QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 28th February 2011, 3:03pm)
It'll be interesting to see how they try to block me.
By the way, if you guys could get me reliable sources that say positive (or at least neutral) things about LaRouche, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm sure all of you are better at finding sources in this subject area than I am.
Some of the sources that SV and Will Beback use say positive (or at least neutral) things. However, SV and Will Beback exclude that which doesn't match up to their POV. You can read their preferred sources, and you can also go over the edit histories of
Lyndon LaRouche (T-H-L-K-D) and
Views of Lyndon LaRouche and the LaRouche movement (T-H-L-K-D) and look at the sources that have been deleted. SV and WB never leave edit summaries that say they are deleting a source -- it's always "tidying," "tightening," "improving flow," and so on, so it may be a tedious process. However, Will just made the rounds of these articles and deleted all the positive stuff that had been added by recent banned editors. You can't revert his deletions without facing charges of meatpuppetry, but you can look at the sources and draw your own conclusions.
Here's an easy one.
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Mon 28th February 2011, 3:00pm)
I don't know if the last two accounts that have been blocked as HK socks, Angel's Flight or Delia Peabody, were socks of his or not, although they were apparently socks of somebody. Even if they were, there are some questions that need to be answered about the way the blocks occurred:
- The two regular editors of that topic, SV and Will Beback, apparently have set up a hidden process for investigating and blocking other editors in that topic area who disagree with their approach to editing those articles. Their process includes having at least one checkuser who agrees to perform private checkusers for them and then shares the results privately with them.
- SV and Will Beback then, when asked, make selective decisions on who they will share this information with. Thus, it appears that they are acting as administrators as well as regular editors of this topic. From what I understand, this isn't supposed to be allowed anymore in Wikipedia.
- It appears that anyone who edits from that LaRouche organization's IP range is labeled as a "sock of HK", even though it appears that over 100 people "work" there (I know "work" is not necessarily what they do, but I can't think of a better word). As far as I know, the LaRouche organization has not been prohibited from editing Wikipedia.
- Any recent account editing the LaRouche topic, no matter how well they are following Wikipedia' rules, faces scrutiny through this backroom tribunal.
If nothing else, they have article ownership down to a science.