Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Paul Vogel

message: Re: last comment from "More expressions of anti-Semitism"
* " It is clear that a cabal of censorous pov bigots have falsely accused me..."
** While I have no doubt that PV has engaged in personal attacks  and anti-Semitic flaming, I fail to see how this specific comment [last comment in the section more anti-Semitic comments] is an expression of anti-Semitism. JRR Trollkien (see warning) 21:00, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegations by outside users

message: Known participants have been given headers, others may join this matter by creating a header and requesting relief.
===User:AndyL===
Paul Vogel has had 24 or 48 hour bans imposed on him on several occasions yet has not improved his behaviour. He circumvented the most recent ban by Hadal (see above) causing his suspension to be extended to 96 hours. This shows his lack of respect for Wikipedia and for attempts to discipline him.
Despite being on wikipedia for several months he refuses to get a userid, despite several requests that he do so, making it more difficult to track his activity (and more difficult to impose discipline). See  also see his talk page in general User_talk:24.45.99.191 for attempts by the community to deal with him patiently and his responses. See also User_talk:65.125.10.66
He has made the pages on which he has participated into hostile environments for those who disagree with his views, particlarly Jews, particularly on Talk:Holocaust where he has used blood curses against Jews as a whole.
:"You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!"-PV"  (emphasis mine: AndyL)
followed by 
:"Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck!" 
The Vogel RFC page shows just how much animosity he has whipped up. 
Paul is an open and unreconstructed anti-Semite (though he prefers the term "anti-Jewish") and tries to edit anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) material into wikipedia such as adding a link to David Duke's material  on to the Judaism page and on 19th of April he reverted  edits more that three times despite others efforts to stop him. See also  and 
The Holocaust page is protected due to his constant vandalism  again, on the 19 of April he reverted this page more than three times. 
He has harassed individuals who complain about him by pasting entire pages of material on their talk page - Eloquence complains about that here 
I request a permanent ban on Vogal and his various ips since he has demonstrated no ability to correct or modify his behavior despite numerous requests and past disciplinary action. If anything he's gotten worse. If a lesser ban is imposed he should be required to obtain and use a userid so that he can be more easily monitored. He should be permanently banned (at least) from editing Judaism, Jews, anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Holocaust denial, Homophobic hate speech, pantheism, genocide, cosmotheism, white supremacy, white separatism (which has been moved to racial segregation), racism and related sites. 
More later if I have time. AndyL 04:33, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sam, please explain what throttling an account means? Thanks. AndyL 04:38, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Relief requested by Mob

message: Paul Vogel has had 24 or 48 hour bans imposed on him on several occasions yet has not improved his behaviour. He circumvented the most recent ban by Hadal (see above) causing his suspension to be extended to 96 hours. This shows his lack of respect for Wikipedia and for attempts to discipline him.
Despite being on wikipedia for several months he refuses to get a userid, despite several requests that he do so, making it more difficult to track his activity (and more difficult to impose discipline). See  also see his talk page in general User_talk:24.45.99.191 for attempts by the community to deal with him patiently and his responses. See also User_talk:65.125.10.66
He has made the pages on which he has participated into hostile environments for those who disagree with his views, particlarly Jews, particularly on Talk:Holocaust where he has used blood curses against Jews as a whole.
:"You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!"-PV"  (emphasis mine: AndyL)
followed by 
:"Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck!" 
The Vogel RFC page shows just how much animosity he has whipped up. 
Paul is an open and unreconstructed anti-Semite (though he prefers the term "anti-Jewish") and tries to edit anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) material into wikipedia such as adding a link to David Duke's material  on to the Judaism page and on 19th of April he reverted  edits more that three times despite others efforts to stop him. See also  and 
The Holocaust page is protected due to his constant vandalism  again, on the 19 of April he reverted this page more than three times. 
He has harassed individuals who complain about him by pasting entire pages of material on their talk page - Eloquence complains about that here 
I request a permanent ban on Vogal and his various ips since he has demonstrated no ability to correct or modify his behavior despite numerous requests and past disciplinary action. If anything he's gotten worse. If a lesser ban is imposed he should be required to obtain and use a userid so that he can be more easily monitored. He should be permanently banned (at least) from editing Judaism, Jews, anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Holocaust denial, Homophobic hate speech, pantheism, genocide, cosmotheism, white supremacy, white separatism (which has been moved to racial segregation), racism and related sites. 
More later if I have time. AndyL 04:33, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: User:AndyL

message: His behavior here is not new, and he has been banned from numerous other sites for very similar reasons. For the past five months he has kept up a constant flow of personal attacks and reversion wars, and he either fails to comprehend or refuses to abide by basic Wikipedia guidelines, including the all-important NPOV policy. Nobody has been able to convince him to do otherwise, despite numerous efforts by any number of Wikipedians. Therefore I wish to see Vogel banned from editing Wikipedia until such time as he agrees to cease the aforementioned behavior. —No-One Jones 16:17, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Mirv aka No-one Jones

message: *I agree to being his advocate, in this circumstance and others, until I such time as I might find cause to recuse myself. Sam Spade 22:30, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: The Accused: Paul Vogel

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Spade/Clients#Paul_Vogel
I propose he be required to form an account if he is to stay, and that said account be throttled, for number of edits or reverts, or both, until such time as his case is re-evaluated (for good or ill). Sam Spade 20:38, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sam, please explain what throttling an account means? Thanks. AndyL 04:38, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Evidence for the Defense of Paul Vogel by Sam Spade:

message: (Attention: As the author of the following statements I do not wish to have my text parsed.  Please add any responses after it is complete. This can be determined by where my signature is provided at the end.  I do not feel my meaning can be properly conveyed if fragmented. I will restore my text to its original form if altered. Feel free to quote me in any response.)
I have encountered Paul Vogel a number of times in the last few months.  Putting aside instances where I only observed an altercation and did not become involved my experiences have been discouraging.  My first encounters were on articles that I had not contributed but noticed a large amount of agressive activity by an anon user.  Looking at these I found that the single anon user was trying to push racist POV into articles where little or no support.  This is my own opinion and the opinions of those discussion the issue before I was involved.  I assisted in reverting these unwanted changes supported by the overwhelming discussion on the talk pages against them.  Some, including myself, tried to create compromises that included both points of view.  The majority reluctantly accepted compromises but none (that I observed) were acceptable to Mr. Vogel and the edit and revert wars were continued on any compromise.
I tried to discuss the issues and reasons to Mr. Vogel and in the course of discussions I was grouped with some vague collection of users that wanted to specifically silence, aggravate, or oppose him as a person.  I do believe that there are users who would oppose Mr. Vogel in anything he does in Wikipedia but I am not one of them.  Mr. Vogel railed against the oppression of his views and sought to prove that those rules are only applied to oppose his opinions and not to other articles.  He decided that if Cosmotheism must have critical opinions linked in the article then Judaism should as well.  He added links to Judaism in a new "criticism" section.  I made one modification to his original links to keep them from being analysis in themselves (and as short as those descriptions in Cosmotheism.  These were immediately removed.   I restored both these links that were added by Mr. Vogel  and started a topic in the talk page  asking what about the links or the criticisms section was wrong for this page. 
Mr. Vogel restored his original links and text which referred to Judaism's "typical lying hypocrisy and psychological projection".   Understandably, this was removed and replaced with one opinion of Jewwatch as anti-jewish.   To help satisfy both parties I attempted a compromise description (encouraged that the description was only modified and not removed outright by Mkmcconn).    I thought the compromise would be acceptable since it did not attack either side's opinion just gave it factually.  One user removed the jewwatch web site as neo-nazi and not an analytical criticism (which I later came to agree with) and another user trying to compromise with Mr. Vogel helpfully added another critical link against Judaism titled "Piety and Power: The World of Jewish Fundamentalism".  ALL of these compromises were unacceptable to Mr. Vogel and his original links and text were fully restored.  And jewwatch restored again in its original text.   I again tried to keep the link but reduce the text to a flat tone.  Good news was that one of the links Mr. Vogel wanted added was being kept each time and the additional book reference as well.  The community was trying to compromise with Mr. Vogel by retaining two entries (one of them his) in the new criticism section.   To Mr. Vogel's credit he made this attempt to change his own text to something more acceptable  and I fixed his formatting but kept his link.   After this there was no attempt at compromise by Mr. Vogel but much was compromised by the community.
Wikilinks were added  (that were mostly kept by the compromising community) but then a torrent of anti-jewish commentary was added that was clearly not appropriate for a links section of any kind.  
Mr. Vogel made several attempts to get anti-jewish links with non-link commentary added to the criticism links section with such authors as David Duke and some commentary that went for paragraphs and talked about Jewish supremacy.     [       Most users left the critical analysis links (including those about moral and ethical problems in Judaism by infidels.org) as part of the article.  Mr. Vogel made the addition of the infidels.org link and the Jewish ethnocentrism and Anti-Semitism links that remain in the article today.  The community compromised and accepted these links in bending to Mr. Vogel to be as fair as possible.
Attempts to communicate with Mr. Vogel and stop the links viewed as racist or neo-nazi were not successful and temporary blocks were needed to stop the constant effort to include them.  I attempted to discuss with Mr. Vogel about limiting the descriptions to factual terms and not include inflamatory links.  I attempted to negotiate terms with the community so that Mr. Vogels links could remain as criticism.     After in-depth discussion on the topic only one of the original links was dropped, the jewwatch site.  It was explained why this was not a criticism but rather an attack on anything jewish.    For my efforts to get as much as possible of Mr. Vogel's views into the Judaism article I was met with derision on the Judaism talk: 
On the Talk:Cosmotheism my efforts were utterly dismissed. It is hard to find correct links to show the discussion since Mr. Vogel would cut large sections of discussion and attribute them all to me even though other signatures were included in what he claimed what all by me and attacking him. I made one effort to correct his misattribution:   It might have explained why he continued to attack me even as I tried to support including some (if not all) of his links in criticism of Judaism.   This is what I thought  but not apparantly what he meant since he then claimed that I banned him and was of the lying hypocrits ilk that opposed him.   After my astonishment at this attack from someone I was trying to help wore off I wrote, then deleted an angry reply. Instead I wrote this:  and . The response was this:  and other cut-and-paste that mixed up others comments mixed in badly with a statement by me that did not say the same thing. He was at this point posting the same large sections that combined others comments with mine into one paragraph both in Judaism and Cosmotheism simultaneously without any change between them. I tried to answer and at the same time inidicate that this discussion should not be cross-posted to both talk pages.  
Mr. Vogel often will past huge segments of other articles into a talk page.  along with his additional text. I can only call these rants.  I wanted to make it clear to Mr. Vogel that I am not "out to get him" and that I don't have to agree with him 100% to avoid being labelled hypocritical ilk that ban and censor him.  Someone suggested mediation but Mr. Vogel considered the "cabal" incapable of mediation. I gave my view of how he can compromise and contribute to Wikipedia:  but this was ripped apart along with the idea of mediation (reply to me below mediation discussion): 
In my opinion, Mr. Vogel is not currently willing to work with others in a cooperative effort.  I agree with those above that he is causing much more disruption than contribution to Wikipedia.  I think he needs extended time away both to make it clear that his actions are unacceptable and to let him reflect on how to work with the community instead of flatly against it.  I agree with the suggestion above to give Mr. Vogel up to 5 months ban from editing in Wikipedia and hope that he can return as a contributor who works with others. 
I apologize for the length but this is the best way I could present the information.  I left out earlier efforts to compromise with Mr. Vogel that also failed.  I can include these if necessary.
This completes my statement. - Tεxτurε 23:00, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Texture|Texture]] Additional Allegations

message: I have reviewed the above statement by Texture, followed by the mailing list, and I feel a need to recuse myself from this case. I won't remove what I said in defense of paul above, nor offer a new proposal, but I will say that I no longer feel comfortable standing behind what I said, and reserve comment regarding his arbitration until it is resolved, for the benefit of my client. Sam Spade 05:00, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] [[User talk:Sam Spade|'''Spade''']] NO COMMENT

message: # We should hear this. I believe it is Wikipedia policy that pushing an extreme point of view is not in itself grounds for banning. However there are a number of Wikipedia policies which by necessity must be violated in an effort to aggressively push a point of view. I think, based on a preliminary review of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Paul Vogel there are sufficient grounds for consideration of his actions. Fred Bauder 13:24, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
# Agree with Fred; support. James F. (talk) 13:26, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Arbitrator's opinions on hearing this matter

message: ====No personal attacks====
* In extreme cases, users have been banned for repeatedly engaging in personal attacks. Specific types of slur covered by this include but are not limited to the following: Racial, sexual, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks
====Disruptive users may be blocked====
* Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia. Blocking policy#Disruption
Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed principles

message: * Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia. Blocking policy#Disruption
Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Disruptive users may be blocked

message: Re: last comment from "More expressions of anti-Semitism"
* " It is clear that a cabal of censorous pov bigots have falsely accused me..."
** While I have no doubt that PV has engaged in personal attacks  and anti-Semitic flaming, I fail to see how this specific comment [last comment in the section more anti-Semitic comments] is an expression of anti-Semitism. JRR Trollkien (see warning) 21:00, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments by outside users

message: Known participants have been given headers, others may join this matter by creating a header and requesting relief.
===User:AndyL===
Paul Vogel has had 24 or 48 hour bans imposed on him on several occasions yet has not improved his behaviour. He circumvented the most recent ban by Hadal (see above) causing his suspension to be extended to 96 hours. This shows his lack of respect for Wikipedia and for attempts to discipline him.
No, I ONLY do have a lack of respect for any of those that do unfairly and that do selfishly abuse and misuse the powers that Wikipedia and that Jimbo Wales and others have granted them.-PV
Despite being on wikipedia for several months he refuses to get a userid, despite several requests that he do so, making it more difficult to track his activity (and more difficult to impose discipline). See  also see his talk page in general User_talk:24.45.99.191 for attempts by the community to deal with him patiently and his responses. See also User_talk:65.125.10.66
Actually, anyone that has been "reasonable" with me and that has been able to "compromise" and to avoid flame and edit wars with me, has had no real or long-term problems with me.-PV
He has made the pages on which he has participated into hostile environments for those who disagree with his views, particlarly Jews, particularly on Talk:Holocaust where he has used blood curses against Jews as a whole.
That is just a bald-faced lie. The "hostile environment" has been actually only your own "ilks" creation and not mine. The so-called "blood curse" was very specific against only "lying and censorious hypocrites" and was NOT against "Jews as a whole", whatsoever.-PV
:"You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!"-PV"  (emphasis mine: AndyL)
Of course, this quote was taken out of context by AndyL. The reference to the Jews was only a warning that any such selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth will reflect badly upon all Jews, everywhere, and no more and no less, and most especially, regarding the current Holocaust or Genocide of the Palestinian People by the Jewish-Zionist-Israeli's for the last 50-60 or so years of constant occupation and displacement and murderous abuse of their natural Human Rights.-PV
followed by 
:"Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck!" 
The Vogel RFC page shows just how much animosity he has whipped up.
Again, this is factually true and accurate, and whenever any such pov and selfish bigotry is chosen over the Truth, there actually are quite harsh consequences that are unforeseen at the time that do happen sometimes until perhaps much later down the line in history. Ignore that fact of the Cosmos and at your own peril was my actual intention, and I still wished this ignorant "ilk" some "Good luck!" in avoiding it.-PV
Paul is an open and unreconstructed anti-Semite (though he prefers the term "anti-Jewish") and tries to edit anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) material into wikipedia such as adding a link to David Duke's material  on to the Judaism page and on 19th of April he reverted  edits more that three times despite others efforts to stop him. See also  and 
I am neither any "open" nor "unreconstructed" anti-Semite, whatsoever.
The term "anti-Semite" itself is really just a complete misnomer.
I am not even "anti-Jewish", but, I am anti-FALSEHOOD, anti-LYING HYPOCRISY, and anti-POV-CENSORSHIP and anti-Jewish SUPREMACISM and anti-Zionist/Israel FIRST and if that fact makes me "anti-Jewish", or falsely "anti-Semitic", then so be it!-PV
The Holocaust page is protected due to his constant vandalism  again, on the 19 of April he reverted this page more than three times. 
Those edits were NOT VANDALISM, but, were added to maintain a Wiki NPOV.-PV
He has harassed individuals who complain about him by pasting entire pages of material on their talk page - Eloquence complains about that here 
I request a permanent ban on Vogal and his various ips since he has demonstrated no ability to correct or modify his behavior despite numerous requests and past disciplinary action. If anything he's gotten worse. If a lesser ban is imposed he should be required to obtain and use a userid so that he can be more easily monitored. He should be permanently banned (at least) from editing Judaism, Jews, anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Holocaust denial, Homophobic hate speech, pantheism, genocide, cosmotheism, white supremacy, white separatism (which has been moved to racial segregation), racism and related sites. 
More later if I have time. AndyL 04:33, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sam, please explain what throttling an account means? Thanks. AndyL 04:38, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Relief requested

message: Paul Vogel has had 24 or 48 hour bans imposed on him on several occasions yet has not improved his behaviour. He circumvented the most recent ban by Hadal (see above) causing his suspension to be extended to 96 hours. This shows his lack of respect for Wikipedia and for attempts to discipline him.
No, I ONLY do have a lack of respect for any of those that do unfairly and that do selfishly abuse and misuse the powers that Wikipedia and that Jimbo Wales and others have granted them.-PV
Despite being on wikipedia for several months he refuses to get a userid, despite several requests that he do so, making it more difficult to track his activity (and more difficult to impose discipline). See  also see his talk page in general User_talk:24.45.99.191 for attempts by the community to deal with him patiently and his responses. See also User_talk:65.125.10.66
Actually, anyone that has been "reasonable" with me and that has been able to "compromise" and to avoid flame and edit wars with me, has had no real or long-term problems with me.-PV
He has made the pages on which he has participated into hostile environments for those who disagree with his views, particlarly Jews, particularly on Talk:Holocaust where he has used blood curses against Jews as a whole.
That is just a bald-faced lie. The "hostile environment" has been actually only your own "ilks" creation and not mine. The so-called "blood curse" was very specific against only "lying and censorious hypocrites" and was NOT against "Jews as a whole", whatsoever.-PV
:"You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!"-PV"  (emphasis mine: AndyL)
Of course, this quote was taken out of context by AndyL. The reference to the Jews was only a warning that any such selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth will reflect badly upon all Jews, everywhere, and no more and no less, and most especially, regarding the current Holocaust or Genocide of the Palestinian People by the Jewish-Zionist-Israeli's for the last 50-60 or so years of constant occupation and displacement and murderous abuse of their natural Human Rights.-PV
followed by 
:"Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck!" 
The Vogel RFC page shows just how much animosity he has whipped up.
Again, this is factually true and accurate, and whenever any such pov and selfish bigotry is chosen over the Truth, there actually are quite harsh consequences that are unforeseen at the time that do happen sometimes until perhaps much later down the line in history. Ignore that fact of the Cosmos and at your own peril was my actual intention, and I still wished this ignorant "ilk" some "Good luck!" in avoiding it.-PV
Paul is an open and unreconstructed anti-Semite (though he prefers the term "anti-Jewish") and tries to edit anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) material into wikipedia such as adding a link to David Duke's material  on to the Judaism page and on 19th of April he reverted  edits more that three times despite others efforts to stop him. See also  and 
I am neither any "open" nor "unreconstructed" anti-Semite, whatsoever.
The term "anti-Semite" itself is really just a complete misnomer.
I am not even "anti-Jewish", but, I am anti-FALSEHOOD, anti-LYING HYPOCRISY, and anti-POV-CENSORSHIP and anti-Jewish SUPREMACISM and anti-Zionist/Israel FIRST and if that fact makes me "anti-Jewish", or falsely "anti-Semitic", then so be it!-PV
The Holocaust page is protected due to his constant vandalism  again, on the 19 of April he reverted this page more than three times. 
Those edits were NOT VANDALISM, but, were added to maintain a Wiki NPOV.-PV
He has harassed individuals who complain about him by pasting entire pages of material on their talk page - Eloquence complains about that here 
I request a permanent ban on Vogal and his various ips since he has demonstrated no ability to correct or modify his behavior despite numerous requests and past disciplinary action. If anything he's gotten worse. If a lesser ban is imposed he should be required to obtain and use a userid so that he can be more easily monitored. He should be permanently banned (at least) from editing Judaism, Jews, anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Holocaust denial, Homophobic hate speech, pantheism, genocide, cosmotheism, white supremacy, white separatism (which has been moved to racial segregation), racism and related sites. 
More later if I have time. AndyL 04:33, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: User:AndyL

message: His behavior here is not new, and he has been banned from numerous other sites for very similar reasons. For the past five months he has kept up a constant flow of personal attacks and reversion wars, and he either fails to comprehend or refuses to abide by basic Wikipedia guidelines, including the all-important NPOV policy. Nobody has been able to convince him to do otherwise, despite numerous efforts by any number of Wikipedians. Therefore I wish to see Vogel banned from editing Wikipedia until such time as he agrees to cease the aforementioned behavior. —No-One Jones 16:17, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Mirv

message: The above statements by Sl are distressing to me. I can see numerous mistakes Paul has made, and I expect that he will be receiving a sanction from the committee, lets just get that out of the way. I am here to plead for lenience, and to minimize injustice. Hard banning Paul, particularly for being anti-Jewish or racist would be unjust. He has not made any overtly racist comments that I am aware of, and quite unlike Sl, I expect people of a variety of offensive types (paraphiliacs, communists, Muslim extremists, atheists etc...) to be allowed here. I don’t see a need to single out particular types of conventionally unpopular people, unless we are going to create an official wiki-POV. He has made quality contributions to the wikipedia, he has been willing to compromise, and his behaviour has improved over time, until just recently. The evidence against him is simple, and his only defense is the reason why he is here. A strict obedience of policy would have him banned/reverted early and often, as a contentious anon. But Paul is more than a vandal. He is Paul Vogel. He is a person with knowledge on a subject. The subject of white separatism might be unpleasant to you (much as finger fucking and atheism and heteronormativity are offensive to me) but that subject needs to be available to our fearless readers. They need to be able to learn about the distinction between separatism and supremacism, and just what exactly these fellows are thinking, and what it is about Jews they don’t like. You want him removed from the Judaism page, even from the anti-Semitism page, the chosen race page where I sent him. I speak to you from my heart: He is not going to love Jews so long as they exclude him, and he is not going to learn anything good about them when his only sources are jewwatch and stormfront. His presence on these pages serves to educate him, if nothing else. Paul is a person, and he has things to say. He is careful, if you have not noticed, not to use slurs or be otherwise overly offensive. The wording of his blood curse so as only to apply to hypocrites and liars and such, his affinity for Carl Sagan, Christ, Palestinians and other Semites shows me that he is not an irredeemable bigot, but rather is an individual who has found a broad label (“ilk”) for those he views as his opposition, rather than a racial or political one as some do (heteronormative, communist, fascist, racist, factual relativist/postmodernist are a few other such labels). Sam Spade 20:26, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Paul Vogel

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Spade/Clients#Paul_Vogel
I propose he be required to form an account if he is to stay, and that said account be throttled, for number of edits or reverts, or both, until such time as his case is re-evaluated (for good or ill). Sam Spade 20:38, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sam, please explain what throttling an account means? Thanks. AndyL 04:38, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Evidence for the Defense of Paul Vogel by Sam Spade:

message: # We should hear this. I believe it is Wikipedia policy that pushing an extreme point of view is not in itself grounds for banning. However there are a number of Wikipedia policies which by necessity must be violated in an effort to aggressively push a point of view. I think, based on a preliminary review of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Paul Vogel there are sufficient grounds for consideration of his actions. Fred Bauder 13:24, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
# Agree with Fred; support. James F. (talk) 13:26, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Arbitrator's opinions on hearing this matter

message: * I think invocation of a blood curse upon another user (probably, but not necessarily Jewish) in Talk:Holocaust pretty much takes the cake. Following this up with "Does it require any "blood curse" for you and your own ilk to take the hint? Or will it take another Holocaust, before you finally learn the lesson? " pretty much defines the situation as far as I'm concerned. Fred Bauder 02:37, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)
If you are that pov biased Fred Bauder
that you have taken the quote out of context,
then you should really just step down as an arbitrator, Fred. 
You can not be fair nor impartial.-PV
===Proposed principles===
====No personal attacks====
* In extreme cases, users have been banned for repeatedly engaging in personal attacks. Specific types of slur covered by this include but are not limited to the following: Racial, sexual, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks
No DOUBLE-STANDARDS. 
There have not been any such "personal attacks" from me nor that were not actually based upon solely the facts or that were not provoked, first. The "ilk" knows just who and whom they are don't they?-PV
====Disruptive users may be blocked====
* Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia. Blocking policy#Disruption
Not without truthful and valid reasons, which some here didn't do before blocking, banning, and censoring me.-PV
Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion by arbitrators

message: ====No personal attacks====
* In extreme cases, users have been banned for repeatedly engaging in personal attacks. Specific types of slur covered by this include but are not limited to the following: Racial, sexual, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks
No DOUBLE-STANDARDS. 
There have not been any such "personal attacks" from me nor that were not actually based upon solely the facts or that were not provoked, first. The "ilk" knows just who and whom they are don't they?-PV
====Disruptive users may be blocked====
* Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia. Blocking policy#Disruption
Not without truthful and valid reasons, which some here didn't do before blocking, banning, and censoring me.-PV
Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed principles

message: * Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia. Blocking policy#Disruption
Not without truthful and valid reasons, which some here didn't do before blocking, banning, and censoring me.-PV
Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Disruptive users may be blocked

message: Plan might be to remove these to avoid the danger of content arbitration... Martin 01:14, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV findings 

message: : (from page) I propose he be required to form an account if he is to stay, and that said account be throttled, for number of edits or reverts, or both, until such time as his case is re-evaluated (for good or ill). Sam Spade 20:38, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is throttling?