(and "you posted too many diffs at AE so you should be topic banned"... seriously?)
==Evidence presented by Thebiguglyalien==
===Grabowski and Klein gamed the system and subverted Wikipedia dispute resolution===
The information at {{doi|10.1080/25785648.2023.2168939}} provides evidence that Grabowski and Klein (G&K) were aware of the ongoing long-term dispute, had an in-depth knowledge of Wikipedia [[WP:DR]] procedures, and chose not to use them.
The same article is evidence that G&K intentionally and extensively involved themselves in the dispute. They did so by making accusations against specific editors and challenging specific edits within the ongoing dispute. These are the exact behaviors that indicate involvement in a Wikipedia dispute, and editors that do such things onsite are routinely considered to be "involved editors". ARBCOM has previously recognized that {{tq|If accusations are made, they should be raised, with evidence, on the user talk page of the editor they concern or in the appropriate dispute resolution forum.}} ([[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3#Criticism and casting aspersions|2013]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Historicity of Jesus#Criticism and casting aspersions|2014]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88#Criticism and casting aspersions|2015]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others#Criticism and casting aspersions|2018]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort#Criticism and casting aspersions|2018]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Motorsports#Criticism and casting aspersions|2020]], [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine#Criticism and casting aspersions|2020]]). G&K have circumvented this process, making accusations that have been widely disseminated through the Wikipedia community without the typical standards imposed on such accusations. Evidenced by the fact that we are discussing this now, we can see that G&K have not only become actively involved in a Wikipedia dispute, but they have elevated their voices and arguments above those of all other participants in a way that exempts them from policies and guidelines, indicating an unprecedented level of success in an attempt to [[WP:GAME|game the system]].
Given these facts, the aforementioned article provides evidence that G&K used their positions in academia to participate in an English Wikipedia conflict in a way that allowed them to circumvent the community's policies and guidelines. This evidence should not be construed as an assertion of jurisdiction over offsite activity, but it is pertinent as it is a recent event that has directly affected and engaged with—and continues to directly affect—onsite activity in regard to this topic area and the named parties. ARBCOM has recognized that {{tq|The Committee may take notice of conduct outside its jurisdiction when making decisions about conduct on the English Wikipedia if such outside conduct impacts or has the potential to impact adversely upon the English Wikipedia or its editors.}} ([[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/BLP issues on British politics articles#Off-wiki conduct|2018]]). It is also pertinent as the response of the community and that of ARBCOM specifically will determine whether this method of circumventing policies and guidelines becomes a viable method for special interest groups or other individuals with platforms to create a chilling effect against Wikipedia editors or control the direction of Wikipedia disputes, creating the potential for a severe adverse effect on the community should it not be adequately considered.