Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yuber

Case Opened on June 22, 2005

Case Closed on 11:11, 9 October 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

 * User:Yuber
 * User:Guy Montag

Statement by Guy Montag
Yuber is a vicious POV pusher. He has been constantly warned by administrators and other editors that he is showing bad faith by not cooperating with others. Articles have been locked numerous times because of his tendency to ignore the 3RR rule and start revert wars. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golan_Heights&action=history]  Every chance has been given to Yuber to stop his militant pov pushing. POV pushing was not as much a concern for me and other editors, as for the fact that he fails to cooperate with other editors. Evidence of his intrasingence has been recorded on his [|talk page]. Jayjg, SlimVirgin and Humus sapiens can testify to his inability to cooperate.

More evidence.

The discussion entitled "minor changes". Yuber inserted "sources" which had nothing to do with the subject. He insterted his POV, than tried to cover it up by source spamming. It took us 4 days of close policing of the article before it stood up to NPOV standards.

See discussion.  Dhimmi page locked because of Yuber's editing
 * Sea of Galilee locked because of Yuber.
 * Citations for numerous violations of 3rr breaches and warnings to lock articles because of his editing.[|talk page] Evidence is found in "3RR" discussion on Yuber's Talk Page.
 * Jizya page paged locked because of Yuber's non cooperation and edit warring.
 * Another paged locked previously because of his editing.

Comprehensive List of Evidence against Yuber
Yuber's approach to editing articles is extremely confrontational. Often his very first edit of a controversial article will be a complete or substantial reverts to previous versions of articles, without any prior discussion in Talk:. Here are some examples of that behavior (note, none of these reverts involved simple cases of vandalism):
 * Golan Heights (his very first edit on Wikipedia):
 * Names of the Levant:
 * Operation Litani:
 * Jizya:
 * Fatah:
 * Dhimmi:
 * Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
 * Muhammad:
 * Phoenicia:
 * Jewish Defense League:
 * Saudi Arabia:
 * User talk:KaintheScion:
 * Israeli terrorism:
 * Mordechai Vanunu:
 * Suicide bombing:
 * User:Enviroknot:
 * State of Palestine:
 * Cyprus dispute:
 * Six-Day War:
 * Gaza Strip:
 * Palestinian:
 * Slavery:
 * Cave of the Patriarchs:
 * Jihad
 * 1982 Invasion of Lebanon:
 * 9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories:
 * Terrorism:
 * Qana Incident
 * Bet (letter):
 * Khiam:
 * South Lebanon Army:
 * Jizya: Upon unprotect by SlimVirgin, immediately returned to reverting article.
 * Religious intolerance: 6/21/05 - Yuber blanks the article. Clear vandalism.

Yuber edits a narrow range of articles, and he has been involved in a series of revert and edit wars with other editors on many of them, to the point that recently at least 4 articles have had to be protected soon after he began editing them. In fact, it is hard to find a controversial article that he has edited and not been involved in a revert war on. Sometimes the reverting seems particularly pointless; for example, when User:Jayjg made a description more NPOV, by changing the phrase "criticized as an Islamophobe" to "accused of being an Islamophobe", he immediately reverted him without comment or even an indication he was reverting: His subsequent Talk: comment is to just assert that "criticized" is a "more accurate term". He is reverted by another editor, and does not respond to further discussion on the subject in Talk:, but returns two weeks later to revert to his version. A number of editors have expressed extreme frustration with Yuber's propensity to revert.


 * An edit war with Yuber leads to Ariel Sharon article being protected
 * Yuber inserted pov quotes on top and instigated an edit war in David Ben Gurion article with User:Jayjg.
 * Al Qunaytirah There is an edit war going on in this article. Yuber believes his biased sentence structure with regard's to Israel legal control of the territories is NPOV, when told that they are not, he claimed that "you are being ridiculous" and initiated a revert war, without even as much as going to :Talk to find compromise. He later inserted a page long quote from a biased source prove a point, much like he did when he copied one article into another.

Yuber inserted quotes from a speech David Ben Gurion made in 1937 to "present balance" for why Israel attacked Lebanon; proceeded to engage in revert war after being told it was irrelevent. Inserted POV terms and irrelevent sources to justify insertation of his opinion. Resulted in an edit war.


 * In article Qana Incident Yuber has engaged in the worst kind of vandalism, reverting a page I have developed with well cited sources back to a stub without explaining his actions. THe blatant disregard for the rules, common curtesy, and going to talk can be found here

More to come later. I urge the committee to take on this case.

Guy Montag 00:20, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

*Comment from Yuber
- That's just a list of various reverts that I have done over my past 3 months here, it doesn't prove or show anything. It's not a "narrow" range of articles either. It seems that pro-Israeli editors such as Guy Montag don't want anyone to edit articles. Perhaps it is they who edit a "narrow range of articles".Yuber(talk) 23:40, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it appears to be a list of articles in which your very first edit was a revert, which is quite another thing, and you just did it to me minutes ago here: on another article. Jayjg (talk) 23:46, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The irony is so rich it could buy France! Grace Note 04:27, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by party 1 Many members have tried to cooperate with him, but the leniency editors have been giving to him is over. He has not changed his militant pov pushing, he does not cooperate, he initiates revert wars constantly instead of the talk page, even over single words and after repeated warnings of its POV content. He has shown deliberate disregard to wikipedia rules. It seems that his sole purpose is to turn specific articles relating to his agenda into a giant soapbox for his viewpoint. He should be banned from editing in Middle Eastern related articles, either permanently or for a limited amount of time as a warning. Blocking him for his numerous 3RR violations has had no effect and I am afraid unless he is disciplined for his violations, no amount of reasoning will help in the future.

Guy Montag 07:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There are, as could be expected, flare-ups of edit wars and POV accusations within this topic, but there are those who appear to often confuse their opinion with the objective truth, and Yuber is one of them. His insistence on including a prejudicial photograph of Quneitra, along with his refusal to explain what non-biased purpose this photograph would have; his unwillingness to forge neutral language on contentious issues (e.g., who started the Six-Day War; whether the Golan Heights can be said to be occupied), are destructive and distracting to more worthwhile efforts.  --Leifern 11:45, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yuber is interested in promoting Pro Islamic/Pro Arab POV and removing anything he percives as being anti-Islamic or anti-arab. He wastes an ennourmous amount of time by getting into revert wars, inserting POV that that will be removed by others, removing information that others will have to add back,  and generally being obnoxious uncivil. Klonimus 03:41, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Yuber
This rant by the "pinnacle of NPOV" himself, Guy Montag, does little to demonstrate my so-called refusal to cooperate. His edits show him to be a militant POV-pusher with no regard for important Wikipedia policies. His arrogance is evident when he calls me a "useless editor" and says he wants to "get rid of me". That doesn't really show him to be someone who wants to cooperate. In actuality, an agreement at the Golan Heights page was finally reached a while ago. Leifern's comment is irrelevant since this edit war over the specific picture was solved by me.Yuber(talk) 14:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Enviroknot
I urge the ArbCom to take up the case of Yuber. He has been vandalizing my user page repeatedly despite being repeatedly told to stop. He is responsible for the locking of the Dhimmi article on Wikipedia. Numerous editors have run into his POV-pushing and revert-warring; indeed he seems to feel that any article related to Islam is his to "defend" no matter what factual information is brought forth.

From Wikipedia Talk:Kharaj: ''What, yet another article in which he can continually delete well-sourced information that doesn't agree with his POV, while simultaneously making claims of his own which simply don't match the sources provided? That's an appealing thought. Jayjg (talk) 03:23, 11 May 2005 (UTC)'' - Jayjg in reference to Yuber.

Yuber is in the middle of starting another revert war right now over at Saudi Arabia.

This cannot be allowed to continue. Though I fear it goes beyond Yuber himself, there are a few other editors (Mustafaa and Mel Etitis come to mind) who regularly act in concert with Yuber, including sending messages to each other to coordinate in revert wars on these articles.Enviroknot 20:03, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - Enviroknot accused Yuber of being a "sockpuppet of Mel Etitis. --Irishpunktom\talk
 * He is. What's your point?
 * Message regarding a personal attack that was in itself a personal attack removed. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 04:05, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Enviroknot, that Mel Etitis helped Yuber ruin the Islamofascism article, together with User:LeeHunter, and YusufToropov. Frankly Yuber makes working on any Islamic or middle eastern topic a chore. Klonimus 03:47, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Humus sapiens
User:Yuber often engages in bad-faith editing, excessive edit warring, removing sourced material he dislikes (sometimes without even mentioning it in edit summaries or Talk: pages), misquoting his own sources, quoting known hoaxes (even after this being pointed out), claiming false consensus. If opposed, he attempted to poison the well, disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, or make unsourced claims. Here's a sample:


 * Yuber claims consensus when there is none:


 * Yuber inserts an entire article into another to prove a point:
 * Comment: A paragraph of obvious relevance to the article, which is frankly too short to serve as a separate article. I see no problem. - Mustafaa 22:23, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: That is patently incorrect.  It is 14 paragraphs, not "a paragraph".  Please review the actual edit rather than jerking your knee.  Tomer TALK 10:15, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: A series of sourced bullet points with obvious relevence to the subject on hand is far far far from what I understood "Point" rule to be about. --Irishpunktom\talk 10:13, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment IrishPunkTom needs to clean his act up, read the rules, get a clue, and stop being a flaming POV-pushing Islamist.
 * Above statement made by 128.148.34.133 (Contribs), another of Enviroknot's protectors. --Irishpunktom\talk
 * IPT: The "POINT" discussion has to do with dumping one article's content into another, which is clearly what happened.  That said, the relevence to the article in question is a matter of POV, but that's basically par for the course in this case. Tomer TALK 19:19, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)


 * Yuber's edit squarely blames Israel in an article describing Muhammad_al-Durrah's murder controversy. His comment: "I try to NPOV articles":


 * Yuber attempts to justify suicide bombings, removes well-sourced statements that contradict his POV:.
 * Comment Thats not a justification, it's an Alternate POV. --Irishpunktom\talk 10:20, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * See the diff. Have our standards atrophied so much that removal of a relevant sourced quote is now considered merely alternative POV?  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 09:58, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Looking at the diff, the only sourced thing he removed concerned the PA's TV from the PMW source, which was originally mine, owing to it being added to in a Biased and incorrect context. When I tried to add the context, after all if you are going to bring up a religious concept it should be explained in a way that deals with it's religious connotations, it was abruptly removed. Everything else he did is an alternate POV, and as such should have remained. --Irishpunktom\talk
 * Comment. It's a sourced link totally relevant to the article and this is a wrong place to discuss its history.  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 10:27, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * If you don't want to bring up the full meaning of the concept, don't bring it up at all. --Irishpunktom\talk 13:31, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * Yuber deletes a sourced quote: without mentioning this deletion in the summary. When it is restored, he deletes it again, this time commenting "took out strange quote": . He removes it two more times, , then poisons the well with the following text: The following letter is only found in the history of Palestine by Moshe Gil, a Jewish historian. It exists in no other history of Islam or the spread of Islam, either Muslim or Secular... . When this POV wording is NPOVified  , he insists on poisoning the well again  and inserts an unsourced claim: , and again claiming: His religion is very relevant, as the rest of the commentators in here's religions are relevant . When he is pointed out that religious/ethnic identities for other historians are not mentioned , Yuber comments: "I think we both know this guy is a Jew, a proud one at that":.


 * In Talk:Jizya, Yuber insists the quote is unreliable because he hasn't seen it before, then he doubts Gil is unbiased, then he insists the site the quote is from is anti-Islamic, then claims that book reviews praising Gil's work are "pro-Israel", then threatens to retaliate by inserting anti-Sharon quotes in Ariel Sharon:.


 * Yuber inserts quotes from a propaganda webpage filled with purported quotes (including known hoaxes) by Israeli leaders:, , , , , , , , , . When his attention is called to the fact some of these quotes are well-known internet hoaxes , , he still keeps reinserting them insisting that leaving them out would be a "double-standard": , , , , , , , ,


 * Even after the source for those quotes is evidenced to be unreliable, Yuber insists the "source is credible":, ,.


 * In articles about certain people and books Yuber adds the following unsourced text: "some think he is an Islamophobe" or "critics have said that it is just another example of Islamophobia in the US":, and again , and again , , .  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 30 June 2005 07:26 (UTC)

Statement by Noitall
Others have provided details on the edit wars caused by Yuber and I agree with all of them. Until a couple days ago, I had no knowledge of Yuber's viciousness and harmful behavior. And I also had no contact or knowledge of these other editors and their complaints against Yuber. But Yuber's behavior goes far beyond that to the extent that it is seriously harmful to Wiki. Here are additional Yuber practices:

1. Retaliation: If Yuber disagrees with a POV, Yuber goes into all pages edited by an editor and reverts them solely to retaliate.

2. Stalking: Yuber stalks other editors, sometimes ending up in several edit wars at once, solely because Yuber will retaliate to insert a POV.

3. Multiple Edit Wars: Even during the short time of this arbitration, Yuber has launched multiple edit wars. Only today, Yuber has launched at least 3 known edit wars.

4. Recent Sock Puppets: In all of Wiki, only a few editors have supported Yuber, and mostly only for Yuber's POV. Yet, recently, a couple similar anonymous editors have appeared acting exactly like Yuber (the only edit is the revert and solely to insert a POV or assist Yuber). Now well known, Yuber is shedding its skin.

Yuber should be banned.

--Noitall 23:12, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Noitall conflicted with Yuber when Noitall decided that it served NPOV better if Islamist terrorism was replaced with Islamic Terrorism. Yuber was reverting to a version he did not create.--Irishpunktom\talk 10:57, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Irishpunktom is correct about when I first crashed into Yuber, but in the short time since, Yuber has wrecked versions far and wide with his reversions, including ones that I worked on. I am always amazed at Yuber. Follow what has happened just in the last couple hours.

1. While this very page is being compiled about Yuber, today June 13, SlimVirgin notes "you've been reported again for 3RR violations.

2. Today, June 13, SlimVirgin at [User talk:Yuber] very very nicely gives Yuber sound advice: "Can I suggest you stop editing controversial articles for a period?"

3. Immediately after getting such sound advice, Yuber gets on more controversial pages and gets in revert wars with friendly and sympathetic people, see Talk:Islam. --Noitall 01:09, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * I would like to note what I just found on SlimVirgin's page. Yuber has apparently made an incredible THIRTEEN edits and it may be more now, on [Talk:Jihad].Enviroknot 01:17, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * 13 edits on a talk page? Explain why there is a Problem ? --Irishpunktom\talk 10:40, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Excuse me. Thirteen REVERTS, destroying comments that others had put into Talk.Enviroknot 13:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Looking at it, and it seems that he was reverting back information that one of the IP addresses, alledgedly used as a sockpuppet by you, kept removing. This is the information here; --Irishpunktom\talk
 * "Here is the evidence that Enviroknot is a SOCKPUPPET of KaintheScion, against whom proceedings have been undertaken. BrandonYusufToropov 18:43, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)"
 * No, he was being a typical Islamist vandal and that personal attack was removed as fits Wikipedia policy on removing personal attacks.
 * The above comment was made by 81.91.192.220 (Contribs). Another protector of Enviroknot who, with only 15 Edits, is expert on Wikipedia policy --Irishpunktom\talk 17:13, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * The above comment was made by a brain-dead Islamist moron and likely sockpuppet of Yuber.

Statement by Zero
Yuber is often but not always correct regarding the facts, but is always strongly opinionated and combative, and frequently violates WP behavior norms. Part of the problem is that s/he is almost alone in counteracting dedicated POV warriors like Guy Montag, who even states right on his use page that he is here for political purposes. We'd be better off with neither of them. --Zero 16:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by SlimVirgin
Most of my interaction with Yuber has been as an admin, not as an editor, so I don't know much about the accuracy of his edits. But there's no question that he's a serial reverter and seems blind to any point of view but his own. I've had to protect several articles because of edit wars he seems to have triggered; he's been blocked three times since May 16, twice by me within three days; I've warned him several times on his talk page; I've given him the chance to revert himself to avoid being blocked; and I've corresponded with him by e-mail to try to persuade him to adopt a different editing style, but nothing seems to make any difference.

On May 17, I unblocked him early after a 3RR violation as a gesture of good faith, because we'd exchanged a few e-mails and I thought I'd managed to get through to him, but he went straight back to reverting, and I had to block him again 24 hours later.

His editing style consists of continuing to add or delete the same disputed passage over a period of days and weeks, even when the edit he's deleting is properly sourced. Example &mdash; since May 28, he has deleted the following referenced sentence from five times, without leaving a single post on :"Palestinian television has aired a number of music videos and announcements that promote eternal reward for children who seek 'martyrdom.' "


 * 05:50, May 28
 * 03:10, May 29
 * 04:33, May 29
 * I protected the page on May 29 and unprotected it on Jun 8
 * 14:05 Jun 10 Yuber's first edit after unprotection was to delete it again, with an incomplete edit summary: "added facts about palestinians being militarily incapable to fight israel, totallydisputed tag"
 * 00:02 June 12 And again.

The KaintheScion/ElKabong/Enviroknot sockpuppets haven't helped the situation, as they targeted Yuber, which made his attitude more entrenched and made him look like the victim &mdash; which he was, to some extent: being called a "lying Islamist f**k" by ElKabong probably didn't open his heart to the joys of collaborative editing. However, even without the provocation of the sockpuppets, Yuber's willingness to edit-by-revert would still be problematic. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:17, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have nothing to do with KaintheScion and/or ElKabong, and I'll thank you to take that back right now SlimVirgin. Your harassment of me has been systemic and wrong. As for Yuber, yes, I have reverted things that he has posted, but only because he serially engages in vandalism (deliberately inserting factual inaccuracies into Wikipedia). While I do believe Yuber is fundamentally an Islamist, I have nothing to do with ElKabong's comment.Enviroknot 22:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yuber's stalking of other users
Yuber maintains a page [here] which has only one purpose: a repository to aid him in stalking other users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.218.64.68 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 13 Jun 2005
 * Another likely KaintheScion/Enviroknot/Elkabong sockpuppet; see his contributions and the language in the comments. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 18:49, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The paranoia is palpable. The evidence of Yuber's using a Sandbox page as a repository for a hit-list is irrefutable.
 * Above comment by 207.241.238.149 (Contribs), other notable occourances by this user involve reverting to Enviroknot's edit, and making the following Edit summary "RV vandalism by Islamist F**k Yuber. You and your sockpuppet BrandonYusufToropov can go suck each other's c***s now --Irishpunktom\talk
 * Please ignore the comments by brain-dead Islamist sockpuppets like "Irishpunktom" who bring only falsehoods and lies to the conversation.

Yuber in new 3RR Violation
Yuber went back to his serial reverting, even attempting to deceptively disguise it, calling it a "minor" edit. Yuber reported: Administrators' noticeboard/3RR. --Noitall 23:59, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Zeno of Elea
I am an editor of the Wikipedia article on Jihad. This is the only article I have edited so far, and that is my only source of contact with Yuber.

Evidence:
 * 11 Jun 2005, edit of Jihad article by Yuber  : Revert by Yuber of a  relatively constructive contribution by an anonymous editor (which happened to be me, before I decided to create a Wikipedia account). Yuber offers no explanation for his revert. In other words, Yuber starts yet another edit war, with a new user, for no apparent good reason.


 * 17 Jun 2005, edit of Jihad talk page by Yuber. Yuber admits to being uncooperative, and claims that his past behaviour of non-cooperation can be excused by a presently percieved "personal attack"


 * Comparison of Jihad article Talk Page vs Edit History
 * Given that Yuber has taken such an interest in editing the Jihad article, it is fair to ask how often he is reverting article, and how much discussion and explanation is Yuber accompanying with his reversions and editing?


 * In the 3 days between 11 Jun 2005 and 13 Jun 2005, Yuber made 4 reverts of the article.


 * The Jihad article talk spans a 6 month time-frame from December 2004 to the present, with some particularly uncivil exchanges Archived by an sysop. . Yuber has written a grand total of 25 words in the present main Talk page. 25 words does not even cover a single one of his reverts. Does Yuber seem like the kind of editor who is interested in cooperation and constructive improvement of the article?


 * Yuber swears in Arabic in the Jihad article talk page:
 * In Archive 4 of the Jihad talk archives, under the section titled "Intervention"  Yuber made the following post:
 * Kess ummak ya ibn el kalb. Mus zib abook. Please respond asap.Yuber(talk) 03:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yuber's statement, translated into English, says, "F*ck your mother (not with your dad's d*ck), you son of a dog." Not only is Yuber making a mockery of Wikipedia policies regarding cooperation, civility, and personal attacks, he is swearing in Arabic on English Wikipedia to evade detection of his violations.

Summary: Yuber is a major source of distruption and distortion in the Jihad article.

--Zeno of Elea 00:31, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Statement by User:IZAK
For some odd reason User:Yuber has avoided tangling with me entirely, however as I come across more and more pages that I contribute to and instances where Yuber's name and tactics crop up at a giddy pace, I cannot help but conclude that User:Yuber is not "Yuber" at all but a smooth super-charged sockpuppet because he is far too experienced and has too much dexterity to be a "new" user of barely three months on Wikipedia. It takes a long time to learn what and where all the "hot buttons" of Wikipedia usage and methodology are buried and how to use them effectively. Sooooo, I must therefore conclude that given User:Yuber's constant Edit warring as enumerated by others here, I must conclude that more than probably he is none other than two almost identical banned users of the recent past: Thus, they have both been banned for most of 2005 in the self-same areas that User:Yuber revels in causing chaos. And, importantly, User:Yuber comes on the scene just when those two are censured and banned for their almost identical infringements of policy. (I suspect that User:Yuber may also be an incarnation of one or two other devious current active members of Wikipedia who I prefer not to name at this time; they operate on a far more deceptive level.) So therefore it follows that User:Yuber may very well be none other than User:Alberuni and/or User:HistoryBuffEr (all of whom obviously use English as a first language in spite of their focus on Islam and Arab related articles.) Yuber should, like them, be banned very soon. This is not "rocket science" folks, and deciding what to do with Yuber should not drag on for weeks allowing him to function with an obvious disdain and disregard for everyone and everything at Wikipedia! IZAK 08:36, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Banned User:Alberuni, see User talk:Alberuni and Requests for arbitration/Alberuni/Proposed decision and/or also
 * 2) Banned User:HistoryBuffEr, see User talk:HistoryBuffEr/Archived-Sermons and Requests for arbitration/HistoryBuffEr and Jayjg. HistoryBuffEr is no friend of Wikipedia, see his "warnings" on his user page.

Request by SlimVirgin for a revert parole
I'm requesting that a temporary revert parole be imposed on Yuber while this case is being looked at. His reverting continues unabated, though he knows his case is before the arbitration committee, which suggests he's not going to change his approach. Here's a characteristic example of his editing style. At Jizya, he reverted to this passage (or a close variant of it) 24 times between June 18 and May 15: "The word jizya is taken from Sura 9.29 of the Qur'an, though it is unclear if it is referring to an actual monetary sum. Many commentators disagree on what the definition of jizya is, though some believe it to be mandated ..."

                       

The frequent reverting is causing trouble on several pages, attracting sockpuppetry, proxy IP reversions, and personal attacks. This isn't to excuse the sockpuppetry and abusive responses, but there's a causal relationship between them and Yuber's editing practices. Currently protected in part because of him are Jihad, Saudi Arabia, Quneitra, Terrorism, Qana, and Suicide bombing. Although others are obviously reverting too, Yuber's presence is the common denominator on the pages experiencing trouble, and based on what I've seen, reverting is all or most of what he does. A temporary revert parole would calm the situation down. SlimVirgin (talk) 08:14, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * I have to second that request. It appears that even threat of arbitration has not changed his editing style. I am afraid that while we deliberate, he will continue to vandalize articles. Some kind of restriction has to be placed on Yuber's editing so he understands that the proceedings against him are serious. Guy Montag 21:40, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment: Obviously Yuber is not going to change his approach. He recently made the following statement:
 * "Yuber" might be restrained from editing, but I certainly won't ;).Yuber(talk) 03:09, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This one editor poses a major threat to the (flawed) wikipedia system. Wikipedia should block open proxies. If Yuber isn't a big enough trolling disaster to percipitate such change, then eventually a much bigger and more systematic trolling disaster will come along, like GNAA, which will force Wikipedia to block open proxies. --Zeno of Elea 11:47, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

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

 * Reject. There's lots of rhetoric, but not a lot of evidence or examples - if more is forthcoming, it may be a different story. Ambi 09:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) Accept into Yuber only - have been waiting for evidence of allegations about Guy Montag, but it has not been forthcoming. Ambi 13:51, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept, however, having read most recent edits to Al Qunaytirah I am more concerned with Guy Montag's POV pushing than Yuber's Fred Bauder 17:25, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept to investigate allegations of POV pushing directed at both parties. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 14:22, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)
 * Accept &#10149;the Epopt 00:56, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunction
1) User:Yuber, using any account or IP, is prohibited from editing any Wikipedia page other than his talk page and the pages of this arbitration until a final decision is made in this case.
 * ''Passed 7 to 0 on June 22

=Final decision (none yet) = All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)

Neutral Point of View (NPOV)
1) With respect to controversial topics Neutral point of view requires that all significant points of view regarding a topic be fairly presented.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Categories
2) Wikipedia uses categories as an aid to the reader. They are not intended to be information in themselves, but are useful in finding information. In the instant case, inclusion of the category "Category:Geography of Israel" in the article Golan Heights is not an endorsement one way or the other of the status of the territory. Thus both "Category:Geography of Syria" and "Category:Geography of Israel" are appropriate and useful to a reader looking for information.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Editing controversial topics
3) Certain subjects are subjects of controversy both outside the context of Wikipedia and within. Editing of articles dealing with these subjects requires extra effort and an appropriate attitude of tolerance and cooperation.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Competency
4) Wikipedia editors who are unable to successfully edit controversial articles may be banned from editing them or their manner of editing restricted.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Advocacy
5) Wikipedia is not a platform for advocacy or propaganda, What Wikipedia is not.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Context
6) The work of a Wikipedia editor must be judged in the context of the work of the other Wikipedia editors editing in the same area. If the other editors are editing in a point of view way themselves and engaging in edit wars also, an attempt should be made to devise remedies which address the problem as a whole.


 * Passed 4 to 0 with 1 explicit abstention at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Edit warring
7) Edit warring is harmful to the purpose of Wikipedia and to the morale of its editors.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Sourced material
8) Information which references a reputable reference work should not be removed from Wikipedia without cause.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Ethnicity and personal characteristics of scholars
9) It is inappropriate to characterize the authors and editors of references in an manner calculated to incite prejudice.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Right to make a counterclaim and to present evidence
10) Any user who has a complaint made against them has the right to make a complaint regarding other users who are involved in the controversy which gave rise to the original complaint and to present evidence regarding his counterclaim. Any others who are able to find evidence, including Arbitrators who discover it in the course of investigating the matter, are entitled to present evidence.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Duty of Arbitrators to investigate controversies
11) If a dispute has come before the Arbitration Committee, the Arbitrators have the duty of investigating the controversy which gave rise to the dispute, and to propose remedies regarding all users who have contributed substantially to the controversy.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Yuber
1), after establishing an account on March 28, 2005, has made point of view edits to a number of articles which relate to Israel and Arab and Islamic concerns, see, for example, one of his first edits, removing category Geography of Israel from Golan Heights , ,


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Disputants
2) When began editing Golan Heights the article was in a state of conflict with  and  playing major roles, see Talk:Golan_Heights and succeeding sections.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet suspects
3) Based on typical edit comments and range of editing, does not appear to be a sockpuppet of either  or, or at least there is not sufficient evidence to establish it.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Continuing use of sockpuppets
4) It is reasonably believed by those who edit in the areas that Yuber edits in and those who are involved in this case that Yuber has continued to edit despite the injunction entered in this case.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Positive contributions by Yuber
5) In addition to participating in the editing of controversial articles, has made useful contributions.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Allegedly objectional edits
6) In addition to his first post removing Category:Geography of Israel from Golan Heights, has added Greater Israel to Names of the Levant ; removed material regarding Syria's withdraw from Lebanon in 2005 from Operation Litani ; removed Koran quotation and other material from Jizya ; restored Palestinian point of view language to Fatah ; restored apologetic language in Dhimmi ; removed emblems of the major Palestinian orgs from Israeli-Palestinian conflict ; removed derogatory point of view material from Muhammad ; changed BC to BCE in Phoenicia ; added Category:Zionist terrorist organizations to Jewish Defense League ; removed the section "Religious Police and Oppression" and references from Saudi Arabia ; removed apologetic language from Zionist terrorism ; removed derogatory information from Mordechai Vanunu ; removed Israeli point of view and inserted Islamist point of view in Suicide bombing ; inserted Palestinian point of view in Six-Day War ; restored links to photographs of Israeli settlers in Gaza Strip ; restored information about Palestinian refugees in Palestinian ; removed information regarding Slavery under Islam from slavery ; replaced Israeli with Palestinian point of view in Cave of the Patriarchs ; replaced Israeli with Islamist point of view in 1982 Lebanon War ; added material supportive of conspiracy theories to 9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories and added detailed information regarding Baruch Goldstein to Terrorism


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

The Six Day War example
7) Detailed analysis at Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence/Six Day War of Yuber's cited edit to Six Day War and its context show that Yuber after a brief discussion accepted Guy Montag's removal of the edit. However going forward in the page history of the article provocative edits by both Guy Montag  and Yuber  are found. Neither seems to have persisted when  proposed a solution.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Cave of the Patriarchs example
8) Detailed analysis at Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence/Cave of the Patriarchs of Yuber's cited edit to Cave of the Patriarchs and its context shows aggressive point of view edit warring by both  and  with minimal talk page discussion until the intervention of  who proposed a compromise and leaned on both parties requesting a resolution.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Jizya example
9) Great emphasis is placed in the evidence on Yuber's edits to Jizya. Detailed analysis of Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence/Jizya of Yuber's cited edits and  to Jizya and their context show profound problems with Yuber's behavior including edit warring, removal of sourced material, original research and a general inability to edit a controversial article in a civil way.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Guy Montag
10) states on his user page, "I am primarily here to represent the nationalist right wing in Israel." He has, in pursuit of that goal, engaged in disruptive point of view editing, see a detailed analysis of the editing history of Cave of the Patriarchs at Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence/Cave of the Patriarchs and the detailed analysis of the editing history of Six Day War at Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence/Six Day War.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Use of Palestinian
11) took the position that use of "Palestinian" as in "a Palestinian city" signified Palestinian sovereignty over the city in question, see Talk:Nablus. He backed up this position by repeatedly reverting the articles Bethlehem and Nablus, see Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber/Evidence. Eventually, he accepted a compromise which permitted use of the phrase "Palestinian population center".


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of evidence by Guy Montag
12) has removed evidence (allegedly placed there by a Yuber "clone") from the talk page of this project page.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Yuber's use of sockpuppets
13) Following enactment of Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber/Proposed_decision Yuber continued to edit under a number of accounts. When asked regarding the matter he refused to respond accurately, see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber/Proposed_decision


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

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.

Yuber placed on probation
1) is placed on Probation for one year. This means that any administrator, in the exercise of their judgement for reasonable cause, documented in a section of this decision, may ban him from any article which relates to Islam or to the Israeli-Paletinian conflict which he disrupts by inappropriate editing. Yuber must be notified on his talk page of any bans and a note must also placed on WP:AN/I. He may post suggestions on the talk page of any article he is banned from editing. This remedy is crafted to permit Yuber continuing to edit articles in these areas which are not sources of controversy.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Yuber to edit under that account
2) shall edit under that username and no other. Edits by other accounts or anonymous IPs which due to area of interest, style or manner which can be reasonably ascribed to Yuber shall be considered to be Yuber.


 * Passed 4 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Guy Montag placed on probation
3) is placed on Probation for one year. This means that any administrator, in the exercise of their judgement for reasonable cause, documented in a section of this decision, may ban him from any article which relates to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which he disrupts by inappropriate editing. Guy Montag must be notified on his talk page of any bans and a note must also placed on WP:AN/I. He may post suggestions on the talk page of any article he is banned from editing. This remedy is crafted to permit Guy Montag continuing to edit articles in these areas which are not sources of controversy.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Guy Montag banned from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
4) is banned for three months from editing articles which concern the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


 * Passed 4 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Jayjg
5) is reminded that edit-warring is harmful to Wikipedia's mission and is advised to use Wikipedia's dispute resolution procedure in preference to attempting to control content through the use of reverts.


 * Passed 4 to 0 with 1 explicit abstention at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Procedure for banning in probation for Yuber
1) Should a Wikipedia administrator feel it necessary that Yuber be banned from an article where he is engaged in edit warring, removal of sourced material, POV reorganizations of the article or any other activity which the user considers disruptive they shall place a template at the top of the talk page of the article and notify Yuber on his talk page. The template shall include the ending date of the ban (one year from this decision) and a link to Probation. The template may be removed by Yuber or any other editor at the end of the ban. See Probation


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Procedure for banning in probation for Guy Montag
2) Should a Wikipedia administrator feel it necessary that Guy Montag be banned from an article where he is engaged in edit warring, removal of sourced material, POV reorganizations of the article or any other activity which the user considers disruptive they shall place a template at the top of the talk page of the article and notify Guy Montag on his talk page. The template shall include the ending date of the ban (one year from this decision) and a link to Probation. The template may be removed by Montag or any other editor at the end of the ban.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Enforcement blocks on Yuber
3) Should Yuber edit an article he is banned from he may be briefly blocked from editing Wikipedia, up to a week for repeat offenses.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Enforcement blocks on Guy Montag
4)) Should Guy Montag edit an article he is banned from he may be briefly blocked from editing Wikipedia, up to a week for repeat offenses.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Use of sockpuppets by Yuber
5) Should Yuber edit under any account other than Yuber (or other than incidental edits as an anonymous ip) he may be briefly banned, up to a week in the case of repeated violations. Edits by suspected sockpuppets of Yuber may be removed by any user without comment.


 * Passed 5 to 0 at 11:11, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Guy Montag

 * Extended one day due to this edit Fred Bauder 18:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Banned from Battle of Deir Yassin/Deir Yassin Massacre for disruptive page move and incivility on the talk page. Ral315 (talk) 16:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The ban was undone by User:Braingotts considering the page move as WP:NPOV. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 16:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)