV and his use of weasel words.

May 10

 * 23:25, 10 May 2005
 * Davenbelle changes my version of the article to say that Castro "allegedly" tortured people at the Isle of Pines prison, despite the testimony of high-profile figures like Huber Matos that they were abused. He does so four more times over the next two days.

Suharto
More summary reversion and POV.

May 12

 * 01:21, 12 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my edits with no explanation to a version containing emotionally-charged language and POV such as "This tacit support of the United States government for the Suharto regime would remain quite firm throughout the terrible repression he inflicted on Indonesia..."


 * 06:47, 12 May 2005
 * Same.


 * 06:51, 12 May 2005
 * Again. The same is done thrice on May 15th.

Amy Goodman
More uncritical acceptance of the particular subject of this article's POV.

May 12

 * 01:24, 12 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my edits to a view that accepts, without question, Goodman's allegations of U.S. support for Indonesian anti-independence militias despite the '93 weapons sales cutoff and Chevron complicity in the Nigerian Army's killing of two villagers.


 * 06:41, 12 May 2005
 * Unexplained revert; same story.


 * 07:55, 12 May 2005
 * Revert again. Does not discuss justification on talk.

Contras
Davenbelle helps his buddy Viajero to inject POV backed by unreliable sources into the intro.

May 15

 * 03:18, 15 May 2005
 * Davenbelle reverts my edits to change the intro to say that any resistance to the Contras brought "brutal retribution" and provide an "objective" link to a site that describes itself as "An International Guide to CIA Death Squads" as well as one by William Blum, who has been been a radical critic of U.S. interventions since WWII.


 * 03:58, 15 May 2005
 * Same.

May 18

 * 08:55, 18 May 2005
 * Same. No explanation.

Slight suspicions of sockpuppetry
I'd request an admin check on whether Davenbelle, Viajero, Mel Etitis, and NoPuzzleStranger share any accounts, although it could just be that they're comrades in POVerizing.

On Requests for comment/Trey_Stone
The sockpuppetry issue that Davenbelle brings up was resolved a while back, as was the vandalism, which I have not done in some time. I admit to being somewhat harsh in my arguing and reversions on this project, but I sometimes have difficulty assuming good faith with users who seem so clearly guided by ideology.

Evidence presented by User:Davenbelle
Trey Stone has been reverting many editors who've challenged his editing on many articles in spite of their pointing out that he fails to cite his sources and falls back on original research. He often discards all other edits to articles, contravening Ownership of articles. His talk and edit summaries are often quite uncivil.


 * See also: Requests for comment/Trey Stone recently opened by Viajero and endorsed by myself and many others. I will by adding commnents to this RfC concerning conduct of Trey Stone's that is not directly related to Trey Stone's statements concerning me in this arbitration case.


 * I have structured the presentation here by article for clarity; I will recast it in strict chronological order upon request.


 * all times UTC

Requests for page protection

 * Requests for page protection


 * re Allan Nairn, Amy Goodman, Isle of Youth, Suharto, Corporate media


 * 06:49, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone's original request: "Davenbelle has shown himself to be quite the obnoxious and uncompromising POV warrior.".


 * 11:49, May 12, 2005
 * Viajero characterizes the request as "Premature. The same could be said for T.S. himself."


 * 07:21, May 13, 2005
 * Followed by some nice language from Trey Stone: "I have fucking explained myself again and again, but you kids can't fucking compromise on anything less than anti-American tinged POV." (nb: this posted after this case has been accepted.)

Allan Nairn

 * Talk, history

Trey Stone has been editing Allan Nairn frequently since April 25; 1st edit with the edit summary: "NPOVing this sorry article". Viajero and Mel Etitis have challenged Trey Stone's edits on the Talk page, asking for citations to back up his assertions, but he refuses to cite his sources and tries to argue his point of view using original research. I became aware of this dispute after reading and endorsing the RfC re Trey Stone. After reading the article and talk and noting that Trey Stone's most recent revert had broken the three revert rule, I reverted his edits as detailed here:

May 10

 * 23:33, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis.


 * 23:33, May 10, 2005 (yes, within the minute)
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 23:37, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone blocked for 24 hours by James F. for violating the three revert rule on three articles: Death squad, Allan Nairn (above revert is a 5th), and Isle of Youth.


 * 23:45, May 10, 2005
 * I made a further edit with the edit summary: "tidy" (added a few wiki-links, minor formatting, a spelling correction). My first attempt at saving this produced an edit conflict with Trey Stone's last revert. I checked history in another tab before deciding to save my edit over his &mdash; I regret not updating my edit summary to indicate that I was also reverting again. Here is the "revert + tidy" diff.

May 11

 * 08:29, May 11, 2005
 * Mel Etitis edits on top of my "tidy" version with the edit summary "tidied quotation"; edit marked as minor.

May 12

 * 01:05, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone, block expired, reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 01:17, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv".


 * 05:22, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:44, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv".


 * 06:45, 12 May 2005 // current version; diff=0 will need fixing
 * Trey Stone posts to Talk:Allan Nairn a new section: "ATTN Davenbelle" which reads: "The allegations are controversial, and I have fully justified my edits. Please stop this incessant reverting."


 * 06:50, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:53, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv". I had read his "ATTN" note which offered no new argument.


 * nb: this dispute has continued on May 14 between Trey Stone and Mel Etitis
 * and on May 18 between Trey Stone and myself.

Amy Goodman

 * Talk, history

As with Allan Nairn, Trey Stone, and Viajero and Mel Etitis have been at odds over Amy Goodman since April 25. And I have opposed the edits Trey Stone is attempting to introduce that Viajero and Mel Etitis have argued are original research on the talk page.

May 11

 * 09:25, May 11, 2005
 * I edit the article to add a few links and tweak the image formatting with the edit summary: "tidy".

May 12

 * 01:04, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone, just off a 3RR-block, reverts to his last version with no edit summary. This removed my "tidy" edit, this edit by JamesMLane ("caps, etc.") and the last revert by Mel Etitis.


 * 01:24, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 05:19, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:41, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 07:40, May 12, 2005
 * Willmcw adds Category:1957 births.


 * 07:41, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary. Does re-add Willmcw's Category:1957 births.


 * 07:55, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Willmcw with edit summary: "rv trey again".


 * nb: this dispute has continued on May 14 between Trey Stone and Mel Etitis
 * and on May 18 between Trey Stone and myself.

Death squad

 * Talk, history

Another Trey Stone vs Viajero and Mel Etitis article with Grace Note opposing Trey Stone, too. Trey's edits already addressed on the talk page: "This is at best personal research and speculation." &mdash; Mel Etitis. Prior to my first edit, Trey Stone had just performed his 6th revert within 24 hours (and was blocked within the hour).

May 11

 * 00:07, May 11, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv trey".

May 12

 * 01:06, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone &mdash; block now expired &mdash; reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 01:23, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv".


 * 05:19, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:42, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv".


 * 06:59, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 07:05, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to last version by Mel Etitis with edit summary: "rv".


 * 07:11, 12 May 2005
 * Trey Stone posts to Talk:Death squad a new section: "ATTN Davenbelle (again)" which reads: "Please stop re-editing in supposed U.S. "support" for FRAPH. Being on the CIA payroll at one point does not mean the agency endorses everything you do -- it's an intelligence agency for chrissakes. Chilean DINA chief Contreras was accidentally paid once by the CIA while the U.S. cut off arms shipments to the country in 1976; and Noriega was on the payroll before, and we overthrew him in '90 (or '91, I can't remember.) Your tactic is nothing but a cheap attempt to smear the U.S. by oversimplifying and distorting the situation."


 * 12:58, May 12, 2005
 * Death squad protected by Mirv.

Suharto

 * Talk, history

The activity editing Suharto is more complex. A series of edits by Trey Stone and Meursault2004 over the spelling "Suharto" vs "Soeharto" involving global search-and-replace resulted in two image-links breaking. One of the broken images was removed by Cdc and the other was lingering in a broken state.

On Suharto, Trey Stone's edits have previously been reverted by WebLuis and Mel Etitis.

May 11

 * 01:05, May 11, 2005
 * On my first edit to the article, I restored the images.


 * 01:39, May 11, 2005
 * I edited article to remove some of Trey Stone's POV-Pushing. Much of this was based on other editors' earlier versions.


 * 02:52, May 11, 2005
 * I convert the succession box to a wiki-table from an html-table.


 * 05:43, May 11, 2005
 * I make another edit of the succession box formatting.

May 12

 * 01:05, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone, just back from a block, reverts to his last version with no edit summary. This removes all of my edits, this edit where the FlaBot added an "it" inter-wiki link and performed some other re-ordering of things, this edit by Kitch that had added the news item "On May 10, 2005, he was hospitalized with intestinal bleeding", and this edit by Berasategui that added a "pl" inter-wiki link; Trey Stone's revert removes one image completely and breaks another.


 * 01:21, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv". This restored all of the above users' edits, too.


 * 05:21, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with the edit summary: "removing emotionally-charged language".


 * 06:47, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 06:49, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:51, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv; you are breaking image links with your reverts".


 * nb: this dispute has continued on May 15 between Trey Stone and myself

Isle of Youth

 * Talk, history

The issue on Isle of Youth revolves around the use of the word 'allegedly' re torture occuring in the prison on the island under Fidel Castro. Trey Stone edits have been previously reverted on this page by Viajero rv and NoPuzzleStranger  ; Trey Stone's 4 reverts of NoPuzzleStranger earned him a 24 hour block.

May 10

 * 23:25, May 10, 2005
 * I edit the article, restoring the use of the word 'allegedly', and making some other custodial changes. Edit Summary: "allegedly".


 * 23:29, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary. (this is a 5th in < 24 hours.)


 * 23:37, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone blocked for 24 hours by James F. for violating the three revert rule on three articles: Death squad, Allan Nairn, and Isle of Youth.


 * 23:46, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".

May 12

 * 01:08, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone, block expired, reverts to his last version with no edit summary; adding "such as Huber Matos, once a supporter of the revolution". Trey Stone is the sole editor of the article Huber Matos; created May 9.


 * 01:22, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv". (I'm open to considering the inclusion of the Matos link if it is done without removing other edits.)


 * 05:21, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with the edit summary: "Matos has his own GD testimony, that proof enough for you?".


 * 06:46, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with no edit summary. I did re-add the Matos line.


 * 06:50, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary. This again removes 'allegedly' and the other custodial changes I had made.


 * 06:54, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv". This includes the Matos line.


 * nb: this dispute has continued on May 14 between Trey Stone and NoPuzzleStranger
 * and on May 18 between Trey Stone, and Viajero

Corporate media

 * Talk, history

Corporate media is an article Trey Stone originated. It is unsourced original research with a condescending tone.


 * 04:40, Dec 27, 2004
 * I edited the article to take some of the vitriol out of it.


 * 08:27, Jan 8, 2005
 * I edited the article again with the edit summary: "progressives".


 * 05:22, Mar 18, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with the edit summary: "WTF happened". This revert removes both of my edits and edits by two other users. He immediatly makes three further edits of his own, producing this version of the article.


 * 07:17, Apr 27, 2005
 * I edit the article again along the same lines as before.

May 10

 * 08:00, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone edits the article again with edit summary: "pathetic". Four more edits follow in the next six minutes resulting in this version.


 * 1:00, May 10, 2005
 * Viajero edits article with edit summary: "copyedits". This version is the base for my subsequent edits.


 * 21:29, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary; adding (re News Corp.) " whose CEO, Rupert Murdoch, is known for his strong right-wing, pro-Bush administration views." and, interestingly, dropping the characterization of News Corp. as "massively successful". Four more edit follow resulting in this version (net diff from his previous version).


 * 22:56, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to the last version by Viajero and also make a few link changes and quote the word "news" in Fox "News" Channel; edit summary: "npov".


 * 22:57, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 23:00, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 23:02, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 23:03, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 23:31, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with edit summary: "putting quotes around FNC and endorsing Chomsky's musings is not npov".


 * 23:37, May 10, 2005
 * Trey Stone blocked for 24 hours by James F. for violating the three revert rule on three articles: Death squad, Allan Nairn, and Isle of Youth.


 * 23:47, May 10, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version, also changing 'the programming of Fox "News" Channel' to 'the "news" on Fox News Channel' with no edit summary (my bad).

May 12

 * 01:07, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 01:22, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 05:20, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:43, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * 06:51, May 12, 2005
 * Trey Stone reverts to his last version with no edit summary.


 * 06:55, May 12, 2005
 * I reverted edits by Trey Stone to my last version with edit summary: "rv".


 * nb: this dispute has continued on May 14 between Trey Stone, and Viajero
 * and on May 15 && 18 between Trey Stone and myself.


 * I endorse the evidence presented by Viajero. &mdash; Davenbelle

Evidence presented by User:Viajero
Trey Stone's incivility, edit-warring, sockpuppetry is extensively documented Requests for comment/Trey Stone, including his many 3RR violations (no fewer than eight since the RfC was opened on 9 May 2005) and a bizarre faux "edit war" between him and at least one and possibly two of his own sockpuppet accounts. The RfC contains much material not included this Evidence page and vice versa; in fact, the RfC and the ArbCom evidence is largely complementary; there is little overlap, and I hope that the Arbitration Committee will at least take a brief look at the RfC and take it into account in its final decision.

Here, I am going to address one issue not well covered on the RfC, Trey Stone's failing to cite his sources and his reliance on original research which, in my opinion, is as grave as the matters listed above, but one that is more of a challenge to document, partly because one comes up against content issues. In the example below, Trey Stone makes edits to an article,, and is challenged on the talk page to justify his changes by first one editor then later a second.

In the interest of readability and succinctness, I have restricted myself to one clearly defined section of the text, and I have have listed only the article edits and talk page comments that I feel are relevant. (All times UTC)

25 Apr 2005

 * 03:15 - 03:46
 * Trey Stone makes a series of edits to this article; the first edit summary is "NPOVing this sorry article" . Among other edits, he changes this text:
 * In an article published in The Nation in 1994, Nairn broke the story of the US government's role in establishing and funding the Haitian paramilitary death squad, FRAPH (the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti).
 * to this:
 * In an article published in The Nation in 1996, Nairn raised questions about possible links between the U.S. CIA, DIA, and the anti-Aristide death squad FRAPH (Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti). However, his report relies heavily on a single source, and the Clinton administration had publicly come out against the Haitian military regime of General Raoul Cédras, accused of supporting the group. Furthermore, the deposed Jean-Bertrand Aristide was reinstated as President of Haiti through U.S. military intervention in 1994.


 * 08:30
 * Viajero leaves a comment on the talk page for Trey Stone (edit summary: note for Trey Stone) which includes this text:
 * Trey Stone: several cmments about your recent edits.
 * [...]
 * ''2. You changed this:
 * In an article published in The Nation in 1994, Nairn broke the story of the US government's role in establishing and funding the Haitian paramilitary death squad, FRAPH (the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti).
 * ''to this:
 * In an article published in The Nation in 1996, Nairn raised questions about possible links between the U.S. CIA, DIA, and the anti-Aristide death squad FRAPH (Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti).
 * ''Was changing 1994 to 1996 just an editing error? Also, if you read his original reports, he did not "raise questions", he asserted it was true.


 * ''3. Then you added this line:
 * However, his report relies heavily on a single source, and the Clinton administration had publicly come out against the Haitian military regime of General Raoul Cédras, accused of supporting the group. Furthermore, the deposed Jean-Bertrand Aristide was reinstated as President of Haiti through U.S. military intervention in 1994.
 * ''This is blatant editorializing. Unless you can attribute this POV to someone, with a citation, I will delete it.


 * ''Thanks, -- Viajero 08:30, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

26 Apr 2005

 * 19:54
 * Viajero reverts the edits of Trey Stone for the first time, to the last version of user:84.9.89.246

6 May 2005

 * 05:52
 * Trey Stone reverts. The edit summary (can tone down but Clinton admin. friendliness to Aristide should be noted) suggests he is offering a different version but the revert is identical to his previous version.

8 May 2005

 * 01:03
 * Trey Stone responds on Talk page, comments interspersed between original query; no signature:


 * ''Fine, but that doesn't mean the Clinton admin's support of Aristide shouldn't be mentioned.
 * ''[...]
 * ''The tone is a little much, but like I said before, the article gives the false impression that the U.S. was unambiguously hostile to Aristide, and that needs to be fixed."


 * 20:49
 * Trey Stone reverts article again. Edit summary i've proven my case, i will not discuss this any further


 * 23:22
 * Viajero replies on the Talk page:
 * Trey Stone: in your most recent edit summary, you wrote: i've proven my case, i will not discuss this any further. What kind of childish petulance is this? You haven't presented a shred of evidence in support of your argument. -- Viajero 21:22, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 21:23
 * Trey Stone replies on the Talk page:
 * ''[...] Secondly, his evidence surrounding U.S. "support" of Constant is not conclusive, and contradictory to the Clinton admin. policy of restoring Aristide to power. This needs to be noted. J. Parker Stone 21:26, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 22:02
 * Mel Etitis enters the discussion on the Talk page:
 * Yet again you're offering original research. You might think that an action, event, or state of affairs conflicts with a certain politician's or government's stated policy, but that's not sufficient reason reason for excluding it from the article. You need to provide evidence for your views, not assumptions and appeals to what seems to you to make sense. Mel Etitis (&#924;&#949;&#955; &#917;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#951;&#962;) 22:02, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 22:40
 * Trey Stone replies on the Talk page:
 * ''What "seems to me" to make sense makes sense to any rational person not blinded by a kneejerk distrust of U.S. foreign policy. The Clinton admin. said that the Cedras regime had subverted democracy in Haiti. It intervened in 1994 and successfully secured the resignation of Cedras through threat of military action. It's not that hard to comprehend. J. Parker Stone 22:40, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 22:49
 * Mel Etitis replies on the Talk page:
 * It's original resarch, unbacked up by evidence. That's all there is to it. Mel Etitis (&#924;&#949;&#955; &#917;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#951;&#962;) 22:49, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 22:56
 * Trey Stone replies on the Talk page:
 * ''so are you saying that it's disputed that the U.S. restored Aristide to power? if so i'm gonna have a hard time taking you seriously J. Parker Stone 22:56, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 23:02
 * Mel Etitis replies on the Talk page:
 * ''It's not the fact that's underdispute, but the original-research conclusions that you draw from it. Mel Etitis (&#924;&#949;&#955; &#917;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#951;&#962;) 23:02, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 23:08
 * Viajero replies on the Talk page:
 * ''No one is arguing that the U.S. restored Aristide to power. But this fact does not "disprove" that the U.S. also backed FRAPH. Nairn explains why in this interview: [2] (http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/june95arnove.htm). -- Viajero 23:08, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 23:13
 * Trey Stone replies on the Talk page:
 * ''paying Constant as an informant does not equate to unequivocal support of FRAPH's actions. J. Parker Stone 23:13, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 23:22
 * Viajero replies on the Talk page:
 * ''Fine, back that assertion up with a citation which disputes Nairn's findings, and we'll add it to the article. -- Viajero 23:22, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

From this point until 21 May, the article is reverted seventeen times by Trey Stone, ten times by Davenbelle, nine times by Mel Etitis, and once by Viajero.

9 May 2005

 * 00:49
 * Trey Stone replies on the Talk page:
 * ''hey, it's not my fault no one takes Nairn seriously enough to discuss his charges J. Parker Stone 00:49, 9 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 09:00
 * Mel Etitis replies on the Talk page:
 * ''But it is your fault that you insist on putting unverifiable conjecture into the article against Wikipedia policy. Mel Etitis (&#924;&#949;&#955; &#917;&#964;&#951;&#964;&#951;&#962;) 09:00, 9 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 23:57
 * Trey Stone modifies his version of the text to this:
 * ''In an article published in The Nation in 1994, Nairn claimed to have found a definitive link between the CIA and the establishment of FRAPH, a notoriously brutal death squad that terrorized supporters of deposed president Jean-Bertrand Aristide with approval from the military regime that ruled from 1991-1994. As the U.S. was instrumental in restoring Aristide to power in Haiti and forcing the resignation of the junta, Nairn's allegations are controversial, as they run contradictory to the stated policy and actions of the Clinton administration. His claims rely heavily on the testimony of Emmanuel "Toto" Constant, FRAPH's founder, who is currently serving time in Florida jail.


 * As can be seen seen, he still fails to cite his sources and in no way addresses the concerns of the other editors.

12 May 2005

 * 06:45
 * Trey Stone writes on the Talk page:
 * ATTN Davenbelle The allegations are'' controversial, and I have fully justified my edits. Please stop this incessant reverting. J. Parker Stone 06:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


 * 06:49
 * Trey Stone lists the article on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.


 * 07:21
 * In response an objection by Viajero, Trey Stone responds:
 * I have fucking explained myself again and again, but you kids can't fucking compromise on anything less than anti-American tinged POV. J. Parker Stone 07:21, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

14 May 2005

 * 23:56
 * Trey Stone reverts article. Edit summary:
 * ''it's a fact that Clinton restored Aristide -- this presents an unambiguous contradiction to the Chomskians' claims)

15 May 2005

 * 00:25
 * Mel Etitis reverts article. Edit summary:
 * ''The fact is OK, the original-research conclusion isn't


 * 00:27
 * Trey Stone reverts article. Edit summary:
 * ''"original research" doesn't apply to patently obvious facts.

21 May 2005

 * 09:15
 * Trey Stone reverts article. Edit summary:
 * "explained time and time again"

Conclusion
Trey Stone is challenged to justify his edits, but instead of drawing on solid scholarship, he falls back on blustery, ad hoc argumentation to defend his position, and appears to believe that simply by repeating often enough that he has "justified his edits" that others will be convinced that in fact he has, but as the evidence above demonstrates, this is far from the case. He makes no effort to work towards a concensus on the talk page beyond stating his position (The issues have been the same with ), which deals with the same subject matter).

The Allan Nairn article is but one example of this kind of behaviour; more examples can be found in the page histories and on the Talk pages of Henry Kissinger, Death squad, Amy Goodman, among others.

In summary, Trey Stone has been contributing since July 2004 and should now be intimately acquainted with Wikipedia culture but appears incapable or unwilling to enter into the collaborative spirit of the enterprise and engage in concensus-building over controversial topics.

25 March

 * 04:28
 * After I released a 14 day block on him, Trey Stone, by prior agreement as a condition of the release, acknowledged that he had been reading policy during his block and agreed to abide by it