User talk:LibertarianAnarchist

Thank you for your note on my talk page -- I appreciate it. I also just wanted to add my note about editing the article here as well: I am in the process of reviewing (I would not characterize it as "investigating") 2002 Gujarat violence, the edit history of the article and its talk page, the various comments linked to this page, and the email traffic here, here, here, here, and here (and a few other threads) on the mailing list related to it. Even though the page is unprotected, I would ask all parties involved to hold off editing this article voluntarily until I can offer a few suggestions, which I will do within a few hours. Thanks for your forbearance, BCorr ¤ Брайен 14:31, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

NOTE: See bottom of page for mediation proposal

Outdated complaints

User:LibertarianAnarchist

User:LibertarianAnarchist alias User:Democrate2003 keeps reverting 2002 Gujarat violence to a blatantly POV version, which for example alleges that India's English-language media is "largely Marxist" and that Justice Krishna Iyer is a "Marxist" (which Iyer denies) - and then he has the nerve to describe this as an NPOVing. In fact, the original version by User:Boud is perfectly NPOV, giving all the differing views about the events. --Wik 19:21, Oct 23, 2003 (UTC)

Still active at the moment. Martin 23:42, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Over the past three weeks, various users have had to revert extremes made by LibertarianAnarchist on the following Websites:

Babri Mosque (3 to 4 times)
2002 Gujarat violence (5 times)
Bharatiya Janata Party (6 times)
Racism (6 times)
Genocide (4 times)
V. R. Krishna Iyer (8 times)

LibertarianAnarchist is probably also 128.107.253.42.

Sincerely, Kingturtle 23:14, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've had to revert Genocide, Babri Mosque and Mount Everest several times today. He is very tiring and accuses people in the summary boxes and on his user page of being racist and/or communist. He has a Hindu nationalist POV. Secretlondon 00:01, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)
- Be careful, if you revert him often enough you will be accused of "getting into edit wars" and such, and people will tell you to find a "compromise" with him. --Wik 00:06, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)
User:LibertarianAnarchist just left this unsigned comment at Talk:Mount Everest in response to reversions of his statement that a Bengali surveyor discovered Mount Everest in the mid-1800s: "okay, what about Columbus "discovering" America? This is getting out of hand. You guys are clearly RACIST. I don't have to appeal to White skinned racists to "recognize" any fact. You are clearly ignorant fools if you did not know it. AmeriKKKan stupidity perhaps?" I thought it was relevant to this page. If not, revert me. :-) Jwrosenzweig 00:21, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

- - What is the process to ban this user? Kingturtle 00:28, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
    - He'll be banned if there's enough of a consensus for it. Please discuss. --Modemac 00:36, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Under the new name HistoryBuff, LA posted this in Mount Everest's talk page -- "VerilyVerily commented that he finds it hard to believe what I wrote about Sikdar! His knowledge base being clearly inferior, he had heard of Sikdar for the first time. I am sure he did a Google search and posted the information which was as far away from mine but unfortunately for the bigot, even he couldn't completely remove the reference to Sikdar. -- LibertarianAnarchist". I believe that this kind of paranoid slander of VeryVerily is exactly the kind of thing we need to eradicate. LA has done nothing but spread anger and rapid reversion where he/she goes -- I think it is time for a ban. I understand Modemac's desire for discussion, but I personally feel LA's comments speak for themselves loudly enough to make the discussion a brief one. Jwrosenzweig 00:49, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- To add to above: in his Mount Everest edit he said my "India hating White skinned racism is showing itself" because of an edit where I moved (and slightly edited) the note about Sikdar measuring the mountain's peak from the intro to the Measurement section. This seems like quite a conclusion to jump to. At least I'm apparently not a Communist (CPI(M)) propagandist anymore. I don't know much about the banning process, but it looks like it may have to come to that. -- VV 01:05, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Strongly support banning. Has created a new username (in addition to existing three) even after being asked not to in the mailing list. Practically every edit involves calling someone a communist, and very frequent accusations of racism as well. For many days I was doing nothing on wikipedia except reverting LA's edits, and I think others wasted a huge amount of time too. Several attempts to reason with LA were made on the mailing list, but were all met with vitriolic personal attacks. All this is apart from the main issue of having an extreme POV and complete unwillingness to collaborate. -- Arvindn 11:00, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It is true he was inactive for a while, but he's back (including from IP 67.121.94.160). Some users proposed banning, and perhaps now we should consider continuing on that process. -- VV 21:14, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

He's back

Look's like he's back, and monkeying around with Jawaharlal Nehru under a series of IPs. --Calton | Talk 01:50, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)