Case Opened on May 12, 2005

Case Closed on 17:30, August 11, 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 a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

Involved parties

Statement by Trey Stone

I have posted comments on Talk:Death squad and Talk:Allan Nairn, but the attitude of this user seems to be one of continuous reversion w/o compromise. His blatantly biased edits on Corporate media tell me he does not take editting seriously -- merely as a way to distort wikipedia to suit his own views. See also: Suharto, Amy Goodman, and Isle of Youth, where I have fully justified my edits. His hilarious comments on Wikipedia:Requests for mediation tell me he does not take any resolution process seriously.

see also: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Trey Stone

User:Davenbelle continues to mass revert my edits without justification despite my rationalizations on those articles' respective talk pages. As mentioned above, his attitude is one of non-seriousness and constant reversions while ignoring any compromise edits or discussion. Furthermore, his transparent POV edits on Corporate media tell me he is simply using wikipedia as a platform to push his own left-wing views.

I don't have time to constantly revert obvious bias, and while I know wikipedia's imperfect I think it could do a lot better without the detrimental contributions of users like this. J. Parker Stone 07:32, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Davenbelle

Trey Stone (talk · contribs) has been widely opposed by many editors on all of the pages he has listed:

For example, the edits he attributes to me on Corporate media are in fact mostly by User:Viajero: diff with only the following being "mine".

see also ~ other opposition to Trey Stone's edits:

Henry Kissinger – talk – history
Fidel Castro – talk – history

I support the acceptance of this case; thanks for bringing this here, Trey.

— Davenbelle 08:57, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Preliminary decisions

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (5/0/0/0)

Accept. I understand Trey Stone has used several usernames in the past; how many of those are in use here? - David Gerard 10:37, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- None... I use this name. Alternate name use was a while back and is currently irrelevant. J. Parker Stone 10:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Accept. Neutrality^talk 10:50, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
Accept ➥the Epopt 13:23, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Accept; both users support arbitration against each other. -- Grun t 🇪🇺 15:24, 2005 May 12 (UTC)
Accept Fred Bauder 18:26, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunction (none)

Final decision

Principles

Verifiability

1) For information to be included in Wikipedia, it must have been published elsewhere in reliable sources and those sources should be cited as references in Wikipedia articles (see Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Cite sources).

Passed 8-0

Obscure topics and dubious sources

1.1) Sometimes, especially regarding topics which have not been the subject of extensive journalistic or scholarly inquiry, published information regarding a topic is limited or available only through sources which because of their editorial policies (strong point of view) are suspect (see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Dubious_sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability#Obscure_topics).

Passed 8-0

Consensus

2) As put forward in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, Wikipedia works by building consensus. This is done through the use of polite discussion, in an attempt to develop a consensus regarding proper application of Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines such as Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Surveys and the Request for comment process are designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked.

Passed 8-0

Wikipedia is not a soapbox

3) Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda and advocacy.

Passed 8-0

Relationship of Wikipedia policies and controversial articles

4) Wikipedia policies regarding courtesy, assuming good faith, communicating about edits on the talk page of articles, producing appropriate references are especially relevant to articles which involve controversy.

Passed 8-0

Editing of controversial articles

5) Users who are unable or unwilling to follow the Wikipedia policies which relate to editing of controversial articles may be restricted with respect to editing in those areas.

Passed 8-0

NPOV

7) Wikipedia policy requires inclusion of all significant points of view regarding a subject.

Passed 5-0

Talk pages

8) Wikipedia policy requires discussion of the content of an article when disputes arise on the talk pages of the article.

Passed 5-0

11) Sustained edit warring is wasteful of resources and destructive to morale.

Passed 5-0

Findings of Fact

Focus of disputes

1) User:Trey Stone has engaged in editing disputes with Davenbelle, User:Viajero and others with respect to a set of articles which generally concern journalistic reports of recent events in the political spectrum; these include Allan Nairn, Amy Goodman, Death squad, Suharto, Isle of Youth, Corporate media, Henry Kissinger, and Fidel Castro.

Passed 8-0

Trey Stone's perspective

2) It is User:Trey Stone's contention that Davenbelle, User:Viajero and others are editing from a left-wing or anti-American point of view.

Passed 7-0 with 1 abstention

Davenbelle and Viajero's perspective

3) It seems to Davenbelle and Viajero that User:Trey Stone is discourteous and dismissive and while challenging the credibility of the sources they reference, fails to produce references on his own part while justifiying his own edits through argument rather than reference to credible sources.

Passed 7-0 with 1 abstention

Battle fatigue

4) Trey Stone and Davenbelle have, due to a long history of struggle (in Trey Stone's case dating back to User:172, no longer an active editor), ceased attempting to discuss edits with one another, relying on repetitive reversions. They assume bad faith, make no attempt to produce references for their edits, and revert even the coding of images; see page history and talk page of Isle of Youth.

Passed 4-0 with 3 abstentions

Allan Nairn

Creation of the article by Viajero

5.1) On February 5, 2005, User:Viajero created the new article Allan Nairn,[1]. This article is well written, but based on sources which share Allan Nairn's (and presumably Viajero's) point of view. It characterizes Allan Nairn as a "highly-respected American investigative journalist." It includes the content of a number of Allan Nairn's published allegations, for example, the "story of the US government's role in establishing and funding the Haitian paramilitary death squad, FRAPH (the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti)," published in Nation.

Passed 4-3

"NPOVing" by Trey Stone

5.2) Editing progressed normally for a period with most edits by Viajero until on April 24, 2005 User:Trey Stone made a number of changes with the comment, "NPOVing this sorry article" [2]. Trey Stone's edits, other than characterizing Allan Naim as a "[[left-wing politics|left-wing]]" investigative journalist, consisted of replacing language used by Allan Naim with apologetic language, for example, he replaced "death squads" with "repressive actions being taken by the country's military government." Material was also added which puts reported material in context, for example, he added "amidst a chaotic counterinsurgency campaign against Marxist guerrillas active in both urban and rural areas." to the sentence, "In 1980, Nairn visited Guatemala, in the middle of a campaign of assassination against student leaders," Particular attention was paid to the report concerning FRAPH, replacing "In an article published in The Nation in 1994, Nairn broke the story of the US government's role in establishing and funding the Haitian paramilitary death squad, FRAPH (the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti)." with "In an article published in The Nation in 1996, Nairn raised questions about possible links between the U.S. CIA, DIA, and the anti-Aristide death squad FRAPH (Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti). However, his report relies heavily on a single source, and the Clinton administration had publicly come out against the Haitian military regime of General Raúl Cédras, accused of supporting the group. Furthermore, the deposed Jean-Bertrand Aristide was reinstated as President of Haiti through U.S. military intervention in 1994." Trey Stone, however, cites no sources for his revisions and additions.

Passed 8-0

Edit warring

5.3 Following User:Trey Stone's revisions User:Viajero and others attempted discussion on Talk:Allan Nairn but this was unproductive. Edit warring has continued to the present with User:Mel Etitis and User:Davenbelle replacing Viajero as Trey Stone's adversaries. His opponents maintain that Trey Stone's edits amount to original research and characterize them as "editorializing." Trey Stone, on his part, views his additions as adding perspective, for example in this edit which he characterizes as "once again RVing the lie about unambiguous U.S. support for FRAPH." However, he cites no source other than his own reasoning. See i've proven my case, i will not discuss this any further

Passed 8-0

Corporate media

6) Trey Stone (talk · contribs) complains about Davenbelle (talk · contribs) editing of Corporate media

Passed 5-0

Davenbelle

6.1) A detailed analysis of Davenbelle (talk · contribs) edits to Corporate media shows dozens of reverts with no citation of authority and no discussion on the talk page regarding the dispute.

Passed 5-0

Viajero

6.3) A detailed analysis of Viajero (talk · contribs) edits to Corporate media shows point of view copyediting without citation of sources, addition of useful information but no participation in the extensive reversions engaged in by the other editors.

Passed 4-0

Remedies

Trey Stone banned from certain articles

4.1) User:Trey Stone is banned for one year from editing articles which concern politics, particularly articles which concern the foreign relations of the United States.

Passed 6-0

Davenbelle banned from certain articles

5) User:Davenbelle is banned for one year from editing articles which concern politics, particularly articles which concern the foreign relations of the United States.

Passed 4-1

Talk page discussion encouraged

7) All involved contributors are urged to make better use of talk pages, in particular to consider whether language used in articles complies with the policy of NPOV. Note that Trey Stone is not banned from any talk pages.

Passed 5-0

Enforcement

1) In the event User:Trey Stone edits articles which concern politics, especially those which concern United States foreign policy he may be briefly banned, up to one week for repeated offenses. However the one year editing ban will not reset.

Passed 6-0

2) In the event any user, either User:Trey Stone or User:Davenbelle edits articles which concern politics, especially those which concern United States foreign policy he may be briefly banned, up to one week for repeated offenses.

Passed 4-1