Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pat8722/Evidence

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/index.php?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&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. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs, a much shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and answer and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues.

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.

The Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as Arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Evidence presented by BorgHunter

Edit warring

Pat8722 has been a continuous edit warrior on Wikipedia, and repeatedly (one might say purposefully) misunderstood the purpose and import of the three-revert rule.

• [2] — Note "Three reverts a day are permitted" and "my daily alottment of three reverts".
• [3] "[R]evert wars happen all the time in wikipedia, and sometimes they are the only way to get others to make an effort at achieving consensus"
• [4] Edit summary of "Third revert for today, see you on Sunday".

I (and many others) have tried to get Pat to realize the intent of the 3RR: [5] [6]

Earlier reverts from his RfC

1. March 31: [7]
2. April 3: [8]
3. April 4: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] - 6 reverts within a few hours. Pat was blocked for this 3RR, and since then he limits himself to exactly three reverts on most days.
4. User:William M. Connolley blocked Pat for the 3RR. WMC is uninvolved: he handles many 3RR requests, and does not edit the Libertarianism article. Despite WMC's unbiased status, Pat accused WMC of blocking him for political reasons, called him a "coward", a "liar", and "incompetent". [15]
5. April 8: [16] [17] [18]
6. April 10: [19] [20] [21] - three reverts within six hours
7. April 11: [22] [23] [24] - three reverts within two hours
8. April 15: [25] [26] [27] - three reverts in less than an hour
9. April 17-18: [28] [29] [30]
10. April 20: [31] [32] [33] - three reverts within an hour
11. April 21: [34] [35] [36] - three reverts within ten minutes
12. April 23: [37]
13. April 25: [38] [39] [40] - three reverts in a little over an hour
14. April 26: [41] [42] [43] - three reverts in less than a half hour
15. April 27: [44] [45] [46] - three reverts in less than a half hour
16. Pat also tried to modify Wikipedia:Vandalism so that "circular definitions" would be considered vandalism, which he believed would give him a license to revert endlessly at libertarianism: [47], [48]. See talk page.

Assumption of bad faith

Pat8722 also has assumed bad faith on more than one occasion, notably when he was first blocked, and also to those with whom he disagrees on the direction of an article.

• [49] in response to his first block, which I made for clear gaming of the 3RR.
• [50], asking for me to be desysopped.
• More of the same: [51]

—BorgHunter (talk) 03:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Evidence presented by {your user name}

First assertion

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion, for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring". Here you would list specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring

Second assertion

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion, for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks". Here you would list specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.

Evidence presented by {your user name}

First assertion

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion, for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring". Here you would list specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring

Second assertion

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion, for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks". Here you would list specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.