Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yuber/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.

Yuber's suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Would you please place any accounts or ips which you believe to be Yuber's sockpuppets here. Fred Bauder 17:37, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

62.252.0.6 (talk · contribs) [2] [3] - This undoubtedly belongs to the same dynamic IP address range as the anon user below; not likely to be Yuber. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 05:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
62.252.0.7 (talk · contribs) - Contributions show lots of knowledge of and interest in the UK: television shows, university system, towns. I don't believe this is Yuber. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
62.253.64.15 (talk · contribs) - - not likely to be Yuber; too many edits to articles that Yuber would never be interested in (see contributions). a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:41, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Uses "colour" in an edit summary [4], British spelling. Also, I interacted with this anon IP, and I interacted with Yuber, and they don't have the same "voice." This post, for example, [5] is definitely not Yuber's writing. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

69.217.199.179 (talk · contribs) - Apartheid editor (AE); not Yuber; see my note below. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
212.175.113.52 (talk · contribs) - Uses the word "vandalising," British spelling SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
217.121.64.74 (talk · contribs) - Somebody who only edited MSN messenger articles; not Yuber a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:44, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
69.209.207.148 (talk · contribs) - AE SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:40, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
69.209.226.32 (talk · contribs) - AE
69.216.244.52 (talk · contribs) - AE
69.217.196.142 (talk · contribs) - AE
69.209.224.210 (talk · contribs) - AE

Heraclius (talk · contribs)

Note: that these are dynamic IPs of the same person.Guy Montag 21:10, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

At least some of the IP addresses above have been associated with an anonymous editor and obvious anti-Semite who's been causing trouble around Jewish-related pages since April, as well as David Irving and, I believe, Apartheid. He has also edited using lots of user accounts, some of them abusively named, all blocked now. I'm pretty certain it's not Yuber. I'll be more precise about which IP addresses are involved as soon as I find the information. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:02, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The first IP address can not be the same person as user:Heraclius because Heraclius actually posted messages to the anon user on his talk page.[6]. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:08, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that done before in an effort to cover tracks. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:09, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I found the information, and of the above, 69.217.199.179 (talk · contribs), 69.209.207.148 (talk · contribs), 69.209.226.32 (talk · contribs), 69.216.244.52 (talk · contribs), 69.217.196.142 (talk · contribs), and 69.209.224.210 (talk · contribs) belong to the so-called Apartheid editor, not Yuber. I'm going to put AE next to them in Guy's list. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:16, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, how about this person: 217.121.64.74 (talk · contribs). His/her 2 article edits are focused only on MSN Messenger. [7]. Why is he or she in the list? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Although this person: 62.253.64.15 (talk · contribs) did edit a few articles that Yuber might have edited, just looking at the large number of contributions he/she has made to wikipedia articles, shows that the person has edited a wide variety of articles - most of them ones that Yuber would never have even been interested in. (e.g. Harry Houdini, Kate Bush, Michael Jackson and fabric softener). --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:34, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses believed to have been used by Yuber[edit]

I believe the following are some of the open proxies that were used by Yuber. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:32, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I got these addresses from the user-page history [8] of User:Tranlen. The user page was set up on June 10 by User:Tranlen, and edited to contain a list of editors perceived as supportive of Islam. [9] Yuber deleted this list on June 22 [10] and from then until August 10, a series of open proxies added names of editors perceived to be hostile to Islam, splitting the list of names into those believed to be Jews and others believed not to be. Other than Tranlen, the only user name in the list of editors to the page is Yuber, and many of the edits the proxies made are edits consistent with issues of importance to Yuber. See below for an example.

In my view, the use of these open proxies shows extreme bad faith, and it was within this context that much of Guy's reverting during that period took place; that is, he believed a lot of the time that he was reverting the edits of a temp-banned and bad-faith disruptive user. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:17, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

None of these open proxies show any connection to Guy Montag or to me for that matter. This is very shaky evidence and even if you were able to prove that it was me, none of them can be shown to be acting in "extreme bad faith".Yuber^(talk) 00:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That would seem to be some way sort of an outright denial. Alai 00:13, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point in outright denying all this? So far it has been that as long as someone has said that an IP address is me, it is automatically assumed to be me. No one is taking into account the fact that there are 2 other banned editors that show up occasionally that can be perceived to be editing from my viewpoint.Yuber^(talk) 00:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Example of open proxy appearing to be Yuber[edit]

June 22-24, 2005[edit]

202.83.175.156 (talk · contribs)

18:16 June 22 Deleted the first few paragraphs of Islamophobia, so that the intro began with "Islamophobia is fear and/or hatred of Islam," something Yuber had been reverting to for months e.g. May 24
Also on June 22, was used to violate 3RR against User:Germen at Ma_malakat_aymanukum by reverting to Yuber's version.

User:Yuber reverted at:
16.48 June 22
17:09 June 22
18:03 June 22
Then 202.83.175.156 made the 4th revert to Yuber's version at 18:26 June 22.

21:29 June 23 Added a list of editors to the user page of User:Tranlen, which only Yuber had previously edited.
17:02 June 24 Blanked and vandalized User:Enviroknot's talk page, someone Yuber had been in constant conflict with.
17:18 June 24 At Daniel Pipes, moved higher in the text that Pipes was an Islamophobe, something that Yuber had done a couple of times, for example three days earlier on June 21 and on June 10.

Evidence that Yuber intended to violate tempban[edit]

Yuber sent an e-mail to Guy Montag clearly indicating his intention to violate the arbcom injunction. I'm not sure about the etiquette of posting a private e-mail to this page, or of forwarding it to the arbitrators. Could one of the arbitrators advise, please? The reason the e-mail is significant in relation to Guy is that it shows the context within which much of Guy's reverting took place. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fred advised me to forward the e-mail to arbitration committee members, so I've done that. There's also this evidence from Yuber, posted to Talk:Jihad on Jun 18, just before the tempban:

"Yuber" might be restrained from editing, but I certainly won't ;).Yuber^(talk) 03:09, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) [11]

SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:22, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Moved comments to Wikipedia talk: Requests for arbitration/Yuber/Evidence SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:29, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence presented by Guy Montag[edit]

06/30/05[edit]

Yuber's first edit appeared in the Golan Heights, where he began to insert propagandistic pictures of Quientra into the article. This was his first revert war. A little later he expanded his activities to other articles, where he minimally cooperated. Over time, after a long discussion over an innacurate, POV passage in the Arab Israeli conflict article, Yuber's edits became more brazen. At first he contributed to talk, but soon after a 3 day discussion in several articles and the relatively lax reprimands he recieved for disregarding the rules, he openly became hostile to the spirit and community of wikipedia.
- Yuber's approach to editing articles became extremely confrontational. Often his very first edit of a contested article will be a complete or substantial reverts to previous versions of articles, without any prior discussion in Talk:. Here are some examples of that behavior (note, none of these reverts involved simple cases of vandalism):
Golan Heights (his very first edit on Wikipedia): [12]
Names of the Levant: [13]
Operation Litani: [14]
Jizya: [15]
Fatah: [16]
Dhimmi: [17]
Israeli-Palestinian conflict:[18]
Muhammad: [19]
Phoenicia: [20]
Jewish Defense League: [21]
Saudi Arabia: [22]
User talk:KaintheScion: [23]
Israeli terrorism: [24]
Mordechai Vanunu: [25]
Suicide bombing: [26]
User:Enviroknot: [27]
State of Palestine: [28]
Cyprus dispute: [29]
Six-Day War: [30]
Gaza Strip: [31]
Palestinian: [32]
Slavery: [33]
Cave of the Patriarchs: [34]
1982 Invasion of Lebanon: [35]
9/11 domestic complicity conspiracy theories: [36]
Terrorism: [37]

Yuber edits a narrow range of articles, and he has been involved in a series of revert and edit wars with other editors on many of them, to the point that recently at least 4 articles have had to be protected soon after he began editing them. In fact, it is hard to find a controversial article that he has edited and not been involved in a revert war on. Sometimes the reverting seems particularly pointless; for example, when User:Jayjg made a description more NPOV, by changing the phrase "criticized as an Islamophobe" to "accused of being an Islamophobe" [38], he immediately reverted him without comment or even an indication he was reverting: [39] His subsequent Talk: comment is to just assert that "criticized" is a "more accurate term".[40] He is reverted by another editor, and does not respond to further discussion on the subject in Talk:, but returns two weeks later to revert to his version.[41] A number of editors have expressed extreme frustration with Yuber's propensity to revert.

A comprehensive list can be found here [42]

Evidence presented by Humus sapiens[edit]

User:Yuber engaged in bad faith editing and hostile behavior to those who don't share his views. He removed sourced material, sometimes without even mentioning it in edit summaries or Talk pages, made unsourced claims, misquoted his own sources, quoted known hoaxes, claimed false consensus, attempted to poison the well and disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. A sample:

6 May[edit]

Bad faith: Yuber claims false consensus: [43] during an ongoing discussion.

11 May - 13 May[edit]

Bad faith: Yuber deletes a sourced quote: [44] without mentioning this deletion in the summary. After it is restored, he removes it three more times: [45], [46], [47], then poisons the well: The following letter is only found in the history of Palestine by Moshe Gil, a Jewish historian...: [48], and again: [49], then inserts an unsourced claim: [50], and again claiming His religion is very relevant, as the rest of the commentators in here's religions are relevant: [51]. When he is pointed out that religious/ethnic identities for other historians are not mentioned [52], Yuber comments: "I think we both know this guy is a Jew, a proud one at that": [53].
WP:Civility: In Talk:Jizya, Yuber insists the quote is unreliable because he hasn't seen it before, then he doubts Gil is unbiased, then he insists the site the quote is from is anti-Islamic, then claims that book reviews praising Gil's work are "pro-Israel", then threatens to retaliate by inserting anti-Sharon quotes in Ariel Sharon: [54].
Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point: Yuber inserts an entire article into another [55]

14 May[edit]

Bad faith: Yuber follows up on his May 13 threat and adds purported quotes, including known hoaxes, from a propaganda website: [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65]. When his attention is called to the fact some of these quotes are well-known internet hoaxes [66], [67], he still keeps reinserting them, insisting that leaving them out would be a "double standard": [68], [69], [70], [71], [72], [73], [74], [75], [76]

Even after the source for those quotes is evidenced to be unreliable, Yuber keeps violating Wikipedia:Check your facts policy, insisting the "source is credible": [77], [78], [79].

28 May[edit]

NPOV: Yuber squarely blames Israel for murder in an article describing a highly sensitive and still inconclusive case, even though a large part of that article describes the ongoing controversy. His summary: "...I try to NPOV articles": [80]

20 June[edit]

Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms, poisoning the well: In articles about certain people and books Yuber adds the following unsourced text: "some think he is an Islamophobe" or "critics have said that it is just another example of Islamophobia": [81], [82], [83], repeated [84], and again [85].

Evidence presented by SlimVirgin[edit]

I'm presenting this evidence to show that the main problem with Yuber was not content, but behavior, and specifically his tendency to edit-by-revert, which was the bulk of what he did during his time as an editor, at least that I'm aware of. I've concentrated below on one article, Jizya, and on just one paragraph, but Yuber acted like this on many or most of the pages he edited.

I've included below diffs showing some of my attempts to reason with him. During May and June, I also exchanged several e-mails with him asking him to reconsider his approach.

I've also included the dates he was blocked for 3RR, but there were other 3RR violations where he was not blocked, either because I ignored it in an effort to reach an understanding with him, or where I or others offered him the opportunity to revert himself.

May 15[edit]

13:45 May 15, 2005

Yuber deletes "The imposition of jizyah on non-Muslims is mandated by Sura 9.29 of the Qur'an".

He replaces it with "The word itself comes from the root jaza which means compensation, though it is unclear if the Qur'an refers to a monetary one. The word jizya is taken from Sura 9.29 of the Qur'an" [86]

He continues reverting this one paragraph from May 15 until the arbcom temporary injunction: mostly straight reverts, sometimes with a tweak of the wording.

May 16[edit]

10:22, May 16, 2005

Yuber blocked for five hours for 3RR violation at Golan Heights [87]

May 16-18[edit]

Between May 16 -18, Yuber and I exchanged several e-mails about his reverting in which I offered to help with his edits if he would stop reverting. For example, on May 16, I wrote: "Anyway, my offer stands for when you come back. If you stop the reverting and edit in good faith, I'll help you if I can, if you want help. And if there really are sockpuppets following you around, let me know about it, with their user names, and I'll look into it."

May 17[edit]

23:02 May 17, 2005

Jizya revert [88]

23:08 May 17, 2005

Jizya revert [89]

23.14 May 17, 2005

Jizya revert [90]

23:33 May 17, 2005

I ask Yuber on his talk page to stop editing-by-revert. [91]

May 18[edit]

01:54 May 18, 2005

Yuber blocked for 24 hours for 3RR violation on another page [92]

May 21[edit]

05:09 May 21, 2005

Jizya revert [93]

May 22[edit]

05:49 May 22, 2005

Jizya revert [94]

May 23[edit]

01:18 May 23, 2005

Jizya revert [95]

23:13 May 23, 2005

Jizya revert [96]

May 25[edit]

02:46 May 25, 2005

Jizya revert [97]

10:33 May 25, 2005

Jizya revert [98]

23:17 May 25, 2005

Jizya revert [99]

23:22 May 25, 2005

Jizya revert [100]

May 26[edit]

02:44 May 26, 2005

Yuber blocked for 24 hours for 3RR violation on another page [101]

May 28[edit]

05:50 May 28, 2005

Jizya revert [102]

May 29[edit]

05:34 May 29, 2005

Jizya revert [103]

05:43 May 29, 2005

Jizya revert [104]

05:47 May 29, 2005

Jizya revert [105]

20:02 May 29, 2005

I protect Jizya [106]

May 30[edit]

23:33 May 30, 2005

I ask him again on his talk page to stop reverting. [107]

June 09[edit]

03:49 Jun 9, 2005

I unprotect Jizya [108]

22:58 Jun 9, 2005

I again ask him on his talk page to stop reverting. [109]

June 13[edit]

22:55 Jun 13, 2005

I once again ask Yuber on his talk page to stop reverting, and suggest that he stop editing controversial pages for awhile. I also offer to help him. [110]

23:00 Jun 13, 2005

I post a message on his talk page in an effort to show some understanding of his situation. [111]

June 14[edit]

00:23 Jun 14, 2005

Jizya revert [112]

00:43 Jun 14, 2005

Jizya revert [113]

00:48 Jun 14, 2005

Jizya revert [114]

June 17[edit]

00:41 Jun 17, 2005

Jizya revert [115]

05:37 Jun 17, 2005

Jizya revert [116]

15:48 Jun 17, 2005

Jizya revert [117]

June 18[edit]

05:29 Jun 18, 2005

Jizya revert [118]

10:43 Jun 18, 2005

Blocked for 24 hours for 3RR violation on another page [119]

June 19[edit]

14:52 Jun 19, 2005

Jizya revert [120]

June 20[edit]

01:46 Jun 20, 2005

I protect Jizya [121]

June 23[edit]

02:50 Jun 23, 2005

Blocked for 24 hours for violating arbcom injunction [122]

Evidence presented against Guy Montag[edit]

The following is evidence that was presented against Guy Montag (talk · contribs) on wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber/Proposed_decision. Sections of the discussion which do not pertain to Guy Montag have been removed by me. - a-n-o-n-y-m 22:19, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Even when opposed by multiple users and IP's, Guy Montag still reverts again and again and again. Guy Montag is a vicious, disruptive editor that has shown he is not willing to cooperate on anything and he should be banned as Yuber. He has reverted no less than 10 times on the bethlehem page. He also says that there is no consensus when he doesn't agree, showing that he lacks a fundamental understanding of how wiki works. Even when opposed by multiple editors he will not back down. He is a crusader for the far-right. Here is but a short list of a recent edit war over Bethlehem, Guy Montag not a serial reverter, what a ridiculous statement!

More evidence of Guy Montag's vicious reverting style can be found on this page, removing comments he doesn't agree with [131]. Also one needs only too look at the history of the Nablus page to see even more serial reverting:

That's about 25 or so reverts before the article was protected, in about 8 days. I don't see how any sane person can say this isn't serial reverting. unsigned by User:160.81.221.42

Evidence presented by <username>[edit]

<timestamp2>
- What happened.

<timestamp3>
- What happened.

<day2> <month>[edit]

<timestamp1>
- What happened.

<timestamp2>
- What happened.

<timestamp3>
- What happened.