Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Evidence: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Evidence presented by {your user name}: +brief bit from me |
|||
Line 138:
This level of misunderstanding of basic content policy is questionable at the best of times. For people writing marginal BLPs on hot-button topics, it's wildly outside the bounds of acceptability. I've seen topic bans from BLPs for less. The tricky part here is that because Sgerbic and Rp2006 have an unknown number of private confederates who assist them in writing such BLPs, a tban alone couldn't be properly enforced by the community; this is why we've ended up here at all.
==Evidence presented by GeneralNotability ==
=== Sgerbic encourages "backwards editing" to cite Skeptical Inquirer===
As I mentioned in the case request, there is an oft-cited [https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/learn-to-edit-wikipedia-like-a-gsow-editorndashbackwards-editing/ blog post] in which Sgerbic encourages people to go out of their way to cite Skeptical Inquirer in Wikipedia articles.
==Evidence presented by {your user name}==
| |||