Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Argyrosargyrou

As a matter of urgency I draw attention to the fact that opponents of this user's free speech have now arranged (and proudly announce on the VfD page their achievement) to have him banned from the paedia whilst also pursuing their VfDs against his pages, and (presumably) also pursuing their Arbitration request. What has this man done that means that whilst Milosevic and Saddam have trials with lawyers, these people can simply prosecute someone they then render incapable of reply ?
 * He was blocked for persistant vandalism, sock-puppetry and personal attacks. His pages on VFD are there because they have been nominated. They are entirely unconnected events. The RfAr is a culmination of his campaign to push one POV into as many crevices as possible, and from attacking users. It is, again, unconnected. --Kiand 11:41, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * (After edit conflict)
 * He's used a very large number of Sock puppet|sock puppets in order to disrupt Wikipedia, and has behaved extremely badly and disruptively in his editing. The point isn't that he's an extreme right-wing, hate-filled nationalist; that's unpleasant, but not reason to stop him editing; the problem is that insists on including his views in articles (see [Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]), and that he is either unwilling or unable to collaborate and discuss matters rationally with other editors.  Comparison with national or international law are irrelevant here, and reference to "these people" are unhelpful.  Similarly, free speech is irrelevant; freedom of speech doesn't entail that Wikipedia has to allow itself to be used as a soap box. Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 11:45, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * He has repeatedly attacked all users that have met him in editing (for the sole exception of one or two of his countrymen), including long-time contributors and administrators. His editing style is completely out of bounds - while we could include several of his views for sure, and several of his mentioned facts (and we did), Wikipedia is not a soapbox. He has also repeatedly tried to torpedo VfDs on "his" pages by sockpuppeting - i.e. using either unsigned votes via open proxies (which would not be counted normally anyway), or registering new user names whose only contributions are votes on his VfDs. (for the problem of distinguishing sockpuppet user accounts from real people of his friend circle, see the sockpuppet article). He was blocked for persistant vandalism, the latest being another attempt to have "his version" of the Cyprus dispute on that very page, by using his known sockpuppets.
 * The WP:RfAr is exactly for juding him by the Arbitrators, long-time members who have been elected to be impartial judges, judging not on the topic, but on the way he has behaved as a user, also taking into account the actions of other users. This is independent of his block, which was done for certain actions of vandalism. - Snchduer 12:06, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)