What I find fascinating about all of this isn’t the pros and cons of the article itself, but rather how Cirt’s behavior is a textbook case of how he games the system and intimidates opponents to win the Wiki battle and push his POV at any cost. For instance, he began by posting on the talk pages of some of his buddies to tell them to come over to the article, and then thanks people for supporting him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396164492
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396164481
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396164466
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396189170
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396172994
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396172372

Then he took on disparaging or harassing every editor who has said the article should be deleted, including following one editor around THF on multiple message boards about a completely different article, in attempt to get him to back off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396326797
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396327480
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396331943
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396314736
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396160431
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396195934

Of course, all the while he’s fighting hard to make the article more of an attack piece and to object to any attempt to improve the article. Where sources contradict the point of view he’s pushing in the article, he’s over on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard, trying to get them removed as reliable sources, and then removes the sources from the article before the discussion is even finished, over the objections of other editors:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396336473
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396341116

Finally, he cavalierly announces that he’s doing multiple future articles on similar topics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396323846
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=396198793

Something might finally be able to be done about cirt and his abuse.... don't you think?

It always seems to be open season at Wikipedia for any organization that is a "purported cult." Those articles are exempt from all the BLP BS. Which is of course ironic, because Wikipedia itself seems to be within the Ayn Rand orbit, which is, according to numerous "reliable sources," a purported cult.

But you see, the Ayn Rand "cult" had no trace of antisemitism. "Wikipedia" remains a bit pissed that Werner Erhard changed his name from Jack Rosenberg. To be sure, Rand changed her name from Rosenbaum, too, but not to an overtly German one! (She got her pen name off her typewriter).

Likewise, if you read the Church of Scientology article on WP, you'll find out all about orthodox Jewish opposition to it.

And need we mention why Lyndon LaRouche is in such bad odor on Wikipedia? And why SlimVirgin is perennially after then, and why HK is forever banned? The REAL reason? If any political or new religious movement smells of the Germans or seems in any way to be unfriendly to Israel or the Jews, en.wiki will be all over it like a swarm of Africanized honeybees.

Here's a truly obscessive article: List of groups referred to as cults in government documents. There are 189 listed from Belgium (including "Christian Church"), which is very strange until you realize that this isn't really anything close to official Belgian list of cults. Every one of the 32 listed in this "cults" article by the French goverment has an article in Wikipedia, and Landmark Education (Erhard's group, post EST) is in there, too. Problem: likewise, this isn't a French list of "cults" either. The WP article itself is simply listing religious groups referred to in some government document, and sythesizing this into a list of groups that govenments supposedly consider cults.

Thus we find that "Christian Church" is listed in this article on groups that are (supposedly) listed as cults in government documents, so it sounds very objective. Surprise, Chabad does not appear in these lists, even though it as far more cultlike as a movement than (say) the Jehovah's Witnesses (which does appear). There's quite a lot of selection, here. The word "cult" does not appear in WP's Chabad article, but has been offloaded into Chabad Lubavitch related controversies where plenty of people say Chabad has become a cult. This is known as a "POV fork".

Oh, and who started this article with the "list of cults," in 2007, sythesizing like mad? And continues to add to it, and WP:OWN it? Well, Cirt, of course. Back in her "Smee" days. When she was being mentored into adminship by SlimVirgin Durova.

That was Durova, not SlimVirgin.

Ah, wups, you're right. Not that it makes much difference.

I find this theory to be overly simplistic. In the case of SlimVirgin, I suspect a Lockerbie connection, since LaRouche was a friend of Pierre Salinger, who was an enemy of Virginia Slim. Plus, as a wannabe Cambridge Apostle, Slimmy is an Anglophile par excellence, which doesn't play well with LaRouchism (I recently discovered that BillMasen (T-C-L-K-R-D) is also a major Anglophile, busy as one of your African bees with articles such as Anglophobia,English nationalism, and Anti-British sentiment ‎.

But for Will Beback and 172, among others, economic theory and policy played a big role. Among the fiercest battlegrounds were American System (economics) (T-H-L-K-D) and Privatization (T-H-L-K-D).

Okay, how do you explain the time SV put into Death of Jeremiah Duggan?

Sorry to be correcting you twice in one day, but I think you mean Death of Jeremiah Duggan.

Neener-- had it fixed before you noted it.

I'm not saying your theory doesn't account for part of the motivation. I just don't think it's the whole enchilada. As far as the Jeremiah Duggan business is concerned, here's the LaRouche theory about why it happened: LaRouche had recently been interviewed on the BBC, attacking the whole "WMD in Iraq" theory. This was seen as a deliberate move by a section of the British establishment that sought to undercut the war faction. The war faction counterattacked by killing David Kelly, purging the BBC, and promoting the Duggan hoax.

Now, if you are willing to entertain the "SlimVirgin as MI-5 wannabe or fantasist" theory, she could have been trying to either ingratiate herself with the Brits, or acting out her black ops fantasies, by crafting her WP magnum opus.

Cirt's conduct has been brought up on the administrators notice board:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...eletion_request

I think this may just be scratching the surface.

And who are you in that zoo?

I thought this thread was going to be instantly condemned to the Annex or the Tarpit or worse. Fortunately it involves Slimvirgin and LaRouche. and therefore it will stay. I'm beginning to work out Wikipedia Review, after about 3 years.

And someone is actually being stern with Cirt for his ridiculous behavior. That's a first.