Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Cberlet _ Chip on the old block
Posted by: CrazyGameOfPoker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review_User:Cberlet
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cberlet&diff=prev&oldid=227344107
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
He appears to be the latest to join the meltdown parade, perhaps in sympathy with his old buddy SlimVirgin. True to form, he reacts by suggesting that Jimbo, the ArbCom, and Wikipedians of all persuasions are a bunch of Nazis.
Ever the diplomat, Chip also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Georgewilliamherbert&diff=227341010&oldid=227091950 on GeorgeWilliamHerbert, the blocking admin, who is probably generally on Chip's side.
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 23rd July 2008, 7:13am) 
Chip also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Georgewilliamherbert&diff=227341010&oldid=227091950 on GeorgeWilliamHerbert, the blocking admin, who is probably generally on Chip's side.
And Chip makes an excellent point.
QUOTE
Admins who favor proceess over morality and facts make me sick.
Posted by: dtobias
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cberlet&diff=prev&oldid=227333964 recent quote by Chip regarding another editor is amusing...
QUOTE
The fact that you have been blocked for a week speaks for itself.
Sauce for the goose and the gander?
Posted by: Yehudi
QUOTE
The fact that you have been blocked for a week speaks for itself.
The fact that Mr Berlet was not blocked for longer must also be saying something.
Posted by: Bob Boy
Chip seems to follow the philosophy that are only two kinds of people on Wikipedia -
1) people who exactly agree with everything he says, and
2) people who are exactly like Adolf Hitler.
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
QUOTE(Bob Boy @ Wed 23rd July 2008, 6:40am)
Chip seems to follow the philosophy that are only two kinds of people on Wikipedia -
1) people who exactly agree with everything he says, and
2) people who are exactly like Adolf Hitler.
Actually, that philosophy extends to the world outside Wikipedia as well. Posted by: Cla68
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Wed 23rd July 2008, 6:13am)
He appears to be the latest to join the meltdown parade, perhaps in sympathy with his old buddy SlimVirgin. True to form, he reacts by suggesting that Jimbo, the ArbCom, and Wikipedians of all persuasions are a bunch of Nazis.
Ever the diplomat, Chip also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Georgewilliamherbert&diff=227341010&oldid=227091950 on GeorgeWilliamHerbert, the blocking admin, who is probably generally on Chip's side.
A request by another admin to unblock is quickly and appropriately denied:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGeorgewilliamherbert&diff=227398322&oldid=227341010
Posted by: gomi
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Wed 23rd July 2008, 4:20pm)
A request by another admin to unblock is quickly and appropriately denied:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGeorgewilliamherbert&diff=227398322&oldid=227341010
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGeorgewilliamherbert&diff=227398322&oldid=227341010
For the purposes of clarity for those too lazy to click the link, SlimVirgin's request to unblock is denied by Sir Fozzie. Can we expect more diatribes about pro-WR admins?
Posted by: guy
"on top of which his own bio is repeatedly under attack, often by the same people, and he has been incredibly patient about it."
Why is SV happy for someone to write and WP:OWN his own biography?
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(guy @ Thu 24th July 2008, 9:04am)
"on top of which his own bio is repeatedly under attack, often by the same people, and he has been incredibly patient about it."
Why is SV happy for someone to write and WP:OWN his own biography?
Well, she's batting 2 for 2 with Berlet and Weiss on that front.
Also supports "jossi" owning (and adminning!) the Prem article as a proxy autobiographer. 3 for 3.
Posted by: CrazyGameOfPoker
Looks like he's gone, at the very least for a good while.
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
QUOTE(CrazyGameOfPoker @ Thu 24th July 2008, 6:42am)
Looks like he's gone, at the very least for a good while.
Posted by: Rootology
Wow, this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cberlet&diff=prev&oldid=227344107
Is totally off the wall inappropriate. Good block.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Tue 22nd July 2008, 11:13pm)
He appears to be the latest to join the meltdown parade, perhaps in sympathy with his old buddy SlimVirgin. True to form, he reacts by suggesting that Jimbo, the ArbCom, and Wikipedians of all persuasions are a bunch of Nazis.
Umm, that's been Chip's major social and literary "trick" for his whole life, as somebody has already pointed out. Pretty much the same way SV decides that anybody who disagrees with her must be a troll or stalker.
And yeah, it's a general form of total fundamentalist closed-mindedness. It was said of Oppenheimer's nemesis Louis Straus, that if you disagreed with him politically, he would patiently explain his position to you again, on grounds that you must not have understood him the first time. If you continued to disagree, he would assume you must be a traitor.
Posted by: dtobias
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time. People seem to be confusing Italian Fascism with German Nazism.
Posted by: Bob Boy
QUOTE(CrazyGameOfPoker @ Thu 24th July 2008, 8:42am)
Looks like he's gone, at the very least for a good while.
He'll be back - his livelihood depends on it. If it wasn't for Chip Berlet promoting Chip Berlet's websites, books, and whatever else, who would?
Posted by: sarcasticidealist
QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 24th July 2008, 10:31am)
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time.
No kidding - as somebody who's visited Germany a couple of times and spent more than three years dating a German, the real accomplishment would be delaying a German train. Conductor's head would probably explode.Steve Smith
Adding no value to WR threads
Since 2008
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 24th July 2008, 10:31am)
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time. People seem to be confusing Italian Fascism with German Nazism.
Not "people"-- Chip Berlet. He's been causing problems in the fascism articles, since he really doesn't know anything about fascism (political philosophy of Mussolini). All he knows is that it's bad, associated with the axis in WW II and thus with Hitler, and thus must be politically similar.
It doesn't help that Hitler and Mussolini helped each other out in WW II, but that was some time after the initial statement of fascism by Mussolini. Hitler called Mussolini "my teacher" for showing him how to construct an authoritarian state. But the idiologies for WHY one would want to do such a thing, were originally quite different. Mussolini's ideas, which came well before German Socialism, are not particularly Nazi-like. Unless you group any political system in which the state plays a heavy hand as "politically similar." But then you can't tell left from right, and you're really on a libertarianism vs. everybody else scale. That's the famous http://www.la-articles.org.uk/pc.htm, which measures personal freedom, and is orthogonal to the usual Left/Right scale.
Anyway, to understand Mussolini, you actually have to read Mussolini, which Berlet appears unwilling to do. In the early days, Mussolini has some complementary things to say about Jews, for example. It was only when WW II got his cookies in the fire and he was forced to rely on German military help, that the Italian fascists began to support the German extermination programs. They didn't start out that way, with racism as a core of their political philosophy, which of course the Nazis did.
Posted by: everyking
QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 24th July 2008, 6:31pm)
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time. People seem to be confusing Italian Fascism with German Nazism.
His analogy is nastier than that, actually; he's referring to the deportations to the death camps. The "good Germans" don't ask where the trains are going.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(everyking @ Thu 24th July 2008, 11:55am)
QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 24th July 2008, 6:31pm)
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time. People seem to be confusing Italian Fascism with German Nazism.
His analogy is nastier than that, actually; he's referring to the deportations to the death camps. The "good Germans" don't ask where the trains are going.
Yeah, I got that. And yes, he did that, too.
Posted by: Bob Boy
Chip has requested that his biography be deleted, "just like Dan Brandt's".
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Will_Beback&diff=227734906&oldid=227708254
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Will_Beback&diff=227749030&oldid=227734906
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
QUOTE(Bob Boy @ Thu 24th July 2008, 9:22pm)
Chip has requested that his biography be deleted, "just like Dan Brandt's".
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Will_Beback&diff=227734906&oldid=227708254
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Will_Beback&diff=227749030&oldid=227734906
Chip's jackbooted Praetorian Guard, comprised of SlimVirgin and Will Beback, doesn't inspire the sort of fear that it once did. There is an extensive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review_User:Cberlet where a number of editors come close to taunting SlimVirgin for refusing to come out and debate, preferring to attempt (unsuccessfully) to manipulate something behind the scenes. Will Beback darkly insinuates that the Svengali-like figure who is manipulating all of this from behind the scenes is... yours truly. Then he blusters about a retaliatory block against Polly Hedra, for saying "I think that Berlet is using Wikipedia to try to build up credibility and for commercial promotion of his organization, which provides defamation for hire."http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Views_of_Lyndon_LaRouche&diff=227213535&oldid=227154727 He evidently intends to go through with it, judging by his reply to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Question_by_Cla68
Posted by: Somey
I'd just like to say that simply having a brutally despotic and psychopathic fascist dictator in charge is no guarantee that trains will run on time. You've got to have talented, dedicated, well-trained people at all levels of your transportation infrastructure, from the people who build the trains to the people who manage the schedules to the engine drivers who actually go out there and run the @$#%^&!! trains.
Besides, everyone knows that trains run on coal, or else diesel fuel.
Posted by: The Joy
QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 25th July 2008, 2:52am)
I'd just like to say that simply having a brutally despotic and psychopathic fascist dictator in charge is no guarantee that trains will run on time. You've got to have talented, dedicated, well-trained people at all levels of your transportation infrastructure, from the people who build the trains to the people who manage the schedules to the engine drivers who actually go out there and run the @$#%^&!! trains.
Besides, everyone knows that trains run on coal, or else diesel fuel.
And powerful magnets!
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(sarcasticidealist @ Thu 24th July 2008, 6:30pm)
Adding no value to WR threads
Since 2008
Who told you that? I think you add value.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Fri 25th July 2008, 2:14am)
Who told you that? I think you add value.
I must have mentioned it during the last WRcon, the one in Bismarck, ND back in February. (I was kidding, though, honest!)
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
Interesting. Chip is now proclaiming that he must leave because http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=227809302&oldid=227570983
Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank
Sweet! Looks like I may have to update my article.
Posted by: Bob Boy
Will Beback has now placed the Chipster's article up for deletion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chip_Berlet_%282nd_nomination%29
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(Bob Boy @ Fri 25th July 2008, 10:55pm)
Will Beback has now placed the Chipster's article up for deletion:
Looks like a snowball keep to me. Worth remembering what happened on the first AfD:
QUOTE
Keep. This is barely worthy of a response. Cognition (talk ?Çó contribs) is a supporter or member of the LaRouche movement, a political cult headed by Lyndon LaRouche. Chip Berlet is an investigative journalist and researcher who specializes in tracking rightwing movements like the LaRouche organization, and he is therefore someone they perceive as an enemy. For that reason, Cognition is trying to have his Wikipedia entry deleted. In addition, the arbitration committee has ruled in two separate cases that LaRouche supporters are not allowed to use Wikipedia to promote LaRouche's ideas, or to further his cause. This VfD is in clear violation of those rulings. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 21:55 (UTC)
I look forward to Slim dropping in again to condemn Chip as a LaRouche supporter.
Posted by: Cla68
They're refusing to delete his biography. It will be interesting to see if he now starts posting to this forum to complain about his treatment by Wikipedia's administration.
By the way, my request for clarification to ArbCom was to see if the 2005 ruling could be used to help control any current problems surrounding the LaRouche articles, not just with Berlet but with everyone. But, judging by Bainer's response it probably can't be.
Posted by: Bob Boy
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 25th July 2008, 6:26pm)
They're refusing to delete his biography. It will be interesting to see if he now starts posting to this forum to complain about his treatment by Wikipedia's administration.
By the way, my request for clarification to ArbCom was to see if the 2005 ruling could be used to help control any current problems surrounding the LaRouche articles, not just with Berlet but with everyone. But, judging by Bainer's response it probably can't be.
Silly Cla68! ArbCom rulings are not to be applied in any places but where the power structure says they are to be applied! Otherwise the riff-raff might start demanding equitable treatment. Duh!
Posted by: ThurstonHowell3rd
QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 24th July 2008, 10:31am)
But it was Mussolini who (supposedly) made the trains run on time. People seem to be confusing Italian Fascism with German Nazism.
Mussolini did not make the trains run on time either: http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/trains.asp
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(guy @ Fri 25th July 2008, 3:25pm)
QUOTE(Bob Boy @ Fri 25th July 2008, 10:55pm)
Will Beback has now placed the Chipster's article up for deletion:
Looks like a snowball keep to me. Worth remembering what happened on the first AfD:
QUOTE
Keep. This is barely worthy of a response. Cognition (talk • contribs) is a supporter or member of the LaRouche movement, a political cult headed by Lyndon LaRouche. Chip Berlet is an investigative journalist and researcher who specializes in tracking rightwing movements like the LaRouche organization, and he is therefore someone they perceive as an enemy. For that reason, Cognition is trying to have his Wikipedia entry deleted. In addition, the arbitration committee has ruled in two separate cases that LaRouche supporters are not allowed to use Wikipedia to promote LaRouche's ideas, or to further his cause. This VfD is in clear violation of those rulings. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 21:55 (UTC)
I look forward to Slim dropping in again to condemn Chip as a LaRouche supporter.
Remind them again. We can't get another visit from user:Cognition, since SV finally nailed him with an indef block, for all the reasons she could think of, in 2006 (the block log http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Cognition)
But Cognition2, playing Cato, might show up at this point on WP, saying how Berlet MUST BE DELETED, and salted! (Berlet delenda est, cum salis!). Like Carthage.
The funniest thing here is not that Berlet asked for his bio to be deleted-- the funniest thing is that he thought his bio might actually be, just because he wanted to be.
He not know Wikipedia vewwwy well, do he?
Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 25th July 2008, 11:26pm)
By the way, my request for clarification to ArbCom was to see if the 2005 ruling could be used to help control any current problems surrounding the LaRouche articles, not just with Berlet but with everyone.
QUOTE(guy @ Fri 25th July 2008, 10:25pm)
I look forward to Slim dropping in again to condemn Chip as a LaRouche supporter.
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Fri 25th July 2008, 11:26pm)
They're refusing to delete his biography. It will be interesting to see if he now starts posting to this forum to complain about his treatment by Wikipedia's administration.
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 26th July 2008, 12:56am)
We can't get another visit from user:Cognition, since SV finally nailed him with an indef block, for all the reasons she could think of, in 2006 (the block log http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Cognition)
QUOTE
06:57, 12 April 2006 SlimVirgin (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Cognition (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (unblocking to block for longer)
Posted by: Milton Roe
From the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chip_Berlet_%282nd_nomination%29&diff=prev&oldid=227907115
QUOTE
'''Comment''' I am Chip Berlet. The entry under [[Chip Berlet]] has, since it was created in 2004, been off and on a collection of biased, defamatory, and false information. It is currently biased and POV and fails the NPOV standard, much less BLP. It is currently under attack from conspiracy theorists and supporters of neofascist antisemite Lyndon LaRouche. Now being attacked are some entries where my work published in reputable journalistic and scholarly sources is being called unreliable and problematic. I have been trying to work within the Wiki guidelines on the entry [[Chip Berlet]] since December 2004. It is obvious that there is no interest in dealing with this ongoing problem and that Wikipedia's leadership ahs no solution to wikistalking and attacks by fanatics, which in my case has extended to a battle at Wiki quotes. Enough. Please delete the entry [[Chip Berlet]]. If it is appropriate for Dan Brandt, it is appropriate for me. Wikipedia has shown that it is unwilling or unable to enforce its own policies, and I have no faith that this will change in the near future. I have been through RFC's, Mediations, and Arbcom. It has been an utter waste of time. Please delete the entry [[Chip Berlet]], and when that is accomplished. Please delete my user account. I have no interest in discussing this.
But of course, he is interested in discussing this, once he finds out it won't happen.
On Chip Berlet's bio TALK page, he says that if it was done for Brandt, it could be done for him. ..Whoa, Chip, if you're comparing yourself to Brandt, you have to rock WP's world by outing a bunch of admins, first. Tasks of Hercules. You're a mosquito. And you just found out how small a mosquito.
And then, after Chip's request, there occurs one of those deftly sarcastic comments that appear mainly in official documents (police, court, government, military records, etc.), and (of course) on Wikipedia. In all of which, the people making the comments know they are being watched for bias, and are pretending like crazy they have none, and are working to show they are completely reasonable. Even while shoving the shiv into the back of somebody. This can be high art, if you're a taste for it. Of course, it's no fun if it's happening to you. But when it happens to evil-doers, as in judges' rulings during any good trial, it can be good theatre. This one happens as Martin Diode performs a bit of jujitzu on Berlet's egotistical penchant to use his own writings for reliable sources:
QUOTE(Marvin Diode)
Chip is presented as a Reliable Source for many contentious accusations in BLP and other articles throughout Wikipedia. These sorts of accusations must be attributed, and should be linked to a Wikipedia article so that the reader may evaluate the source of the accusations. In the case of Daniel Brandt, whose bio was deleted, I don't think that he is used as a source at Wikipedia to any significant degree. --Marvin Diode (talk) 15:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
So you see, how could we delete any of this RS stuff?
That's the reason to keep it, and who's going to argue with this reason? 
Chip, if you're going to argue that you're actually NOT a reliable source, then why should we believe you on that, given that if we did, you'd be... unreliable? It's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar_paradox
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
Here's a swell comment from the AfD page:
QUOTE
Keep Cberlet has spent years on Wikipedia vociferously insisting on his notability. The price of fame is not having 100% control over how your notability gets interpreted. Boodlesthecat Meow? 03:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Posted by: guy
Loads of good stuff. This needs to be kept for posterity and quoted in future BLP cases:
QUOTE
Delete - It is about time we as Wikipedians accept the responsibility that comes with success. If we cannot keep at bay the hordes of POV pushers that hide under the excuse of "it has been published in an RS so it must be cited", to misquote, misrepresent or otherwise edit articles to assassinate the character of living people, then we need to afford LPs the recourse to have their articles deleted or at a minimum stubified and monitored. It is about time that we develop a process to deal with those editors that will use these excuses to slant articles in a way that portrays these living people in a biased light, forgetting that RS is not a magic word: NPOV is not attained by throwing a number of sources into a page. It requires diligence, respect, and effort to create a BLP that is indeed neutral in its presentation of the subject. There should not be any excuses for sloppy, malicious, and biased accounts of living people in our project. ?ëê jossi ?ëê (talk) 02:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
And can someone please nominate the closer for ArbCom:
QUOTE
The result was Keep per WP:SNOW/WP:IAR. The fact that the subject requests deletion is not per se a reason to delete, as John254 points out. The article is well sourced, and many other users agree that it is not defamatory. Even if there are problems with PoV and sourcing (as Jossi points out), these could easily be fixed without deletion. Those arguing for deletion are merely comparing this to the Daniel Brandt case, which is apples and oranges ?Çö Brandt was borderline notable, but Berlet seems irrefutably notable per the sources. Overall, I feel that this should be closed now before it spirals even more out of control, as the consensus seems rather obvious. If this is in the wrong, please let me know; this was a rather WP:BOLD non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters ?Çó (Broken clamshells?Çó Otter chirps ?Çó HELP!) 04:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Posted by: The Joy
I thought non-admins could not close a XfD if there were any delete votes? It is not a WP:SNOW keep as long as there is opposition.
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 26th July 2008, 8:29pm)
I thought non-admins could not close a XfD if there were any delete votes? It is not a WP:SNOW keep as long as there is opposition.
Any admin can re-open a non-admin close, I think. If none does, it's a community consensus. Of course, Jossi can always go to DRV.
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
It's interesting that, beyond a token effort at back-room intrigue, SlimVirgin pretty much abandoned the Chipster in his hour of need. That must have hurt.
Posted by: Cedric
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sat 26th July 2008, 7:47pm)
It's interesting that, beyond a token effort at back-room intrigue, SlimVirgin pretty much abandoned the Chipster in his hour of need. That must have hurt.
Pretty much SOP for the Stroynaya Deva. She has no real friends "on wiki". As soon as your usefulness is at an end, she doesn't know you anymore.
Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank
Cberlet's account has been deleted. I think the main reasons he left were 1) persistent questions being raised about his suitability as a source, and 2) Alison's intervention at "Views of Lyndon LaRouche," where she came down against unsourced innuendo. I think Berlet regarded this as a crushing defeat -- he was never the same afterwards.
Posted by: Rootology
QUOTE(It's the blimp, Frank @ Thu 14th August 2008, 9:31am)
Cberlet's account has been deleted. I think the main reasons he left were 1) persistent questions being raised about his suitability as a source, and 2) Alison's intervention at "Views of Lyndon LaRouche," where she came down against unsourced innuendo. I think Berlet regarded this as a crushing defeat -- he was never the same afterwards.
Accounts don't get deleted. And his user page was deleted last month: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Cberlet
Posted by: Disillusioned Lackey
QUOTE(Cedric @ Sun 27th July 2008, 4:15pm)
Pretty much SOP for the Stroynaya Deva. She has no real friends "on wiki". As soon as your usefulness is at an end, she doesn't know you anymore.
You aren't implying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociopath, are you?