text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Chuck F/Proposed decision

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority aye vote will be enacted.
 * Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority aye or nay vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.
 * Items that receive a majority abstentions will need to go through an amendment process and be re-voted on once.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator in parenthesis after his time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were enacted.

There are 2 arbitrators recused and one inactive, so 5 is a majority.

Following official policy
1) Contributors are expected to follow Wikipedia official policy, particularly the three-revert rule, prohibition against personal attacks, and neutral point of view policy.
 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 15:44, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Neutral point-of-view
2) Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view (NPOV) policy contemplates inclusion of full expression of all significant diverse points of view regarding all aspects of any subject on which there is division of opinion.

Now reads:

Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view (NPOV) policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view regarding any subject on which there is division of opinion.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 14:11, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 00:29, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 01:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 02:06, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 18:32, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * "All aspects of any subject" leaves articles open to the inclusion of mindless trivia and extreme minority (even minority of one) ideas on issues. See my proposed alternate wording (based on wording on the NPOV policy page). ---mav 03:35, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I hope the above changes meet your objections. Fred Bauder 14:28, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain

2.1) Editors should take care to present each of the significant views on a subject fairly. They should characterize disputes, making sure to not assert any one position as correct. If we are to represent the dispute fairly, we should present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties. Reasonable persons who represent each of the major viewpoints should be able to look at the resulting text and agree that their views are presented sympathetically and as completely as possible (within the context of the discussion). This is the essence of the NPOV policy.

 * Aye:
 * mav 03:35, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Fred Bauder 14:28, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC) Wordy and potentially misleading.

 * Abstain

Removal of Arbitration evidence
3) Removing evidence from an Arbitration page is unacceptable.
 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 15:44, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Unexplained deletions on controversial articles
4) Unexplained deletions of portions of controversial articles are unacceptable.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 15:44, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point
5) Editors should not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.

 * Aye:
 * David Gerard 13:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 15:44, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 16:35, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Changing of votes
6) Changing the votes of other people in a Wikipedia poll such as Votes for deletion is a serious offense.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 23:14, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 23:33, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:18, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 06:04, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:24, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain

Revert warring
1) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have engaged in multiple revert wars on multiple pages on widely varying topics, including libertarianism, see page history, Exxon Mobil, Wal-Mart, Michael Badnarik, United States Libertarian Party, General Motors, McJob, Ron Paul, Roppongi Hills, Temple University, Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, Dred Scott v. Sandford, libertarian socialism, libertarian theory, Libertarian Party and Libertarian League. Often he brazenly ignored the three-revert rule, reverting dozens of times in a very short period. Many times he did not use talk pages or even edit summaries, or used them as forums for abusing other users. He did so even after being advised of policy and warned about his revisions. He continued to revert even after being reverted and asked to stop by dozens of well-respected users. He also continued to revert even after being temporarily blocked and having a RfC brought aganist him. (See the evidence page).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 01:20, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:32, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * For heavens sake just look at the page history of any of the cited articles! --mav

 * Abstain:

Removal of templates
2) ChuckF removed the template  from an article that he was in a revert war over (the revert war dealt with POV issues). (See the evidence page).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 01:27, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I changed the wording to be more specific)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * The cited example seems unobjectionable. Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * He was in the revert war over POV issues and he removed notice of the article's POV. --mav

 * Abstain:

Removal of content
3) ChuckF has repeatedly removed content and external links from articles in order to impose a point-of-view on them. In many cases he has given insufficient reasons for the removal. (See the evidence page). For example removing large blocks of information with the edit summary "Minor" "Fixed spelling".

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt David Gerard 01:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:07, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 03:38, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) (changed my mind since it involves our NPOV policy - which does need to be followed)

 * Nay:

:# No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:
 * Deals with a content issue and thus outside of our jurisdiction. --mav 01:28, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Agree with mav, although I think it's borderline.)
 * Actually, you're right David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC) The example's pretty clear.

Personal attacks
4) ChuckF has made many personal attacks. (See the evidence page).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) I've seen plenty of worse cases, but I see quite a few there.
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:
 * I'd like to see some specific examples. --mav 00:27, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
5) ChuckF has used sockpuppets in violation of the sockpuppet policy, having created them to deliberately violate or evade Wikipedia policy. Examples include 203.112.19.195–210.142.29.125, 200.55.11.49, and 208.62.52.1). (See the evidence page).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) Could be worded better, but we get the point.
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) I've added another clause to the sentence. How's that?
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 01:56, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) (If using open proxies counts, then what Chuck F did does count as sockpuppetry.)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:16, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

:# No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Removal of evidence
6) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have removed evidence from Requests for arbitration/Reithy/Evidence. (See the evidence page).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * He did it but seems to misunderstand that the other party was entitled to present evidence against him too Fred Bauder 19:24, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * I added the diff. --mav
 * That deletion may have been accidental. See --mav 01:03, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (In light of mav's comment that the deletion may have been accidental.)

 * Abstain:

Ignoring previous Arbitration Committee ruling
7) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have ignored previous Arbitration Committee temporary injunctions. Specifically, ChuckF has made edits to the main namespace several times (from 00:46 (UTC) Nov 16, 2004 to 03:05 (UTC) Nov 25, 2004) in violation of an Arbitration Committee order. (See the evidence page). (violation of a temporary injunction at Requests for arbitration/Reithy)

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 00:55, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 19:49, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Ruling ignored not specified and no specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 15:27, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a link. --mav

 * Abstain:

NPOV
8) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have repeatedly edited articles in a point-of-view manner. (See the evidence page). Examples include (Removal of material with the comment "More Article Bias removing";  (Removing all criticism and placing it in separate article);  (Removing more prominant link to critical article);  ("POV nonsense").

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) Could be better worded, but we get the idea.
 * David Gerard David Gerard 01:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:50, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 07:50, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC) (NPOV is a policy that needs to be enforced - but we do need to be careful not to rule on the validity content)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Content issue and thus outside of our jurisdiction. --mav 01:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Although I think at some point a determination that someone is a POV warrior will be necessary, here there's enough other stuff that it's not needed.)
 * As above - this one is a bit weak - David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't like the potential precedent these abstentions/rejections set. The breaches of the NPOV policy here are clear and obvious - can we enforce the NPOV policy in regards to someone who persistently violates it, or can't we? I've objected to findings in the past that have attempted to refer to article content as POV/NPOV, but I think the pattern of behaviour here is pretty clear. Ambi 06:58, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism
9) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have repeatedly vandalized articles and created nonsense articles, often disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Examples include 'Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit', Nut (hardware), and NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics, in addition to vandalizing a userpage. (See Requests for arbitration/Chuck F/Evidence).

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 23:05, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 01:49, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) (using open proxies to evade blocks is vandalism and in direct oppositon to policy) mav 01:49, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:17, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:25, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

:# No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 23:31, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Added. --mav

 * Abstain:

Changing of votes on VfD
10) ChuckF (and various proxies and IP adresses associated with him) have repeatedly engaged in the malicious changing of votes on Votes for deletion (VfD). Examples include Votes for deletion/FahrenHype 9/11, Votes for deletion/Market libertarianism, Votes for deletion/NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics.,

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 23:05, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 01:52, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 02:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 06:04, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 03:18, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:26, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

:# No specific evidence showing the behavior cited Fred Bauder 23:31, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC) Yes, but there is no valid finding of fact that that is Chuck F's sockkpuppet.
 * Two examples added. --mav

 * Abstain:

One-week ban for personal attacks
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are banned for one week for personal attacks.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) I have little tolerance for personal attacks, particularly combined with other policy violations.
 * Ambi 03:43, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see a huge pattern of this. --mav 01:57, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Two-month ban for reverts
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are banned for two months for repeated and malicious revert warring and violation of the three-revert rule.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) Feels a touch long to me, but not unjustly so.
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem near long enough Fred Bauder 20:05, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * See the rever warring section. --mav
 * We just imposed a 3 month probation period in Gzornenplatz et al for people doing the same type of thing. A probation seems more in order here as well. --mav 02:00, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Changed my vote after reading Mav's alternative proposal. Ambi 02:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Voting for section-area ban.)

 * Abstain:

One-month ban for disregard for the previous Arbitration ruling
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are banned for one month for blatant disregard for the Arbitration community's previous rulings.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * mav 02:14, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems a bit long Fred Bauder 20:07, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * See 2.7 Ignoring previous Arbitration Committee ruling --mav

 * Abstain:

One-week ban for removal of evidence
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are banned for one week for removing evidence from Requests for arbitration/Reithy/Evidence.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) I'd like longer.
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC) He seems to not have understood that the other party could present evidence against him. Fred Bauder 20:08, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * That one single edit looks like it was an accident. --mav 02:19, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Looks like an accident.)
 * Ambi 01:19, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Ban on editing some articles
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are hereby banned from editing any article related to libertarianism, socialism, or political ideology. Should he do so, any administrator may block him for a length of time up onto and including one week. Administrators are authorized to determine what relates to libertarianism, socialism, or political ideology at their discretion.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) Shouldn't part of this be under remedies, though?
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) Do you mean enforcement?
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Probation and parole is a better option at this point. --mav 02:48, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Three-month parole
For repeated violations of the three revert rule, Chuck F is placed on a 3 month general parole. If during this period he violates the other remedies passed in this case, then he can, at the discretion of the Committee, be ordered to serve the rest of his parole period banned from editing the English Wikipedia. This parole period starts after Chuck F successfully serves whatever bans may be imposed by the ArbCom.

 * Aye:
 * mav 00:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) (this is the same remedy we gave in Gzornenplatz et al)
 * Ambi 02:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 05:04, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 20:14, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:28, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Actually, I don't think this is a wise move. As far as I can see, the problems with Chuck have been largely limited to liberalism-related articles. I'd sooner see him banned from editing that subset of articles than this, which is very likely (based on his behaviour during the last case) to amount to a three-month ban from Wikipedia in general. Ambi 01:14, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

One-year revert probation
Chuck F is hereby limited to 1 revert per article per day and must discuss all reverts on the relevant talk page. This probation will last for 1 year and will start as soon as Chuck F is done serving whatever bans may be imposed by the ArbCom. Admins can treat anything more than 1 revert as a violation of the 3RR and act accordingly. If Chuck F demonstrates good behavior in a minimum of 6 weeks, then he can petition the ArbCom to stay this ruling.

 * Aye:
 * mav 02:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:28, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 05:04, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 20:17, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:28, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

One-month ban for vandalism/use of open proxies
Chuck F is hereby banned for 1 month for vandalism and use of open proxies to violate policy and to evade blocks.

 * Aye:
 * mav 02:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:28, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 01:39, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 05:04, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 20:17, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 05:28, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Removal of content
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) are hereby prohibited from removal of information or substantive content (including external links and references/sources) from any article. Should he do so, any administrator may block him for a length of time up onto and including 24 hours. Administrators are authorized to determine what constitutes a removal of information or content at their discretion.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 20:17, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * No supporting finding of fact Fred Bauder 15:41, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * See the probation and parole sections above. --mav 02:52, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Above remedies are better.)

 * Abstain:

Required edit summaries
ChuckF (and all user accounts and IP addresses used by him) must give legitimate edit summary for every edit he makes, excepting those to his userspace. Should he not do so, any administrator may block him for a length of time up to and including 24 hours. Administrators are authorized to determine what constitutes a legitimate edit summary at their discretion.

 * Aye:
 * Neutralitytalk 03:15, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ambi 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * David Gerard 13:39, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 16:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 16:38, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC) see this edit.

 * Nay:

 * Delirium 12:29, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC) (Edit summaries don't seem to be an issue in the findings of fact.)

 * Abstain:
 * I'd like to see a finding for this first. --mav 02:55, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

General

 * I declare my intention to remain recused in this case. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 02:15, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
 * I also will remain recused in this case - due to past mediation work -- sannse (talk) 20:19, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * That makes the required majority five Arbitrators. Neutralitytalk 03:33, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

Motion to close
Four Aye votes needed to close case

 * mav 00:44, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (granted there are a couple items that may pass, but I think enough time for their passage has already been given and the passed items will be just.)

 * Oppose closing. There's still a few things that could well pass, and are only being prevented because of either technicalities (which, if people are voting against remedies because of them, means we need to fix up, rather than ignore), or because Fred chose to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point in giving Neutrality this crash course in remedy writing (and Fred still doesn't appear to have reviewed his prior votes). Ambi 01:25, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * OK - fair enough. --mav 02:40, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Please consider and refine the proposed principle regarding NPOV before closing. I'd still like to see some examples of personal attacks, too. Also I think we are delivering a slap on the wrist to a very serious offender, a systemic point of view warrior. I would welcome some stronger sanctions. Fred Bauder 16:42, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * New motion:

 * 1) All items that could likely pass have passed. It is time to close. --mav 21:37, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutralitytalk 22:42, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Fred Bauder 23:45, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) ➥the Epopt 01:08, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Ambi 10:00, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Still oppose closing. We have a new proposal that all of two people have voted on. Heck, trying to get you people to close the Darwin case was like pulling teeth - why the rush with this one? We need to work out how to handle NPOV disputes, because this won't be the last time this comes up, and we shouldn't be closing cases just because we can't be bothered working out a solution. We did it with consensus with Antifinnugor - and we can do it with NPOV here. Ambi 06:11, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Er, what new proposal? The one I made? I only made it due to some wording I didn't like for the other NPOV item. When the wording was changed, I changed my vote on the older item. --mav 09:44, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Ambi is an idiot. Ambi 10:00, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Typo/capitalization

After checking the edits made on this project, I notice that half of them seemed to be capitalizing phrases like "Mosul Province", as intended, and half of them were marking these as mistakes. After checking some professional news sources, it appears that non-capitalization is generally acceptable. So it appears that this project for systematic capitalization was, after all, a bad idea. Thanks to everyone who participated; your edits were very educational. -- Beland 14:26, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Wikipedia:Typo/capitalization


text:
Jimmy Hollywood

Jimmy Hollywood is a 1994 American comedy film written and directed by Barry Levinson and starring Joe Pesci and Christian Slater. It was released on April 1, 1994, and was a box office bomb, grossing just $3 million against its $30 million budget.

Plot
Jimmy Alto is a failing actor living in Los Angeles. After increasing frustration with his career going nowhere and with crime in the city, Jimmy, along with his "spaced-out" best friend William, decides to take the law into his own hands.

After losing his job as a waiter, Jimmy transforms himself into "Jericho," leader of a mock-vigilante group that videotapes criminals and then turns them over to the police. Jimmy enjoys the free publicity, anonymously, but eventually the police begin to close in on him, resulting in a tense standoff at the Grauman's Egyptian Theatre.

Cast

 * Joe Pesci as Jimmy Alto / Jericho
 * Christian Slater as William
 * Victoria Abril as Lorraine De La Peña
 * Robert LaSardo as ATM Robber
 * Earl Billings as Police Captain
 * Jason Beghe as Detective
 * Rob Weiss as himself / Director of "Urban Nomad"
 * Chad McQueen as himself / Audition Partner
 * Barry Levinson as himself / Director of "Life Story"
 * Harrison Ford as himself (uncredited)

Production
Robbie Robertson created music for the film and produced the soundtrack, with Howard Drossin providing additional music.

Reception
Rotten Tomatoes give the film a 28% approval rating from a sample of 25 reviews, with an average rating of 4.1/10. Roger Ebert gave the film 2$1/2$ stars out of 4. Ebert praises the actors "who find the right tone for the material", but criticize the plot, which "weighs them down". He concludes "Here are characters who might have really amounted to something, and we can see the movie dying right under their feet."

Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "C" on an A+ to F scale.

Produced on a budget of $30 million, the film made less than $4 million in ticket sales.

title: Jimmy Hollywood


text:
Józef Potocki

Józef Potocki (1673 – 19 May 1751) was a Polish nobleman (szlachcic), magnate, Great Hetman of the Crown.

Early life
Potocki was born in Stanisławów in 1673. He was a son of Andrzej Potocki and Anna Rysińska.

Career
Józef was considered as the richest magnate in Poland at that time. He was Voivode of Kijów Voivodship (Kyiv, also Kiev) from 1702 to 1744, Regimentarz generalny of the Crown Army since 1733, Great Crown Hetman since 1735, voivod of Poznań Voivodship since 1743, castellan of Kraków since 1748 and starost of Halicz, Warsaw, Leżajsk, Kołomyja, Czerwonogród, Śniatyn and Bolemów.

In 1703 he suppressed a peasant revolt led by Semen Paliy in Ukraine. He was originally a supporter of King August II of Poland but in 1705 he changed sides and became a supporter of King Stanisław I Leszczyński.

Józef was defeated at the battles of Kalisz 1706 and Koniecpol in 1708 and since 1709 after the Battle of Poltava he lived in exile in Hungary and Turkey. In 1714 he came back to Poland and became together with Teodor Potocki, the leader of the opposition to the "Familia" and the royal court. As part of this opposition, he contributed to the breaking-up of 9 sejms and prevented an increase of the army.

In 1733 during the War of the Polish Succession he again supported Stanisław I Leszczyński. He became a regimentarz of the Confederation of Dzików and guided the Polish confederate army against Russian and Saxon forces in several battles. On 28 February 1735 he recognized August III as King of Poland, becoming the Grand Hetman of the Crown, but conspired against him and the royal court with Turkey, Sweden and Prussia.

In 1719 he was granted the Order of the White Eagle, the highest decoration in Poland, and in 1742 became a chevalier of the Russian Orders of St. Andrew and St. Alexander Nevsky.

Personal life
Potocki was twice married, first to Wiktoria Leszczyńska. Together, they were the parents of: Zofia Potocka and Stanisław Potocki. After her death, he married Ludwika Mniszek.

Potocki died in Założce on 19 May 1751.

title: Józef Potocki


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Chuck F/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:.

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
''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 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 Dispute resolution have been highlighted in bold.

Sep 6

 * 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

 * 16:53, 9 Sep 2004
 * Chuck engages in an edit war on Libertarianism, eventually reaching eight reverts in the space of eleven hours:, , , , , , ,

Sep 13

 * 23:25: Chuck creates a nonsense page, 'Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit' to make a point about a VfD entry, a clear violation of Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.

Sep 14

 * 06:34, 14 Sep 2004
 * Chuck vandalizes Nut (hardware) by adding a reference to his invented "Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit", an action which he repeats the next day.

Sep 15

 * 13:59, 15 Sep 2004
 * Duk inquires about Chuck's fictional "Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit". Chuck does not respond.
 * 17:47, 15 Sep 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's vote on Votes for deletion/FahrenHype 9/11.

 * 18:43, 15 Sep 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's vote on Votes for deletion/Market_libertarianism.

Sep 30

 * 00:48, 30 Sep 2004
 * Chuck, using the anon IP 203.112.19.195, creates a new article NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics in response to European Union at the 2004 Summer Olympics being kept on VfD, another violation of Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. His intention in creating the page is made very clear by his comment on the subsequent VfD: "The article proves it's [sic] point well"
 * 19:07, 30 Sep 2004
 * Francs2000 asks Chuck not to change others' votes on VfD; Chuck ignores him and does so again the next day.

Oct 1

 * 06:56, 1 Oct 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's ambiguous comment to a keep vote on Votes for deletion/NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics. Does it again (to different users) at 15:32.

Oct 2

 * 13:18, 2 Oct 2004
 * Theresa knott warns Chuck about changing votes on VfD, noting that "I see you've been asked not to change people's votes before yet have ingnored [sic] the request". She threatens to block him for a week if he does so again.
 * 17:22, 2 Oct 2004
 * Chuck vandalizes Nut (hardware) again.

Oct 5

 * 12:28, 5 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes three factual paragraphs from Exxon Mobil. He does so again the next day.

Oct 7

 * 07:04, 7 Oct 2004
 * Chuck unilaterally (i.e., without previous discussion) removes all criticism from the Wal-Mart article, and puts it in a new article, Criticism of Wal-Mart, with nothing but a "See also" link to replace it.

Oct 8

 * 04:21, 8 Oct 2004
 * Ignoring requests not to remove material (from Rhobite, from Intrigue, and from Stormie), Chuck starts an edit war on Exxon Mobil, reverting the page five times in fourteen hours. He attempts to deceive by using anonymous IPs, and then referring to one of them in the third person when logged in:, , , ,.
 * 05:15, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite warns Chuck about removing factual content from articles.
 * 15:59, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite lists the Exxon Mobil dispute on RFC. Chuck alters the wording, and still ignores comments on Talk:Exxon Mobil.
 * 18:21, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite leaves a message for Chuck requesting mediation, which Chuck ignores.
 * 22:47, 8 Oct 2004
 * Stormie posts a note on Chuck's talk page asking him not to remove material on Exxon Mobil without replying to comments on talk.

Oct 9

 * 07:46, 9 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts an attempt to make Criticism of Wal-Mart more visible in the main Wal-Mart article.

Oct 10

 * 20:06, 10 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts Michael Badnarik four times in the space of a half-hour:, , ,

Oct 11

 * 01:01, 11 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite and Duk create and certify Requests_for_comment/Chuck_F, outlining much of the material documented here. Four other users (not including Reithy) eventually endorse the summary.

Oct 12

 * 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.

Oct 13

 * 06:56, 13 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes basic material from Wal-Mart summarizing Criticism of Wal-Mart. In the edit summary, he falsely claims that the previous version stated allegations "as if they were fact."

Oct 14

 * 16:13, 14 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes material from General Motors concerning the company's activities in WWII. Over the next few days, he is reverted by User:DavidLevinson and User:Bkonrad.
 * 16:26, Oct 14, 2004
 * Chuck, editing as 203.112.19.195, finds a sentence he doesn't like in McJob, and removes most of a different paragraph for good measure. The sentence is explained and restored, but Chuck immediately reverts back.

Oct 15

 * 04:41, 15 Oct 2004
 * Chuck, intent on reverting Reithy, removes acceptable material from Ron Paul. He continues reverting (not just a Reithy sock, but also Nat Krause), for a total of nine times in eleven hours:, , , , , , ,.

Oct 16

 * 03:41, 16 Oct 2004
 * Exactly twenty-three hours after beginning his revert spree on Ron Paul, and after numerous other (non-Reithy) editors spend a fair bit of time cleaning up and NPOVing the article, Chuck returns to revert back to his last version. He continues reverting (not just Reithy's sock, but also Radicalsubversiv and Golbez) until the page is protected:, ,.
 * 12:43, 16 Oct 2004
 * In another revert war on Michael Badnarik, Chuck reverts twelve times in fifty-two hours, ultimately resulting in page protection. Much of the edit war is with a Reithy sock, but he also repeatedly reverts Rhobite's attempts to reach a compromise., , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 17:11, 16 Oct 2004
 * Chuck makes another quick series of edits to Libertarianism, removing a large quantity of material with next-to-no information in edit summaries.

Oct 17

 * 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:, , , ,.

Oct 18

 * 19:13, 18 Oct 2004
 * In the midst of the Badnarik edit war, now in its second day, Rhobite reminds Chuck that he is violating the three revert rule, requests mediation, and threatens arbitration. Rhobite posts a fairly comprehensive request for mediation. Chuck responds, and offers "[Reithy's RFC] has about 15 more singatures then mine, and he's been causing a large amount more of problems then me" as justification for his behavior. Having now been threatened with arbitration, Chuck agrees to mediation, which is commenced with Sannse as mediator.

Oct 19

 * 16:23, 19 Oct 2004
 * After a few days of back and forth on Libertarianism, Chuck gets into a major edit war involving Reithy's socks, various anonymous IPs, and a handful of others. Chuck reverts 9 times in 46 hours:,, , , , , , , ,

Oct 20

 * 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

 * 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., , , , , ,

Oct 23

 * 15:56, 23 Oct 2004
 * Again blindly reverting Reithy, Chuck removes an apparently factual addition to Temple University. He proceeds to revert the article a total of eleven times in the next six hours:, , , , , , , , ,.
 * 18:17, 23 Oct 2004
 * In a revert war with Reithy over Roppongi Hills, Chuck reverts the article 12 times in 20 hours, mostly removing material he acknowledges is accurate:, , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 21:31, 23 Oct 2004
 * Infrogmation posts a note on Chuck's talk page: "Please use edit summaries as a description of you edits. Ranting or sniping at other editors is not an appropriate use," giving an example and pointing Chuck to Wikiquette.

Oct 30

 * 01:17, 30 Oct 2004
 * After a few days of back-and-forth, Chuck and Reithy resume a hot-and-heavy revert war on Roppongi Hills, with Chuck reverting 11 times in 24 hours:, , , , , , , , , ,
 * 07:06, 30 Oct 2004
 * With no explanation whatsoever, Chuck removes the NPOV tag from Michael Badnarik.

Oct 31

 * 01:22, 31 Oct 2004
 * Chuck engages in a edit war on Michael Badnarik, reverting both Reithy and Rhobite, for a total of 12 reverts in 57 hours:, , , , , , , , , , ,
 * Note: During the course of these reverts, Chuck removed unrelated improvements and reintroduced old spelling errors. Rhobite 05:43, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * 04:41, 31 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts Temple University five times in 32 hours (spaced so as to violate the 3RR). At 3:50, Sekicho posts a note to Chuck's talk page asking him to explain his reverts; Chuck does not., , , ,.

Nov 1

 * 04:13, Nov 1, 2004
 * Chuck F removed links to a poll because he doesn't like the results. In the process he reverts to a very old version and re-introduces grammar errors and unrelated changes. He continues reverting: ,
 * 04:15, 1 Nov 2004
 * Chuck resumes his edit war with Reithy on Roppongi Hills, with him reverting the article 16 times in 15 hours:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 11:11, 1 Nov 2004
 * Sannse reports that mediation between Chuck and Rhobite has been unsuccessful.

Nov 4

 * 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., , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Nov 5

 * 15:51, 5 Nov 2004
 * In another of his reverts of Reithy, Chuck says in the edit summary: "encylopedia's [sic] are meant to build people up and show why they are important".

Nov 6

 * 13:48, 6 Nov 2004
 * Offering no more than "POV nonsense" for an edit summary, Chuck removes accurate, NPOV information from Dred Scott v. Sandford.

Nov 7

 * 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., , , , , ,.
 * 13:27, 7 Nov 2004
 * Chuck begins his continuing effort to ensure that Libertarian socialism presents his variety of libertarianism as having a monopoly on the word. He begins his usual pattern of reverts, ignoring the wishes of other users (such as Fifelfoo, who writes, "Modern Libertarianism in Australia clearly means libertarian socialism, prior to the 1960s it meant the Sydney push, then earlier libertarian socialism again. Too much USPOV.") In exactly 24 hours, he reverts the article 22 times, ceasing only when it is protected:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.

Nov 8

 * 07:01, 8 Nov 2004
 * Fifelfoo, who clearly has some expertise in the politics and history of Australia, posts a well-cited note on Talk:Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, explaining the usage of the term there, which does not coincide with Chuck's libertarianism. This does not stop Chuck from reverting the article again, so as to use "libertarian" unqualified, when he later violates his temporary injunction on Nov 16 (see below).

Nov 9

 * 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

 * 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:,.

Nov 13

 * 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

 * 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., , , ,
 * 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., ,
 * 01:39, Nov 16, 2004
 * This time from his user account, Chuck F reverted main namespace articles., , , , ,
 * 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

 * 06:19, Nov 17, 2004
 * Chuck F again edits in the main namespace from an open HTTP proxy, violating his injunction:, ,

Nov 19

 * 16:08, Nov 19, 2004
 * Chuck F edits in the main namespace: . He is blocked for 24 hours.

Nov 23

 * 08:14, Nov 23, 2004
 * Chuck F edits Wal-Mart in the main namespace:

Nov 25

 * 02:57, Nov 25, 2004
 * After being reverted by RadicalSubversiv, Chuck F reverts Wal-Mart in the main namespace, even accusing RadicalSubversiv of trolling in his edit summary:
 * 03:05, Nov 25, 2004
 * Chuck F deletes evidence off Requests for arbitration/Reithy/Evidence:

Nov 28

 * 10:26, Nov 28, 2004
 * Jiminy Krikkitt posts another note on Chuck F's talk page regarding the continued reverts to Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, again receiving no reply.

Dec 3

 * 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

 * 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: ,
 * 06:34, 4 Dec 2004
 * With this summary-less edit, Chuck resumes reverting Libertarian theory. Before being blocked, he does so 4 times in 22 hours.
 * 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
 * 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

 * 04:05, 5 Dec 2004
 * Pointing to his violation of the 3RR on Libertarian theory, Mirv notifies Chuck that he has been blocked for 24 hours.
 * 04:17, 5 Dec 2004
 * Now blocked, Chuck uses an open proxy to continue reverting Libertarianism, accusing Rhobite in an edit summary of being a "Reithy Sock puppet". He quickly gets into an all out war with 172.191.37.130, in which he reverts the article 19 times in 3 hours, until Mirv protects the article.
 * Chuck F starts using open HTTP proxies to revert the article, and several others (Libertarian socialism, Libertarianism, Libertarian Party, and Liberal Democratic Party of Australia) dozens of times (his opponent in these duels being some AOL user). Mirv blocks each proxy indefinitely (per Blocking policy) but this does not slow Chuck F down in the slightest. The list that follows shows the first revert of each article with each proxy:
 * Libertarian theory: revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26.
 * Liberal Democratic Party of Australia: revert by 65.90.49.2, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarian Party: revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarianism: revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarian socialism: revert by 65.90.49.2, revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * These edit wars end only when Mirv protects all the pages. Chuck F has the gall to complain that the protections are acts of bias against him . Mirv is loudly and vocally annoyed with Chuck F.

Dec 6

 * 06:03, 6 Dec 2004
 * Chuck returns using another anonymous proxy, and proceeds to revert McJob four times (., , ) Once his block expires, he logs in and reverts it once more , for a total of 5 times in 2 hours.
 * 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

 * 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., , ,.

Dec 20

 * 06:45, 20 Dec 2004
 * Chuck decides that User:Libertas is a Reithy sockpuppet, and proceeds to revert legitimate edits with no other explanation:,.

Dec 21

 * 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

 * 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

 * 07:43, 3 Jan 2005
 * After a holiday hiatus, Chuck returns to Wikipedia. He resumes reverting Libertarianism, Libertarian socialism, Libertarian theory, Libertarian Party (United States), and Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, all recently unprotected, without edit summaries or any use of talk:, , , , , . He does the same on Placentophagy, restoring an image with copyright problems and an inappropriate joke: . He also removes material from Ron Paul with only the flimsiest attempt at explanation on talk. In response to a note from Radicalsubversiv asking him to consider his editing in light of ArbCom's proposed decision, he again makes an (implied) threat to disobey a ban.

Evidence Replied to by Chuck
''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 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 Dispute resolution have been highlighted in bold.

Sep 6

 * 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.

 * If you check the history back then http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Libertarianism&limit=50&offset=400&action=history and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Libertarianism&limit=50&offset=350&action=history, this revert was simply following along with other editors concenus, on an compleate change of the article by one loner user.  Note How radical makes this seem like I just came into to Wikipedia and sweep aside a large portion of the article that had been in place for a while, this is simply not the case, This is a tactic he maintains thourgh this evidence.

Sep 9

 * 16:53, 9 Sep 2004
 * Chuck engages in an edit war on Libertarianism, eventually reaching eight reverts in the space of eleven hours:, , , , , , ,

 * 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

 * 23:25: Chuck creates a nonsense page, 'Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit' to make a point about a VfD entry, a clear violation of Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.

 * 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

 * 06:34, 14 Sep 2004
 * Chuck vandalizes Nut (hardware) by adding a reference to his invented "Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit", an action which he repeats the next day.

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

 * 13:59, 15 Sep 2004
 * Duk inquires about Chuck's fictional "Hexaform Rotary Surface Compression Unit". Chuck does not respond.
 * 17:47, 15 Sep 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's vote on Votes for deletion/FahrenHype 9/11.

 * 18:43, 15 Sep 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's vote on Votes for deletion/Market_libertarianism.

 * 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

 * 00:48, 30 Sep 2004
 * Chuck, using the anon IP 203.112.19.195, creates a new article NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics in response to European Union at the 2004 Summer Olympics being kept on VfD, another violation of Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. His intention in creating the page is made very clear by his comment on the subsequent VfD: "The article proves it's [sic] point well"
 * 19:07, 30 Sep 2004
 * Francs2000 asks Chuck not to change others' votes on VfD; Chuck ignores him and does so again the next day.

 * 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

 * 06:56, 1 Oct 2004
 * Chuck changes another user's ambiguous comment to a keep vote on Votes for deletion/NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics. Does it again (to different users) at 15:32.

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

 * 13:18, 2 Oct 2004
 * Theresa knott warns Chuck about changing votes on VfD, noting that "I see you've been asked not to change people's votes before yet have ingnored [sic] the request". She threatens to block him for a week if he does so again.
 * 17:22, 2 Oct 2004
 * Chuck vandalizes Nut (hardware) again.

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

 * 12:28, 5 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes three factual paragraphs from Exxon Mobil. He does so again the next day.

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

 * 07:04, 7 Oct 2004
 * Chuck unilaterally (i.e., without previous discussion) removes all criticism from the Wal-Mart article, and puts it in a new article, Criticism of Wal-Mart, with nothing but a "See also" link to replace it.

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

 * 04:21, 8 Oct 2004
 * Ignoring requests not to remove material (from Rhobite, from Intrigue, and from Stormie), Chuck starts an edit war on Exxon Mobil, reverting the page five times in fourteen hours. He attempts to deceive by using anonymous IPs, and then referring to one of them in the third person when logged in:, , , ,.
 * 05:15, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite warns Chuck about removing factual content from articles.
 * 15:59, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite lists the Exxon Mobil dispute on RFC. Chuck alters the wording, and still ignores comments on Talk:Exxon Mobil.
 * 18:21, 8 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite leaves a message for Chuck requesting mediation, which Chuck ignores.
 * 22:47, 8 Oct 2004
 * Stormie posts a note on Chuck's talk page asking him not to remove material on Exxon Mobil without replying to comments on talk.

Oct 9

 * 07:46, 9 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts an attempt to make Criticism of Wal-Mart more visible in the main Wal-Mart article.

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

 * 20:06, 10 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts Michael Badnarik four times in the space of a half-hour:, , ,

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

 * 01:01, 11 Oct 2004
 * Rhobite and Duk create and certify Requests_for_comment/Chuck_F, outlining much of the material documented here. Four other users (not including Reithy) eventually endorse the summary.

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

 * 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.

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

 * 06:56, 13 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes basic material from Wal-Mart summarizing Criticism of Wal-Mart. In the edit summary, he falsely claims that the previous version stated allegations "as if they were fact."

Oct 14

 * 16:13, 14 Oct 2004
 * Chuck removes material from General Motors concerning the company's activities in WWII. Over the next few days, he is reverted by User:DavidLevinson and User:Bkonrad.
 * 16:26, Oct 14, 2004
 * Chuck, editing as 203.112.19.195, finds a sentence he doesn't like in McJob, and removes most of a different paragraph for good measure. The sentence is explained and restored, but Chuck immediately reverts back.

Oct 15

 * 04:41, 15 Oct 2004
 * Chuck, intent on reverting Reithy, removes acceptable material from Ron Paul. He continues reverting (not just a Reithy sock, but also Nat Krause), for a total of nine times in eleven hours:, , , , , , ,.

Oct 16

 * 03:41, 16 Oct 2004
 * Exactly twenty-three hours after beginning his revert spree on Ron Paul, and after numerous other (non-Reithy) editors spend a fair bit of time cleaning up and NPOVing the article, Chuck returns to revert back to his last version. He continues reverting (not just Reithy's sock, but also Radicalsubversiv and Golbez) until the page is protected:, ,.
 * 12:43, 16 Oct 2004
 * In another revert war on Michael Badnarik, Chuck reverts twelve times in fifty-two hours, ultimately resulting in page protection. Much of the edit war is with a Reithy sock, but he also repeatedly reverts Rhobite's attempts to reach a compromise., , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 17:11, 16 Oct 2004
 * Chuck makes another quick series of edits to Libertarianism, removing a large quantity of material with next-to-no information in edit summaries.

Oct 17

 * 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:, , , ,.

Oct 18

 * 19:13, 18 Oct 2004
 * In the midst of the Badnarik edit war, now in its second day, Rhobite reminds Chuck that he is violating the three revert rule, requests mediation, and threatens arbitration. Rhobite posts a fairly comprehensive request for mediation. Chuck responds, and offers "[Reithy's RFC] has about 15 more singatures then mine, and he's been causing a large amount more of problems then me" as justification for his behavior. Having now been threatened with arbitration, Chuck agrees to mediation, which is commenced with Sannse as mediator.

Oct 19

 * 16:23, 19 Oct 2004
 * After a few days of back and forth on Libertarianism, Chuck gets into a major edit war involving Reithy's socks, various anonymous IPs, and a handful of others. Chuck reverts 9 times in 46 hours:,, , , , , , , ,

Oct 20

 * 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

 * 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., , , , , ,

Oct 23

 * 15:56, 23 Oct 2004
 * Again blindly reverting Reithy, Chuck removes an apparently factual addition to Temple University. He proceeds to revert the article a total of eleven times in the next six hours:, , , , , , , , ,.
 * 18:17, 23 Oct 2004
 * In a revert war with Reithy over Roppongi Hills, Chuck reverts the article 12 times in 20 hours, mostly removing material he acknowledges is accurate:, , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 21:31, 23 Oct 2004
 * Infrogmation posts a note on Chuck's talk page: "Please use edit summaries as a description of you edits. Ranting or sniping at other editors is not an appropriate use," giving an example and pointing Chuck to Wikiquette.

Oct 30

 * 01:17, 30 Oct 2004
 * After a few days of back-and-forth, Chuck and Reithy resume a hot-and-heavy revert war on Roppongi Hills, with Chuck reverting 11 times in 24 hours:, , , , , , , , , ,
 * 07:06, 30 Oct 2004
 * With no explanation whatsoever, Chuck removes the NPOV tag from Michael Badnarik.

Oct 31

 * 01:22, 31 Oct 2004
 * Chuck engages in a edit war on Michael Badnarik, reverting both Reithy and Rhobite, for a total of 12 reverts in 57 hours:, , , , , , , , , , ,
 * Note: During the course of these reverts, Chuck removed unrelated improvements and reintroduced old spelling errors. Rhobite 05:43, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * 04:41, 31 Oct 2004
 * Chuck reverts Temple University five times in 32 hours (spaced so as to violate the 3RR). At 3:50, Sekicho posts a note to Chuck's talk page asking him to explain his reverts; Chuck does not., , , ,.

Nov 1

 * 04:13, Nov 1, 2004
 * Chuck F removed links to a poll because he doesn't like the results. In the process he reverts to a very old version and re-introduces grammar errors and unrelated changes. He continues reverting: ,
 * 04:15, 1 Nov 2004
 * Chuck resumes his edit war with Reithy on Roppongi Hills, with him reverting the article 16 times in 15 hours:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * 11:11, 1 Nov 2004
 * Sannse reports that mediation between Chuck and Rhobite has been unsuccessful.

Nov 4

 * 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., , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Nov 5

 * 15:51, 5 Nov 2004
 * In another of his reverts of Reithy, Chuck says in the edit summary: "encylopedia's [sic] are meant to build people up and show why they are important".

Nov 6

 * 13:48, 6 Nov 2004
 * Offering no more than "POV nonsense" for an edit summary, Chuck removes accurate, NPOV information from Dred Scott v. Sandford.

Nov 7

 * 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., , , , , ,.
 * 13:27, 7 Nov 2004
 * Chuck begins his continuing effort to ensure that Libertarian socialism presents his variety of libertarianism as having a monopoly on the word. He begins his usual pattern of reverts, ignoring the wishes of other users (such as Fifelfoo, who writes, "Modern Libertarianism in Australia clearly means libertarian socialism, prior to the 1960s it meant the Sydney push, then earlier libertarian socialism again. Too much USPOV.") In exactly 24 hours, he reverts the article 22 times, ceasing only when it is protected:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,.

Nov 8

 * 07:01, 8 Nov 2004
 * Fifelfoo, who clearly has some expertise in the politics and history of Australia, posts a well-cited note on Talk:Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, explaining the usage of the term there, which does not coincide with Chuck's libertarianism. This does not stop Chuck from reverting the article again, so as to use "libertarian" unqualified, when he later violates his temporary injunction on Nov 16 (see below).

Nov 9

 * 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

 * 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:,.

Nov 13

 * 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

 * 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., , , ,
 * 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., ,
 * 01:39, Nov 16, 2004
 * This time from his user account, Chuck F reverted main namespace articles., , , , ,
 * 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

 * 06:19, Nov 17, 2004
 * Chuck F again edits in the main namespace from an open HTTP proxy, violating his injunction:, ,

Nov 19

 * 16:08, Nov 19, 2004
 * Chuck F edits in the main namespace: . He is blocked for 24 hours.

Nov 23

 * 08:14, Nov 23, 2004
 * Chuck F edits Wal-Mart in the main namespace:

Nov 25

 * 02:57, Nov 25, 2004
 * After being reverted by RadicalSubversiv, Chuck F reverts Wal-Mart in the main namespace, even accusing RadicalSubversiv of trolling in his edit summary:
 * 03:05, Nov 25, 2004
 * Chuck F deletes evidence off Requests for arbitration/Reithy/Evidence:

Nov 28

 * 10:26, Nov 28, 2004
 * Jiminy Krikkitt posts another note on Chuck F's talk page regarding the continued reverts to Liberal Democratic Party of Australia, again receiving no reply.

Dec 3

 * 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

 * 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: ,
 * 06:34, 4 Dec 2004
 * With this summary-less edit, Chuck resumes reverting Libertarian theory. Before being blocked, he does so 4 times in 22 hours.
 * 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
 * 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

 * 04:05, 5 Dec 2004
 * Pointing to his violation of the 3RR on Libertarian theory, Mirv notifies Chuck that he has been blocked for 24 hours.
 * 04:17, 5 Dec 2004
 * Now blocked, Chuck uses an open proxy to continue reverting Libertarianism, accusing Rhobite in an edit summary of being a "Reithy Sock puppet". He quickly gets into an all out war with 172.191.37.130, in which he reverts the article 19 times in 3 hours, until Mirv protects the article.
 * Chuck F starts using open HTTP proxies to revert the article, and several others (Libertarian socialism, Libertarianism, Libertarian Party, and Liberal Democratic Party of Australia) dozens of times (his opponent in these duels being some AOL user). Mirv blocks each proxy indefinitely (per Blocking policy) but this does not slow Chuck F down in the slightest. The list that follows shows the first revert of each article with each proxy:
 * Libertarian theory: revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26.
 * Liberal Democratic Party of Australia: revert by 65.90.49.2, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarian Party: revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarianism: revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * Libertarian socialism: revert by 65.90.49.2, revert by 61.206.125.114, revert by 220.134.116.191, revert by 80.67.172.1, revert by 195.175.37.26, revert by 64.56.51.196
 * These edit wars end only when Mirv protects all the pages. Chuck F has the gall to complain that the protections are acts of bias against him . Mirv is loudly and vocally annoyed with Chuck F.

Dec 6

 * 06:03, 6 Dec 2004
 * Chuck returns using another anonymous proxy, and proceeds to revert McJob four times (., , ) Once his block expires, he logs in and reverts it once more , for a total of 5 times in 2 hours.
 * 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.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.

 * What happened.
 * What happened.


text:
Kalundborg Transmitter

Kalundborg Radio was a major transmission facility for long- and mediumwave at the harbour of Kalundborg in Denmark. Longwave broadcasts on 243 kHz began on 27 August 1927 and ceased on 31 December 2023. Mediumwave broadcasts on 1062 kHz began on 1 October 1951 and ceased in June 2011.

History
The transmitter site was inaugurated on 27 August 1927 and started broadcasting the first channel of Danish radio on 243 kHz longwave (LW) with 300 kW. On 1 October 1951, mediumwave (MW) broadcasts of DR P2 commenced on 1062 kHz (282 m wavelength) with 250 kW. These two transmitters had a common reserve transmitter.

On 15 February 2007 at 00:05, LW transmissions from Kalundborg were suspended after 80 years of service. They resumed in Digital Radio Mondiale (DRM) mode at reduced power (200 W) on 3 October 2008 after substantial modifications to the aerial earlier that year. During 16-31 October 2009, the old MW and LW reserve transmitter served in place of the regular MW and LW DRM transmitters. Until mid-June 2011, broadcasts on 1062 kHz at 250 kW continued on a restricted time schedule. After that, the MW transmitter was taken out of service.

A new 50 kW LW transmitter replaced the MW service. During 6-12 September 2012, the transmitter also broadcast BBC programmes with 10 kW of power in DRM mode outside DR's broadcast blocks in connection with the international broadcasting exhibition IBC 2012 in Amsterdam. Shipping Forecast bulletins produced by the Danish Meteorological Institute (Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut) ceased on 1 November 2023 ahead of full closure of the longwave service on 31 December 2023.

It was possible to receive the LW signal of the Kalundborg transmitter outdoors over a distance of 800-1,000 km on a standard transistor radio or a longwave-compatible car radio. By connecting the receiver to a stationary or a maritime wire, frame, or active antenna, reception improved up to 1,500 km of range.

Every year on 4 May, Danmarks Radio rebroadcast the "message of liberation," from the Kalundborg transmitter in an hour-long memorial broadcast that began after the news at 20:00. On 4 May 1945, the Danish service of the BBC broadcast the original "message of liberation," marking the end of WWII in Denmark: "At this moment, it is announced that Montgomery has stated that the German troops in Holland, Northwest Germany, and Denmark have surrendered."

LW and MW antennas
The LW antenna was an Alexanderson aerial with two grounded 118 m steel lattice radiating towers connected by top capacitance wires. The northern tower was fed from the transmitter through a top coil, with the top coil of the southern slave tower being fed via the capacitance wires. The MW aerial was an insulated guyed steel lattice mast with a height of 147 metres. All masts virtually stood in the sea on the narrow Gisseløre peninsula, providing excellent radiation efficiency.

Normal daily programming schedule
Times given in Central European Time. Source:
 * 06.00 - 06.05: News (Radioavisen), rebroadcast from DR P4 København
 * 08.00 - 0.805: News (Radioavisen), rebroadcast from DR P4 København (Not broadcast on Sundays and public holidays)
 * 08.05 - 08.30: Act of worship - Morning Devotion (Morgenandagt) from the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen produced by DR P2 (Not broadcast on Sundays)
 * 08.30 - 08.45: Morning gymnastics - Body and Movement (Krop og bevægelse) produced by DR P5
 * 09.00 - 09.05: News (Radioavisen), rebroadcast from DR P4 København
 * 12.00 - 12.05: News (Radioavisen), rebroadcast from DR P4 København
 * 18.00 - 18.05: News (Radioavisen), rebroadcast from DR P4 København

title: Kalundborg Transmitter