Please make a section for your evidence and add evidence only in your own section. Please limit your evidence to a maximum 1000 words and 100 diffs; a shorter, concise presentation is more likely to be effective. Please focus on the issues raised in the complaint and on diffs which illustrate behavior which relates to the issues. If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please cite the evidence in your own section and provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Do not edit within the evidence section of any other user.

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&oldid=5584644] [1].

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Be aware that arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Sockpuppeting

Per checkuser evidence, Henrygb has been sockpuppeting: User:Audiovideo, User:Facethefacts and User:SE16. When called on the issue of Audiovideo and Facethefacts by FloNight, who said she considered this conduct unsuitable to an admin and asked him to resign, he was evasive, and proceeded with new sockpuppet SE16, created while blocked for the first sockpuppets. On User talk:SE16, he attributes this to the Cabal.

I ask other checkusers to look for themselves and provide their opinions.

Abusive use of the sockpuppets

Illusion of greater consensus:

• Supports AFD nomination by other account: [2] (Henrygb and Audiovideo)
• Talk:Gdansk/Vote (Henrygb and Audiovideo) (2005)
• Dual support on IFD [3] (Henrygb and Audiovideo), [4], [5] (Henrygb and Audiovideo) (2005)
• William M. Connolley RFA 1: [6], [7] (Audiovideo and Facethefacts); RFA 2: [8], [9] (Audiovideo and Facethefacts) (note: second edit suggests also sockpuppeting using IP as separate "personality") (2006)
• Reverting to version by other account: [10] (Audiovideo and Henrygb)
• Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Poll/Archive2#Verifiability, not truth (Henrygb and Audiovideo) (2007)
• [11] (Henrygb makes edit), [12], [13] (Audiovideo restores edit twice after removal by others) (2007)

Conversations with self: [14]

Audiovideo supports on Henrygb RFA: [15] (2005)

Sockpuppeting

In my capacity as checkuser operator, I determined that the evidence is overwhelming that Henrygb, Audiovideo, Facethefacts, and SE16 are a single user.

before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person

{Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring.

{Write your assertion here}

Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks.