MrX reported Thucydides411 to AE and slatersteven reported Thucydides411 to ANI for reminding Marek of his history of meatpuppetry after Marek brought up a past sanction of Thucydides411. SPECIFICO, Power~enwiki, and My very best wishes called for Thucydides to be site-banned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Thucydides411

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Thucydides411

An IP droppped this on Thucydides411's talk page: Wikipediametric mailinglist: alleged cabal tactics and stalking of editors, 2009

https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikipediametric_mailinglist:_alleged_cabal_tactics_and_stalking_of_editors,_2009

> "My Very Best Wishes" is Hodja Nasreddin is Biophys. Everytime you read Biophys on those pages that's Wishes.

Awilley, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, and Galobtter removed this information as "trolling".

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thucydides411&diff=809917706&oldid=809916810

Dysklyver had a "countering systemic bias" infobox with a picture of Wikipedia's mascot in a bikini.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Den_Jentyl_Ettien_Avel_Dysklyver&diff=810832628&oldid=810820662

Carrite complained about this when Dysklyver ran for ArbCom. Ritchie333 then decided to be the morality police and changed the image on Dysklyver's talk page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Candidates/A_Den_Jentyl_Ettien_Avel_Dysklyver/Questions

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A_Den_Jentyl_Ettien_Avel_Dysklyver&diff=810926669&oldid=810896096

So Wikipedia has Iran-style morality police now.

Did Adolph Hitler state that he was Christian, or did he claim to be Christian? What's the difference? Does it matter?

An IP noted that "claimed" is discouraged by Wikipedia's WP:SAID manual of style, and tried to change this to "stated." The IP also removed Goebbels from a list of "militant anti-Christians."

> 21:03, 25 November 2017‎ 2601:982:8200:4790:3c54:492b:bc0c:be05 (talk)‎ . . (190,307 bytes) (-11)‎ . . (Undid revision 811989982 by Beyond My Ken (talk) The wording "claimed" doesn't conform to Wikipedia policy WP:SAID and Goebbels made comments favoring Christ in his private dairy.) (undo)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler&diff=812072996&oldid=812061001

(a picture from Goebbels's dairy is provided)

Beyond My Ken threatened to block the IP for making this change.

> noope, he said it publicly, but there;'s no ecidence that he was, so it's a claim - do not change again unless you want to be blocked from editing

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler&diff=812095024&oldid=812072996

So, it's standard Wikipedia: lose an argument, threaten to block the other editor.

For what it's worth, the Nazi Party famously adopted the slogan Kinder, Küche, Kirche (Family, Kitchen, and Church), had the slogan Gott Mit Uns on their belt buckles, and had its own church, the Deutsche Christen. This does not speak for every individual within the party, but the party generally claimed to be Christian.

Pincrete is WP:OWNing and scrubbing the page for the Taliban front organization Cage Prisoners.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:CAGE_(organisation)#WP:OR_and_misrepresentation_of_sources

Bookworm2828 created a page in 2009 for Wilkie Bard, a vaudeville singer from the turn of the 20th century. Bookworm created the page with an infobox. In fact, "Infobox" was in the edit summary of the first version of the page.

Cassianto killed the inbox, claiming that the info was "Misleading, ugly bloat." Dynamic IPs from a few different ranges tried to revert back from Cassianto's preferred version to the version with the infobox.

Cassianto called in meatpuppets Sagaciousphil, Drmies, and John to protect the page, block the IPs, and accuse the IPs of vandalism. Admin tools were used to uphold one editor's preferred version in a trivial little content dispute over whether or not to have an infobox on an obscure page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wilkie_Bard&oldid=321050014

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.132.229.177

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/184.164.157.67

When Cassianto first tried to use John as a meatpuppet, John saw through it and threatened Cassianto with a block. Someone changed his mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:John#Slow_burn_edit_war_from_IP_hopping_troll

>>331407

I pasted the wrong first link. That goes to Bookworm's first version. It was supposed to be the page history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wilkie_Bard&offset=&limit=500&action=history

A couple of users have been holding up attempts to create a page for Oleg Atbashian. >>329502

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Oleg_Atbashian

Winged Blades of Godrick claimed that Wikipedia does not allow any coverage of a person unless there is a biographical article dedicated to that person alone. He doesn't count the twenty different news articles establishing Atbashian's notability as one of several activists, and he wants the number of references cut down so that no one reading the page can tell how obviously notable Atbashian is at a glance.

Justlettersandnumbers demanded the removal of all information about Atbashian's activist groups, calling them "irrelevant" on a page about the political activist who founded these groups.

The Wilkie Bard infobox drama continues. >>331407

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BrillLyle&diff=prev&oldid=813289441#Wilkie_Bard

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cassianto&diff=813283594&oldid=813282858#Let_it_go

BrillLyle jumped into the ring to revert Cassianto who is jumping down everyone's throat while a miniature circus spontaneously appeared on his talk page. Ritchie333 blocked Cassianto for going to 3RR to remove a personal attack by BrillLyle that was eventually revdelled.

Iridescent appeared on Cassianto's talk page to tell him to back off. Yngvadottir appeared on BrillLyle's talk page to tell him to back off, and BrillLyle is offended.

> So let me get this straight, Cassianto can personally attack me, tell me to F off, call me an idiot. He can control what is on his Talk page but I am not allowed to do the same. Every interaction is hostile and angry and objectionable. So it ceases even becoming about the actual editing.

John is trying to calm everyone down.

Tablet reporter Yair Rosenberg on Wikipedia's approach to a subject that he has written articles about:

> Wow, this is incredibly awful: there is an attempt on Wikipedia to delete the article "Anti-Semitism in the (UK) Labour party" and memory hole the extremely well-documented recent instances of Jew hatred there

https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/939643693899898880

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Antisemitism_in_the_Labour_Party

Rosenberg continues:

> In April, 100 of the 229 UK Labour members of parliament denounced their own party for failing to confront anti-Semitism in its ranks … Now some Wikipedians are trying to claim that such anti-Semitism is fake news.

So a journalist makes an emotional claim of fact using a popular narrative. We looove picking those apart. CTRL-F "fake": no matches.

The first words of TFD's opening are three different arguments:

> This article lacks notability and is an attack page recently created.

That's three different arguments. Many of the 'delete' opinions suggest merging the content into the pages Chakrabarti Inquiry and Antisemitism in the United Kingdom. It's not what he says it is. Regardless, the AfD closed with no consensus.

The Wikipedia page for Birth Control says that the rhythm method has a success rate of 76% in typical use, 95%-99.7% in perfect use. rtc claims that the source for the upper figure describes only a specific combination of techniques called the symptothermal method, and the upper figure should be 97%. Doc James disagreed about the interpretation of the source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Birth_control&type=revision&diff=815288252&oldid=815168538

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Birth_control#Ref_says_0.4

So rtc is arguing that the rythym method is not as reliable as Wikipedia claims that it is. JzG saw that the discussion was about the rythym method and jumped in to accuse rtc of bad faith and ridicule what JzG assumed to be rtc's Catholic religion.

> This is pretty pointless. It seems to me, as an outsider, that the intent is to obscure the fact that Vatican Roulette does not work, and is supported as a form of birth control only by religious groups, for that reason. Guy (Help!) 00:34, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

rtc is confused by JzG's reaction and clarifies his position of what he thinks the source says. JzG then reported rtc to to ANI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Rtc_and_birth_control

> Context: "fertility awareness methods" of birth control are advocated almost exclusively by religious groups, as they have a high failure rate. User rtc is trying to include special pleading about how they are really not a lottery after all as long as you use multiple techniques. So far he has tried edit warring, condescension[19] and WP:POINTy tagging[20][21]. Numerous other editors are reverting the changes, including Doc James, who I think we're all aware is medically qualified. I think a topic ban is needed. Guy (Help!) 08:36, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

After rtc reveals himself to be nonreligous, and no one on Wikipedia should be forced into revealing their religious beliefs or lack thereof, BaseballBugs and Nagualdesign ridiculed rtc for Catholicism. JzG called for rtc to be topic banned from birth control, gaining the support of Beyond My Ken, Jytdog, Mjollnirpants, Roxy the dog, SarekOfVulcan, David Eppstein, Marianna251, Flyer22 Reborn, and Only in death does duty end.

fish&karate, GreenMeansGo, Cjhard, and Tornado chaser opposed sanctions because the ANI was made in bad faith, was full of false charges, and included little to no evidence of misconduct by rtc. rtc gained no support for a proposal to warn JzG against making false claims and blocking someone with whom they are in a content dispute.