Failure to respect bans handed down on other users
Inflammatory use of rv vandalism as an edit summary / abusive edit summaries
Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please choose an appropriate header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.
This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.
If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Please do this under a seperate header, to seperate your response from the original evidence.
Be aware that the arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent.
Evidence of not working collaboratively for the good of an article[edit]
MNH does not work with people in order to produce a good article. He see's editing as a war between himself and what he refers to as the "science people"
On alternative medicine he repeately removed a quote by Richard Dawkins. He made [this edit] in order to say "David, are you going to footnote this quote of Dawkins in the article or am I going to have to delete this unattributed assertion?
implying presumably that he didn't believe that Dawkins actually said what he was being quoted as saying. He gave people 1 hour and 16 mins! to respond before deleting the quote with the edit summary
"Time is up David! The footnote has been in talk for quite some time, now. Too lazy to add it to the article? No problem! I will just delete this non-footnoted stupid quote of yours.[1]
This is despite the fact that Mike had already told him where the quote came from on the talk page earlier [here]
On Palliative care he got into an edit war over if it was part of alternative medicine category. As part of that edit war he reverted a rewrite of of the intro to the article in order to get the category:Alternative medicine line back in. When it was pointed out (in the edit summary of a revert by theresa knott) that he had reverted the new intro as well he re-reverted with the following comment:
"rv when you do a revert you throw the baby out with the bath water, TK. Just thought that you might want to know".[2]
He was told on a number of occasions to stop adding his Alt.Med box or a smaller set of links and yet they appear again and again.
This is with 5 or 6 different users removing them over time and yet he keeps putting them back despite people explaining the reason for their removal.
See the history page for evidence of Mr Natural Health's multiple insertion of the same content or variations on a theme and also the removal by a number of (Increasingly frustrated) different editors.
Note also the lack of meaningful dialogue and the unacceptable use of rv vandalism as an edit summary.
MNH reinserts the box with the justification that he wrote the article. "It is positively a *major* on the philosophy of alternative medicine. So, please stop your point-blank vandalism of my edits."
MNH switches from one of his boxes to a different one [15] whilst asserting in the edit summary "rv proven vandalism of Fuelbottle / this article has an infobox in it because it is 100% / I am in the process of reporting the vandalism of Fuelbottle. This will be completed within a few minutes."
These steps have basically been repeating themselves, see the History page for the list.
Related (to Lifestyle Diseases) edits on other pages[edit]
User:Fuelbottle approached MNH about his box on MNH's Talk page in polite terms ("Hi, I removed the CAM box on some pages because even though they may be somewhat related to CAM, CAM is not their main category[snip]" to receive this response "Hi! See Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress -- I reported catching User:Fuelbottle in the act of vandalizing a large number of my edits just a matter of 30 minutes or so ago."
User:Fuelbottle has been making something of a project of addressing the articles that contain CAM boxes. As a result MNH has reported him on Vandalism in progress[16].
[17]A troll is a troll, even with the words science in front of it. I am declining be goaded further by these trolls. I am going back to working on the bigger picture. Have fun David, while I excell!
[18]Moving below. This article was written by a bunch of Yahoos who decided decided to invent their own cumbersome system of referencing research. What a royal mess!!!! I would love to clean up, but ...
[19]rv Vandalism from a non-registered user. You know, a nobody!
[20]Yes, my how the trolls and bigots babble on so on Wikipedia! I really must stop wasting my time on Wikipedia. and While I would love to continue wasting huge amounts of time dealing with morons and bigots on Wikipedia, I happen to have a life. My original characterization of the gang of thugs on Wikipedia has bee from the previus edit
[21]David Gerard, and his ilk, are bigots by the book: plain and simple.
[25]Removing total unattributed nonsense added by a known vandal. Keep your trash out of this article, Geni! Lookup the definition of footnote in a dictionary!
Trouble accepting others may have a valid point of view or be working towards NPOV[edit]
MNH appears not to grasp NPOV[31][32][33]. He is given to combative discussion on talk
pages - he appears to see his mission as pushing one side, rather than
improving an article
([34][35]). He seems to actually believe that those of
differing view are "trolls" ([36]talk page, User:Mr-Natural-Health/2wB1g9Gq) and "liars" ([37][38][39])
rather than
being people who disagree with him.
Offering to help banned users work around bans[edit]
He encourages gross disrespect for Wikipedia bans on other users, offering to proxy for them
[40]. When asked not to do this [41],
he removes the request with an
abusive edit summary [42].
He seems to believe he can take ownership of articles and enforce his views
on who should be allowed to edit them [43][44]. He views article
editing as a battle with winners and losers
[45][46][47][48][49][50][51]. His combative attitude has already discouraged others from contributing to
articles he edits (Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Theresa_Knott#Response).
The analysis there is that
his behaviour represents attempted enclosure of alternative medicine
articles on Wikipedia.
He has constructed a
personal style guide for alternative medicine articles
(Wikipedia:Wikiproject:Alternative Medicine/Standards of Quality), which
is far from
an objectionable idea in itself, but he represents it as enforceable Wikipedia policy
[52][53][54][55][56],
removes edits of others using it as
justification as if it's hard Wikipedia policy [57][58][59]
and removes others'
questions as to it being used like this [60].
Personal attacks on others; cannot distinguish questioning his edits from "personal attacks"[edit]
He takes questioning his edits or edit summaries and asking for explanation
as being "personal attacks"
[61][62][63][64][65].
He says on talk:clinical depression that "science people" are "bigoted, obnoxious, time wasting" and "a bunch of ignorant bigots"
on AM to erich gasboy [73]Hello, Bigot? How are all you bigots doing today?
on AM to Theresa knott [74]I bet TK looks uglier than than she talks
on AM to Xgkkp [75]I have no duty to educate the uneducated
And [76]Totally confused people, such as yourself, should do more reading. You certainly do not get out much do you?
on Talk:Clinical_depression to Bodnotnod [77]"I suggest that you educate yourself, some. I have no duty to educate people who are 30 years out of date. Cheers" (If education isn't an aim, what is?)
In the context of being asked to respond to the debate on the talk page: "Do you really think that I am going to waste my time wading through the above garbage that was written by a bunch of ignorant bigots?"[78]
on Talk:Chelation therapy (after listing page on votes for deletion) "Any alternative medicine article created by Geni is pure pollution."
I wrote the following on MNH's Talk Page: "I politely request that you stop adding your CAM boxes, links, and use of rv vandalism as an edit summary whilst your arbitration is in process. --bodnotbod 01:43, Jun 11, 2004 (UTC)
Soon after it was simply removed with no dialogue whatsoever (on my page, or his): [79]. I thought this may be simple archiving but posts predating mine remained, so it seems like a selective cull. --bodnotbod 21:03, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)
Section to add other articles which have/had CAM (Complimentary/Alternative Medicine) boxes which you consider dubious[edit]
The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that MNH has zero ability to apply his boxes - which I replicate here...
{{CamBottom}}
...to show their overweening impact - zero ability to apply them with discretion, intelligence, consideration for others or forethought
