Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Chuck F/Evidence

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=0&oldid=5584644] [1].

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.

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 Radicalsubversiv

[edit]

I am formally introducing this evidence, which I previously collected at User:Radicalsubversiv/Chuck F. However, some of it, particularly relating to evasion of the prior temporary injunction, is lifted from evidence Rhobite offered in the Reithy case. Much of the material on Chuck's early misdeeds was originally presented at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chuck F. Direct contributions were also made by Neutrality, Mirv, Jiminy Crikkitt, and Rhobite; see the edit history of User:Radicalsubversiv/Chuck F for details. RadicalSubversiv E 18:23, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It can be difficult to follow Chuck's editing history because he often edits without being logged in (from 203.112.19.195 and 210.142.29.125, most commonly, but also 200.55.11.49, and, as of late, 208.62.52.1). Sometimes this is done with a clear intent to deceive, but other times it appears to be simple carelessness. When blocked, he edits through open HTTP proxies at a frightening pace.

The Arbitration Commitee has previously expressed some concern regarding disputes with Chuck not having gone through the proper dispute resolution process. For that reason, evidence regarding other users' attempts to make use of the methods listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution have been highlighted in bold.

Sep 6

[edit]
  • 06:26, 6 Sep 2004
    • In Chuck's very first series of edits to Wikipedia that I can find, he establishes his basic pattern: removing vast quantities of material he dislikes with little explanation.

Sep 9

[edit]

Sep 13

[edit]

Sep 14

[edit]

Sep 15

[edit]

Sep 30

[edit]

Oct 1

[edit]

Oct 2

[edit]

Oct 5

[edit]

Oct 7

[edit]

Oct 8

[edit]

Oct 9

[edit]

Oct 10

[edit]

Oct 11

[edit]

Oct 12

[edit]
  • 06:35, 12 Oct 2004
    • Reithy makes a number of POV edits to United States Libertarian Party. Nat Krause, Radicalsubversiv, and 1644 (possibly a Reithy sock) revert most of them, but also make some NPOV enhancements to the article. Chuck sweeps in and reverts all the changes, saying only "Reverting page back before all these edit wars took place." RadicalSubversiv restores the changes, and Chuck reverts again, falsely accusing RadicalSubversiv of violating the 3RR rule. He is then reverted by Nat Krause, who says "these points should be discussed separately on talk." Chuck continues making changes without using talk. Reithy reappears, and a full-on edit war results. Chuck makes a total of 6 edits in 10 hours. [19] [20] [21] [22] [23]

Oct 13

[edit]

Oct 14

[edit]

Oct 15

[edit]

Oct 16

[edit]

Oct 17

[edit]
  • 05:11, 17 Oct 2004
    • Having previously been reverted by Bkonrad, Chuck is now reverted by one of Reithy's socks. An edit war ensues, in which Chuck reverts five times in ten hours, and the page is protected: [47], [48], [49], [50], [51].

Oct 18

[edit]

Oct 19

[edit]
  • 16:23, 19 Oct 2004

Oct 20

[edit]
  • 19:30, Oct 20, 2004
    • Chuck revert's Reithy's first appearance on McJob (with a very minor edit over a single phrase). Arcuras presents a perfectly reasonable compromise, which Chuck reverts, with an edit summary of "He's a troll, don't have to compromoise with hime [sic]".

Oct 22

[edit]
  • 04:18, 22 Oct 2004
    • Chuck reappears on the scene at McJob, reverting the article seven times in the space of 36 hours. Only two of these reverts are of Reithy -- the other five are of Arcuras and LGagnon. At 00:29, LGagnon posts a note on Chuck's talk page asking him to stop reverting and make use of Talk, and another asking him to offer explanations for his reverts instead of attacking Reithy; Chuck ignores both. On only one occasion does he use an edit summary, and only then to mock LGagnon's request of him to use talk. He stops reverting only when the article is protected. [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67]

Oct 23

[edit]

Oct 30

[edit]

Oct 31

[edit]

Nov 1

[edit]

Nov 4

[edit]
  • 06:46, 4 Nov 2004 15:21
    • When Reithy edits Liberal Democratic Party of Australia (which Chuck created to document his insistence that "libertarian" has only one meaning the whole world 'round), Chuck reverts him. Then an anonymous IP, 212.140.155.19, claiming to be an Australian, corrects Chuck's apparently incorrect use of "libertarian" in the Australian context and inserts an Australian elections template. Without evidence, Chuck assumes 212.140.155.19 is a Reithy sock, and reverts him. Another anonymous IP, 213.120.56.41 (presumably the same individual), reverts Chuck three times, insisting that "libertarian" doesn't mean Chuck says it does in Australia, and that he's not Reithy. Jiminy Krikkitt posts a note on Chuck's talk page inquiring about his reverts. 213.120.56.41 posts two notes asking Chuck not to engage in revert wars and pointing to him to the LDP's website. Chuck ignores all three. Chuck eventually accumulates 18 reverts in the space of 33 hours, until the page is protected. [136], [137], [138], [139], [140], [141], [142], [143], [144], [145], [146], [147], [148], [149], [150], [151], [152], [153]

Nov 5

[edit]
  • 15:51, 5 Nov 2004

Nov 6

[edit]

Nov 7

[edit]
  • 06:36, 7 Nov 2004
    • Beginning of lengthy revert war which starts with Chuck objecting to Radicalsubversiv's insertion of material on Ron Paul's points of difference with the Libertarian Party (for which his edit summaries are "Revert to last version before different from lp" and "Back to rhobite's version"). Reithy gets involved, and over the next 34 hours, Chuck reverts the article 8 times. At one point, Chuck carelessly reverts so as to remove a large quantity of (relatively) undisputed material, without using an edit summary. [154], [155], [156], [157], [158], [159], [160].
  • 13:27, 7 Nov 2004

Nov 8

[edit]

Nov 9

[edit]
  • 04:52, 9 Nov 2004
    • Chuck misleadingly uses "Removing left over Reithy pov" as a summary for an an edit in which he rewrites and rearranges Michael Badnarik's presentation of election results and polling data.

Nov 11

[edit]
  • 13:53, Nov 11, 2004
    • Beginning with this edit, Chuck begins a revert war over Ron Paul. After reverting six times, Chuck F is blocked for habitual violations of the three revert rule. He then evades the block using two different open proxies: [183], [184].

Nov 13

[edit]
  • 22:43, Nov 13, 2004
    • Raul654 notifies Chuck F of a temporary injunction under which he is "prohibited from editing wikipedia pages except for pages related to your arbcom case".

Nov 16

[edit]
  • 00:46, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F violated his new temporary injunction, returning main namespace articles to previous versions he has supported in revert wars. Some of the edits had the summary "revert 178 on his temp injuction." He probably means 172.188.140.92 (an AOL IP), who he did revert. 172.188's edits were also problematic. However Chuck's injunction violation is more troublesome than some anonymous edits. There is no current injunction against an AOL IP address, although it's possible that 172.188 could be Reithy. [185], [186], [187], [188], [189]
  • 01:30, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F again violated his injunction, this time by abusing an open HTTP proxy. In addition he put a protected notice on Libertarianism even though it's not protected. This marks at least three times Chuck has edited from an open proxy to hide his identity. [190], [191], [192]
  • 01:39, Nov 16, 2004
  • 01:49, Nov 16, 2004
    • I have been forced to block Chuck F for 24 hours due to his repeated violations of the temporary injunction. Rhobite 01:49, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • 03:13, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F continues to evade the temporary injunction and block using open HTTP proxies such as 80.58.23.235 and 80.58.3.235. Rhobite 03:15, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Nov 17

[edit]
  • 06:19, Nov 17, 2004
    • Chuck F again edits in the main namespace from an open HTTP proxy, violating his injunction: [199], [200], [201]

Nov 19

[edit]
  • 16:08, Nov 19, 2004
    • Chuck F edits in the main namespace: [202]. He is blocked for 24 hours.

Nov 23

[edit]
  • 08:14, Nov 23, 2004

Nov 25

[edit]

Nov 28

[edit]

Dec 3

[edit]
  • 22:07, 3 Dec 2004
    • Fred Bauder notifies Chuck that the temporary injunction has expired with the closing of Reithy's ArbCom case.

Dec 4

[edit]
  • 06:22, 4 Dec 2004
    • In his first edit since the temporary injunction is lifted, Chuck resumes reverting Libertarianism (making no use of talk, as is now his habit). In his second edit to the article, he deceptively uses "Reinserting links" for a significant revert. Prior to being blocked (see below), he reverts the article 5 times in 4 hours (Rhobite and Radicalsubversiv are the other parties, neither of whom violates the 3RR).
  • 06:25, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck returns to Libertarian socialism, where his [initial edit is almost unintelligible (and removes Victor Serge from the list of libertarian socialists for no apparent reason). He reverts the page 4 times in 6 hours before being blocked (Radicalsubversiv and Sunray are the other parties, neither of whom violates the 3RR). He uses edit summaries only to accuse Radicalsubversiv of "vandalism" and "harassment".
  • 06:33, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck again removes summary of criticisms from Wal-Mart. He twice reverts attempts to restore it, once falsely claiming that his edit had "already previously been agreed to" and once using "Revert radical's harrasment of me" as an edit summary: [207], [208]
  • 06:34, 4 Dec 2004
  • 07:21, 4 Dec 2004
    • Improv creates User:Improv/lib draft dec2004, in an effort to create a RFC/poll to finally settle the question of how "libertarian" should be used in various Wikipedia articles which Chuck has been reverting. He invites assistance from various interested parties, including Chuck, in shaping the RFC prior to posting it. Chuck "participates" (in chronological order) by:
      • inserting into the draft question the parenthetical: "(a page only recently created, and a term with less then 900 hits on google, 58 of which come from wikipedia, many more which come from listing libertarian and capitaliasm in a series of terms)"
      • accusing Improv of attempting to conduct a biased process.
      • red-baiting by suggesting that Icut4you is a "a follower of Trokstvy(sp)".
      • changing "libertarian capitalism" to "libertarian capital1ism" in Icut4you's comments.
      • replacing "Historically, the first of these is libertarian socialism" with "libertarian socialism(which thourgh a series of logic people argued was used first because french used a different term that people now translated as libertarian)" in Radicalsubversiv's proposed introduction to the RFC
      • removing, again from Radicalsubversiv's propsoed introduction, the phrase "There exists significant dispute over the dominant usage of the term today"
      • removing both attempts Radicalsubversiv makes to arrive at compromise text to describe the use of "libertarian" in an anarchist context ([209], [210])
      • reverting Improv's attempt to clarify the purpose of the page
  • 08:49, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck removes a quote (taken from a Texas Monthly article) from Ron Paul without using an edit summary. When Radicalsubversiv reverts him, Chuck adds a note to the main article: "(note: this quote is taken out of context and wikipedia editors are not currently sure of the excat context it was placed in)". When Sam Spade reverts that, he removes the quote again, saying in the edit summary "Remove quotes taken out of context - for all we know the source could have made them up,, Can only find one source on this". Radicalsubversiv subsequently posts a second source (the Houston Chronicle) on Talk:Ron Paul, but Chuck removes the quote again anyway (without an edit summary). He reverts the article a total of 4 times in 19 hours (other parties are Radicalsubversiv and Sam Spade, neither of whom violate the 3RR).

Dec 5

[edit]

Dec 6

[edit]
  • 06:03, 6 Dec 2004
  • 06:05, 6 Dec 2004
    • Chuck resumes his edit war with the AOL anonymous IP over whether "modern day" or "regional" should be used in the disambiguation notice at Libertarian League. He reaches 15 reverts in 8 hours before the page is protected.
  • 08:20, 6 Dec 2004
    • Chuck again removes the quote from Ron Paul, saying "it's entirly possible that it's a misleading quote because of non-context, confirm context". He starts by editing anonymously, then switches to himself when his block expires, then eventually goes back to anonymity. Scott Burley proposes a new version of the paragraph in question, which Radicalsubversiv agrees to. Chuck ignores the discussion on talk and reverts Scott.

Dec 17

[edit]
  • 06:11, 17 Dec 2004
    • Chuck reverts 4 times in 8 hours on Libertarian Party (United States), one of his few targets that remains unprotected. As edit summaries, he offers "revert Aol Anon ip that reverts almost any change I make to an article", when the IP was not from AOL and had not reverted him, and "illregardless it doesn't belong in that section(as other user agreed with me, but i got confused and reinserted it." No else violates the 3RR rule. [218], [219], [220], [221].

Dec 20

[edit]
  • 06:45, 20 Dec 2004
    • Chuck decides that User:Libertas is a Reithy sockpuppet, and proceeds to revert legitimate edits with no other explanation: [222], [223].

Dec 21

[edit]
  • 21:02, 21 Dec 2004
    • Chuck reverts Ron Paul without offering any explanation. RadicalSubversiv reverts him, requesting one. Chuck replies with an edit summary mentioning two changes, but also removes several other pieces of information.

Dec 24

[edit]
  • 03:28, 24 Dec 2004
    • Chuck returns to Ron Paul and reverts the article back two days without offering any explanation.
  • 22:02, 24 Dec 2004
    • Chuck posts a note on User:Radicalsubversiv (not talk), repeating his claim that Libertas is a Reithy sockpuppet, and threatening to disobey a ban if it is imposed.

Jan 3

[edit]

Evidence Replied to by Chuck

[edit]

I am formally introducing this evidence, which I previously collected at User:Radicalsubversiv/Chuck F. However, some of it, particularly relating to evasion of the prior temporary injunction, is lifted from evidence Rhobite offered in the Reithy case. Much of the material on Chuck's early misdeeds was originally presented at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chuck F. Direct contributions were also made by Neutrality, Mirv, Jiminy Crikkitt, and Rhobite; see the edit history of User:Radicalsubversiv/Chuck F for details. RadicalSubversiv E 18:23, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It can be difficult to follow Chuck's editing history because he often edits without being logged in (from 203.112.19.195 and 210.142.29.125, most commonly, but also 200.55.11.49, and, as of late, 208.62.52.1). Sometimes this is done with a clear intent to deceive, but other times it appears to be simple carelessness. When blocked, he edits through open HTTP proxies at a frightening pace.

The Arbitration Commitee has previously expressed some concern regarding disputes with Chuck not having gone through the proper dispute resolution process. For that reason, evidence regarding other users' attempts to make use of the methods listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution have been highlighted in bold.

Sep 6

[edit]
  • 06:26, 6 Sep 2004
    • In Chuck's very first series of edits to Wikipedia that I can find, he establishes his basic pattern: removing vast quantities of material he dislikes with little explanation.

Sep 9

[edit]
  • Same as Sept.6th, and again just to note This other anon ip/Poltical nerd user was reverting article far more then me against concenus of everybody on the page and compleatly changeing the content. Chuck F 19:42, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sep 13

[edit]
  • I admit, my beginer's mistake, I've moved past this point and relized that people aren't even going to see the article, and that talking is far more effective(or if they refuse to talk, getting people to revert them) Chuck F 19:44, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sep 14

[edit]

Same response as last one, I've moved beyond this being any type of problem and this was me still understanding wikipedia editing Chuck F 19:46, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sep 15

[edit]
  • again me still understanding wikipedia editing and making a place in the community(although changing a user's vote was extremly and severly wrong, I apolgize for that, that is a pattern that hasn't continued after my first month Chuck F 19:48, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sep 30

[edit]
  • I still truly think that if European Union at the 2004 summer olympics is a valid article, so is Nato at the 2004 summer olympics, But I abided by the vfd and haven't been recreating the article Chuck F 19:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 1

[edit]

Again early fault's That I accept responbility for, I don't think they are evident of me in Wikipedia today though Chuck F 19:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 2

[edit]

After that msg I never changed another vote again, I did attempt to prove my point again on nut, but like said I relized there's far better ways of talking to people now instead, early edits that still aren't entirely representative Chuck F 19:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 5

[edit]

Again look at the edit history, notice how some of these sentences aren't even in there now? Stormie and other editors agreed with my edit summary that they needed to be sourced and kept the ones that couldn't be sourced out.Chuck F 19:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 7

[edit]

Please see the requests for comments on me, Nobody ejected to the move and it seemed pretty commonsense, someone later on went and made the link more promient and after only one objection from me they explained thier point and I agreed with them compleatly Chuck F 19:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 8

[edit]

Oct 9

[edit]

False evidence, I was reveritng the other section that was removed, critcism of wal-mart was a colleratral, I should have paid attention , was later re-added with no problem from me Chuck F 20:01, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 10

[edit]

Please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=24.92.130.139, most likely a sockpuppet that only stayed around for this revert war and only ever edited Michael Badnarik and then revert warred. Not too mention the matieral posted here is flatey false He was quoting a book that hadn't even been finished yet, much less released so he could source it. I was also suspicous at that time because someone a few days earlier had added in a ton of Negative pov to that article with an edit summary to the effect of this obscure Joker should have an enecylopedia entry he desrves Again Note

Oct 11

[edit]

Please take a look at this and note stormie's section and that three users certified a section saying I'm acceptable editor, and another one endorsing my section Chuck F 20:09, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 12

[edit]
  • 06:35, 12 Oct 2004
    • Reithy makes a number of POV edits to United States Libertarian Party. Nat Krause, Radicalsubversiv, and 1644 (possibly a Reithy sock) revert most of them, but also make some NPOV enhancements to the article. Chuck sweeps in and reverts all the changes, saying only "Reverting page back before all these edit wars took place." RadicalSubversiv restores the changes, and Chuck reverts again, falsely accusing RadicalSubversiv of violating the 3RR rule. He is then reverted by Nat Krause, who says "these points should be discussed separately on talk." Chuck continues making changes without using talk. Reithy reappears, and a full-on edit war results. Chuck makes a total of 6 edits in 10 hours. [248] [249] [250] [251] [252]

Riethy has since been shown as being an obvious troll(as I knew as far back as then), if you can check the edit summaries most of these were negative pov that Reithy added, what's intresting is that none of this has been re-added after Reithy left, Nobody else feels it's that important Chuck F 20:11, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Oct 13

[edit]

Oct 14

[edit]

Oct 15

[edit]

Oct 16

[edit]

Oct 17

[edit]
  • 05:11, 17 Oct 2004
    • Having previously been reverted by Bkonrad, Chuck is now reverted by one of Reithy's socks. An edit war ensues, in which Chuck reverts five times in ten hours, and the page is protected: [276], [277], [278], [279], [280].

Oct 18

[edit]

Oct 19

[edit]

Oct 20

[edit]
  • 19:30, Oct 20, 2004
    • Chuck revert's Reithy's first appearance on McJob (with a very minor edit over a single phrase). Arcuras presents a perfectly reasonable compromise, which Chuck reverts, with an edit summary of "He's a troll, don't have to compromoise with hime [sic]".

Oct 22

[edit]
  • 04:18, 22 Oct 2004
    • Chuck reappears on the scene at McJob, reverting the article seven times in the space of 36 hours. Only two of these reverts are of Reithy -- the other five are of Arcuras and LGagnon. At 00:29, LGagnon posts a note on Chuck's talk page asking him to stop reverting and make use of Talk, and another asking him to offer explanations for his reverts instead of attacking Reithy; Chuck ignores both. On only one occasion does he use an edit summary, and only then to mock LGagnon's request of him to use talk. He stops reverting only when the article is protected. [290], [291], [292], [293], [294], [295], [296]

Oct 23

[edit]

Oct 30

[edit]

Oct 31

[edit]

Nov 1

[edit]

Nov 4

[edit]
  • 06:46, 4 Nov 2004 15:21
    • When Reithy edits Liberal Democratic Party of Australia (which Chuck created to document his insistence that "libertarian" has only one meaning the whole world 'round), Chuck reverts him. Then an anonymous IP, 212.140.155.19, claiming to be an Australian, corrects Chuck's apparently incorrect use of "libertarian" in the Australian context and inserts an Australian elections template. Without evidence, Chuck assumes 212.140.155.19 is a Reithy sock, and reverts him. Another anonymous IP, 213.120.56.41 (presumably the same individual), reverts Chuck three times, insisting that "libertarian" doesn't mean Chuck says it does in Australia, and that he's not Reithy. Jiminy Krikkitt posts a note on Chuck's talk page inquiring about his reverts. 213.120.56.41 posts two notes asking Chuck not to engage in revert wars and pointing to him to the LDP's website. Chuck ignores all three. Chuck eventually accumulates 18 reverts in the space of 33 hours, until the page is protected. [365], [366], [367], [368], [369], [370], [371], [372], [373], [374], [375], [376], [377], [378], [379], [380], [381], [382]

Nov 5

[edit]
  • 15:51, 5 Nov 2004

Nov 6

[edit]

Nov 7

[edit]
  • 06:36, 7 Nov 2004
    • Beginning of lengthy revert war which starts with Chuck objecting to Radicalsubversiv's insertion of material on Ron Paul's points of difference with the Libertarian Party (for which his edit summaries are "Revert to last version before different from lp" and "Back to rhobite's version"). Reithy gets involved, and over the next 34 hours, Chuck reverts the article 8 times. At one point, Chuck carelessly reverts so as to remove a large quantity of (relatively) undisputed material, without using an edit summary. [383], [384], [385], [386], [387], [388], [389].
  • 13:27, 7 Nov 2004

Nov 8

[edit]

Nov 9

[edit]
  • 04:52, 9 Nov 2004
    • Chuck misleadingly uses "Removing left over Reithy pov" as a summary for an an edit in which he rewrites and rearranges Michael Badnarik's presentation of election results and polling data.

Nov 11

[edit]
  • 13:53, Nov 11, 2004
    • Beginning with this edit, Chuck begins a revert war over Ron Paul. After reverting six times, Chuck F is blocked for habitual violations of the three revert rule. He then evades the block using two different open proxies: [412], [413].

Nov 13

[edit]
  • 22:43, Nov 13, 2004
    • Raul654 notifies Chuck F of a temporary injunction under which he is "prohibited from editing wikipedia pages except for pages related to your arbcom case".

Nov 16

[edit]
  • 00:46, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F violated his new temporary injunction, returning main namespace articles to previous versions he has supported in revert wars. Some of the edits had the summary "revert 178 on his temp injuction." He probably means 172.188.140.92 (an AOL IP), who he did revert. 172.188's edits were also problematic. However Chuck's injunction violation is more troublesome than some anonymous edits. There is no current injunction against an AOL IP address, although it's possible that 172.188 could be Reithy. [414], [415], [416], [417], [418]
  • 01:30, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F again violated his injunction, this time by abusing an open HTTP proxy. In addition he put a protected notice on Libertarianism even though it's not protected. This marks at least three times Chuck has edited from an open proxy to hide his identity. [419], [420], [421]
  • 01:39, Nov 16, 2004
  • 01:49, Nov 16, 2004
    • I have been forced to block Chuck F for 24 hours due to his repeated violations of the temporary injunction. Rhobite 01:49, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • 03:13, Nov 16, 2004
    • Chuck F continues to evade the temporary injunction and block using open HTTP proxies such as 80.58.23.235 and 80.58.3.235. Rhobite 03:15, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Nov 17

[edit]
  • 06:19, Nov 17, 2004
    • Chuck F again edits in the main namespace from an open HTTP proxy, violating his injunction: [428], [429], [430]

Nov 19

[edit]
  • 16:08, Nov 19, 2004
    • Chuck F edits in the main namespace: [431]. He is blocked for 24 hours.

Nov 23

[edit]
  • 08:14, Nov 23, 2004

Nov 25

[edit]

Nov 28

[edit]

Dec 3

[edit]
  • 22:07, 3 Dec 2004
    • Fred Bauder notifies Chuck that the temporary injunction has expired with the closing of Reithy's ArbCom case.

Dec 4

[edit]
  • 06:22, 4 Dec 2004
    • In his first edit since the temporary injunction is lifted, Chuck resumes reverting Libertarianism (making no use of talk, as is now his habit). In his second edit to the article, he deceptively uses "Reinserting links" for a significant revert. Prior to being blocked (see below), he reverts the article 5 times in 4 hours (Rhobite and Radicalsubversiv are the other parties, neither of whom violates the 3RR).
  • 06:25, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck returns to Libertarian socialism, where his [initial edit is almost unintelligible (and removes Victor Serge from the list of libertarian socialists for no apparent reason). He reverts the page 4 times in 6 hours before being blocked (Radicalsubversiv and Sunray are the other parties, neither of whom violates the 3RR). He uses edit summaries only to accuse Radicalsubversiv of "vandalism" and "harassment".
  • 06:33, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck again removes summary of criticisms from Wal-Mart. He twice reverts attempts to restore it, once falsely claiming that his edit had "already previously been agreed to" and once using "Revert radical's harrasment of me" as an edit summary: [436], [437]
  • 06:34, 4 Dec 2004
  • 07:21, 4 Dec 2004
    • Improv creates User:Improv/lib draft dec2004, in an effort to create a RFC/poll to finally settle the question of how "libertarian" should be used in various Wikipedia articles which Chuck has been reverting. He invites assistance from various interested parties, including Chuck, in shaping the RFC prior to posting it. Chuck "participates" (in chronological order) by:
      • inserting into the draft question the parenthetical: "(a page only recently created, and a term with less then 900 hits on google, 58 of which come from wikipedia, many more which come from listing libertarian and capitaliasm in a series of terms)"
      • accusing Improv of attempting to conduct a biased process.
      • red-baiting by suggesting that Icut4you is a "a follower of Trokstvy(sp)".
      • changing "libertarian capitalism" to "libertarian capital1ism" in Icut4you's comments.
      • replacing "Historically, the first of these is libertarian socialism" with "libertarian socialism(which thourgh a series of logic people argued was used first because french used a different term that people now translated as libertarian)" in Radicalsubversiv's proposed introduction to the RFC
      • removing, again from Radicalsubversiv's propsoed introduction, the phrase "There exists significant dispute over the dominant usage of the term today"
      • removing both attempts Radicalsubversiv makes to arrive at compromise text to describe the use of "libertarian" in an anarchist context ([438], [439])
      • reverting Improv's attempt to clarify the purpose of the page
  • 08:49, 4 Dec 2004
    • Chuck removes a quote (taken from a Texas Monthly article) from Ron Paul without using an edit summary. When Radicalsubversiv reverts him, Chuck adds a note to the main article: "(note: this quote is taken out of context and wikipedia editors are not currently sure of the excat context it was placed in)". When Sam Spade reverts that, he removes the quote again, saying in the edit summary "Remove quotes taken out of context - for all we know the source could have made them up,, Can only find one source on this". Radicalsubversiv subsequently posts a second source (the Houston Chronicle) on Talk:Ron Paul, but Chuck removes the quote again anyway (without an edit summary). He reverts the article a total of 4 times in 19 hours (other parties are Radicalsubversiv and Sam Spade, neither of whom violate the 3RR).

Dec 5

[edit]

Dec 6

[edit]
  • 06:03, 6 Dec 2004
  • 06:05, 6 Dec 2004
    • Chuck resumes his edit war with the AOL anonymous IP over whether "modern day" or "regional" should be used in the disambiguation notice at Libertarian League. He reaches 15 reverts in 8 hours before the page is protected.
  • 08:20, 6 Dec 2004
    • Chuck again removes the quote from Ron Paul, saying "it's entirly possible that it's a misleading quote because of non-context, confirm context". He starts by editing anonymously, then switches to himself when his block expires, then eventually goes back to anonymity. Scott Burley proposes a new version of the paragraph in question, which Radicalsubversiv agrees to. Chuck ignores the discussion on talk and reverts Scott.

<day1> <month>

[edit]
  • <timestamp1>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp2>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp3>
    • What happened.

<day2> <month>

[edit]
  • <timestamp1>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp2>
    • What happened.
  • <timestamp3>
    • What happened.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Chuck_F/Evidence&oldid=431099377"