Misplaced Pages

:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:42, 16 August 2009 view sourceRisker (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, New page reviewers, Oversighters, Administrators28,285 edits Announcement: Results of Checkuser/Oversight elections, August 2009: minor update← Previous edit Revision as of 05:43, 16 August 2009 view source John Vandenberg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users68,507 edits Appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee: Keeblesound and Arindamp: new sectionNext edit →
Line 693: Line 693:


''']''' ''']'''

== Appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee: Keeblesound and Arindamp ==

The ] has allowed the appeals of:
* {{User|Keeblesound}}
* {{User|Arindamp}}

As a consequence of the Arindamp appeal, the ban subcommittee has also unbanned {{user|Mrinal Pandey}} and {{user|Carlisle Rodham}}. These three users are topic banned from ] for 6 months.

The text of the decisions and any associated restrictions have been posted on the applicable user talk pages.

For the Arbitration Committee, &nbsp;<span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 05:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

]

Revision as of 05:43, 16 August 2009

Misplaced Pages Arbitration
Open proceedings
Active sanctions
Arbitration Committee
Audit
Track related changes
ShortcutThis noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's Clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.
Announcement archives: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6
This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

Agenda

Arbitration Committee proceedings Case requests

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

Open cases
Case name Links Evidence due Prop. Dec. due
Palestine-Israel articles 5 (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) 21 Dec 2024 11 Jan 2025
Recently closed cases (Past cases)

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Clarification and Amendment requests

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

Arbitrator motions
Motion name Date posted
Arbitrator workflow motions 1 December 2024

Current agenda

The Committee's current agenda is as follows:

Review Committee performance (Six-month review)
Milestones:
  • Executive summary published 22 July 2009
  • Full version due for publication 22 August 2009
  • Depending on feedback will open on RFC in September 2009
Status:

Preparation of fuller report in progress

Review mail handling process
Milestones:
  • Documentation of procedures underway
  • Documentation completion date: August 15
Status:

Documentation of procedures underway

Determine workshop page structure
Milestones:
  • Publication of recommendations for discussion by 30 September
Status:

No activity at this time

Prepare updated arbitration policy
Milestones:
  • Prepare updated draft #3 and publish it for discussion by 15 September
  • Referendum on draft #3 (date to be announced)
  • Prepare updated guide to arbitration after referendum
Status:

Draft #2 published; preparation of draft #3 in progress

Rotate Ban Appeals Subcommittee membership
Milestones:
  • Rotate one member by August 1
  • Rotate one member by September 1
  • Rotate one member by October 1
  • Rotate one member by November 1
  • Rotate one member by December 1
Status:

No activity at this time

Appoint CU & OS auditing subcommittee
Milestones:
  • Determine election mechanism by August 15
Status:

Election mechanism under discussion

Determine updates to arbitration enforcement procedures
Milestones:
  • Decide on reform proposals by September 5
  • Implement reforms by September 19
Status:

No activity at this time

Develop an arbitrator recall process
Milestones:
  • Prepare proposal by September 5
  • Decide on proposal by September 26
Status:

No activity at this time

Determine how to deal with users returning from bans
Milestones:
  • Prepare proposal by September 12
  • Decide on proposal by October 3
Status:

No activity at this time

Review clerk procedures
Milestones:
  • Conduct review by September 19
Status:

No activity at this time

Review ban appeals process
Milestones:
  • Internal review underway
  • Six-month review in October 2009
  • Consider options for public ban appeals in October 2009
Status:

Internal review in progress

Determine approach to dealing with inactive administrators
Milestones:
  • Deferred to October 2009, not pressing
Status:

No activity at this time

Determine approach to handling civility issues
Milestones:
  • Open public RFC by October 3
  • Compile RFC results by October 24
  • Prepare further proposals by November 7
Status:

No activity at this time

Determine approach to handling vested contributor issues
Milestones:
  • Open public RFC by October 3
  • Compile RFC results by October 24
  • Prepare further proposals by November 7
Status:

No activity at this time

Prepare transition procedure
Milestones:
  • Prepare draft procedure by October 31
  • Prepare final procedure by November 30
Status:

No activity at this time

Prepare updated induction document
Milestones:
  • Prepare draft by October 31
  • Prepare final version by November 30
Status:

No activity at this time

Discuss the agenda

Calendar

{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Agenda/Calendar/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}}}

Announcements

Arbitration motions regarding Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names

Per these motions at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:

Discussions relating to the naming of Ireland articles must occur at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration.

Moderators of Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration may ban any contributor from the pages within the scope of the WikiProject for up to a month when a contributor is disrupting the collaboration process.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 21:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Motion allowing parties currently banned from I/P articles to comment on naming guidelines for I/P articles

To allow users currently banned from I/P articles to comment on naming guidelines for I/P articles. Conditions are that they may make very short comments in each section once, and may not comment on other users.

Motion failed.

The vote was 0-9-4:

Support: None
Oppose: Carcharoth, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, Jayvdb, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Rlevse, Wizardman
Abstain: Casliber, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad, Vassyana
Not voting: Roger Davies, Stephen Bain

— Coren , for the Committee, 00:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee: Aarandir & Anonimu

The Ban Appeals Subcommittee has allowed the appeals of:

The text of the decisions and any associated restrictions have been posted on the applicable user talk pages.

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 14:39, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Nichalp

In response to community concerns about Nichalp (talk · contribs) using an undisclosed account (Zithan (talk · contribs)) for paid editing, and because of Nichalp's failure to reply to the Arbitration Committee's email enquiry about these concerns, Nichalp's bureaucrat, administrator and oversight status, and his access to the associated mailing lists (<functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org> and <oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org>), are temporarily removed and User:Zithan is indefinitely blocked.

Nichalp is instructed to contact the Arbitration Committee as soon as possible in order to resolve the issues related to his special access privileges and the Zithan account.

The vote was 8-0-1:

Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FloNight, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Wizardman
Oppose: None
Abstain: FayssalF
Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Jayvdb, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain, Vassyana

— Coren , for the Committee, 21:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking

This arbitration case has now closed. The final decision may be reviewed on the case page. A synopsis of the final decision is provided below.

Notes: (1) for "topic banned", read "banned from style and editing guidelines, and any related discussions"; (2) an "editing restriction" is a prohibition from reverting any changes which are principally stylistic, except where all style elements are prescribed in the applicable style guideline.

For the Arbitration Committee,

AGK 19:58, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Changes of account name by restricted users

To allow better enforcement of arbitration decisions, the Committee has amended its enforcement procedures to include the following provision:

If an editor is subject to any sort of Arbitration Committee parole or restriction, and wishes to start a new account or to change their username with a suppressed redirect from the old name, they must notify the Committee of this before they proceed with editing under said new account/name. Failure to disclose this, if discovered, is grounds for a ban from the project.

This resolution was adopted by a 10/0 vote, with one abstention:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: Newyorkbrad
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, Risker, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill  00:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Statement regarding the Matthew Hoffman case

The present Arbitration Committee has reviewed the Matthew Hoffman case, which took place in December 2007 and January 2008. The Committee has concluded that a series of significant irregularities occurred which, in combination, were prejudicial to Shoemaker's Holiday. These irregularities were that:

  • The request for arbitration bypassed preliminary steps in the dispute resolution process, and should not have been accepted as framed;
  • A decision in the case was presented for voting prematurely, limiting the ability of the parties to respond;
  • Order was not adequately kept on the case pages, allowing them to be used as a platform for attacks;
  • The schedule of the proceedings was not clearly communicated to the parties; and
  • Correspondence about the case on arbcom-l was handled incorrectly.

This unique confluence of irregularities resulted in a fundamentally flawed process and the present Committee takes this opportunity to apologize to Shoemaker's Holiday and to the community. Further, the Committee has determined that all findings reflecting adversely on Shoemaker's Holiday, under any account name, are nullified. The Committee notes that Shoemaker's Holiday has agreed to consult with the Committee prior to re-seeking adminship.

This statement was adopted by a 8/2 vote, with three abstentions and two recusals:

  • Support: Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Roger Davies, Wizardman
  • Oppose: Rlevse, Stephen Bain
  • Abstain: Coren, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad
  • Recused: Carcharoth, Vassyana
  • Not voting: None

For the Committee, Kirill  00:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

New rules for inactivity on internal resolutions

The Committee has determined that:

(a) Any arbitrator who fails to enter a vote on an internal resolution within one week of the vote having been generally announced on arbcom-l will be considered inactive on that resolution, and will not be counted when determining the majority for the resolution's passage; and
(b) Any arbitrator considered inactive under provision (a) will be so marked when the resolution is published; but
(c) An internal resolution will not come into effect if the total number of arbitrators voting on it is less than an absolute majority of the Committee.

This resolution was adopted by a 10/2 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: Carcharoth, Rlevse
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: FayssalF, John Vandenberg, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill  01:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

CheckUser and Oversight elections

The Arbitration Committee has determined that a new round of elections for operators of the CheckUser and Oversight tools will be held in the near future.

(I) The timeline of the upcoming elections is as follows:

  • June 20 - Announcement of upcoming election and invitation to request applications
  • July 1 - Deadline to request applications
  • July 3 - Deadline for submission of applications
  • June 20 - July 20 - Committee review of submissions
    • Final decisions on vetting of candidates to be made by July 20
  • July 21-27 - Preparation for election
    • July 21-22 - Emails to successfully vetted candidates advising them that they may stand for election, ensuring they are still interested and explaining election expectations (including number of positions open)
    • July 21-27 - Nominees may post a brief statement and questions can begin
  • July 28 - August 10 - Voting
  • August 11-16 - Committee review of results
  • August 17 - Announcement of results

(II) Candidates may run for CheckUser, Oversight, or both.

(III) The following modifications are made to the procedure used for the first election:

  • The Arbitration Committee reserves the right to rescind or suspend a nomination for checkuser or oversight privileges at any time during the election/appointment process. Nominations will only be rescinded or suspended in exceptional circumstances.
  • Successful candidates will have a minimum of 70% support, in keeping with the Wikimedia Foundation Oversight Policy.
  • For the purpose of this election, any editor who has 150 mainspace edits prior to June 15, 2009 may vote.
  • Nominations will be posted two days before the beginning of voting. Candidates may post a short statement, and editors may pose questions of the candidates during this period. The voting period will be two weeks.

These resolutions were adopted as follows:

I, by a 12/0 vote with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: FayssalF, Risker, Stephen Bain

II, by a 9/0 vote with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, Risker, Rlevse, Stephen Bain

III, by an 8/0 vote with no abstentions:

  • Support: Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Roger Davies, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: Carcharoth, FayssalF, John Vandenberg, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Stephen Bain, Vassyana

For the Committee, Kirill  02:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Procedure for internal resolutions

The Committee has adopted a procedure for proposing and enacting internal resolutions:

  1. All internal resolutions will be proposed for voting on the Discussion board of the arbitration wiki, and will be clearly marked with a section header of the form "Proposal: X" in the case of normal resolutions, or "Urgent proposal: X" in the case of urgent resolutions.
  2. The coordinating arbitrator will circulate a daily list of open proposals and their current voting status to arbcom-l.
  3. When an internal resolution has passed, it will be announced on arbcom-l. The resolution will then be published to the public Committee noticeboard after a 48-hour waiting period (for normal resolutions) or immediately (for urgent resolutions).

The procedure was adopted by an 11/0 vote, with no abstentions or recusals:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: FayssalF, John Vandenberg, Risker, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill  02:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

Non-compliance to the above are grounds for blocking for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling.

The probation on articles relating to Barack Obama will be reviewed by a group of involved and non-involved editors and administrators to see how effective it has been. The process will last two weeks. After the two weeks elapse, the working group will provide their findings to us and the community, and will outline how the article probation will run in the future.

- For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 15:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Oversight-L report for May 2009

An analysis of the Oversight-L mailing list for May 2009 has been completed, the results are posted here.

Discuss

For the Audit Subcommittee, Thatcher 16:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Provisional suspension of community ban: Thekohser

The Arbitration Committee has provisionally suspended the community ban of Thekohser (talk · contribs) and imposed various conditions and restrictions, the terms of which have been posted on the editor's talk page.

Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FloNight, John Vanderberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Roger Davies
Oppose: none
Abstain: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF
Not voting: NewYorkBrad, Rlevse, Stephen Bain, Vassyana, Wizardman

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 19:46, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Second draft of updated arbitration policy

The Committee has prepared a second provisional draft of an updated arbitration policy for community review. All editors are invited to examine the text and to provide any comments or suggestions they may have via one of the two methods specified on the draft page.

Release of this draft was approved by an 8/1 vote, with no abstentions or recusals:

  • Support: Carcharoth, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: Casliber
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, John Vandenberg, Risker, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill  16:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Seeyou

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

Seeyou (talk · contribs) is banned from editing Misplaced Pages for a period of one year.

- For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 21:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Format of requests for amendment

The Arbitration Committee has determined that all requests for the amendment of closed cases are to be made in a standard format:

A request for amendment of a closed case must clearly state the following:

(a) The name of the case to be amended;
(b) The clause(s) to be modified, referenced by number or section title;
(c) For each clause in (b), the desired modification; and
(d) The rationale for the requested amendment, comprising no more than 1000 words.

Any request which does not comply with these criteria will be summarily removed.

This format was adopted by a 10/0 vote, with no abstentions or recusals

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Recused: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill  15:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. A Man In Black's (AMiB) administrative privileges are revoked. He may reapply at any time via the usual means (RfA) or by appeal to the Arbitration Committee. AMiB is topic-banned from the Article Rescue Squadron. AMiB is placed on a standard editing restriction for one year. Ikip is warned to refrain from making large-scale edits which may be interpreted as canvassing and from directing rude comments to users with whom he is in dispute. This notice is given by a clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. AGK 23:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this.

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

  • Within 15 days of this decision, Mattisse shall, in conjunction with one or more mentors or advisers, submit to this Committee for approval a plan to govern and guide her future editing with the continued assistance of those mentors or advisers. The plan shall seek to preserve Mattisse's valuable and rewarding contributions to Misplaced Pages while avoiding future disputes and the types of interactions that have been hurtful for herself and others. As a starting point in developing the plan, Mattisse and her mentors or advisors should consider the suggestions made by various users on the workshop page of this case, including but not limited to Mattisse's taking wikibreaks at times of stress, avoiding or limiting Mattisse's participation on certain pages, Mattisse's refraining from making any comments regarding the motivations or good faith of other users, and Mattisse's disengaging from interactions that become stressful or negative. The plan should also address how any lapses by Mattisse from the standards of behavior described in the plan shall be addressed. (Note: As reflected in the findings, Mattisse prepared a plan as required by this paragraph while the proposed decision was pending. See next paragraph.)
  • User:Mattisse/Plan (version as of 24 June) is enacted as a baseline. Amendments to the plan may occur by consensus of the mentors, whereby the changes become provisional. At the discretion of the mentors, or if there are significant objections by the community, the provisional changes will be reviewed by the Arbitration Committee at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment.
  • Should Mattisse fail to submit a satisfactory plan under remedy 1 within 15 days of this decision, she shall not edit Misplaced Pages until she does so, except with permission of this Committee. (Note: As reflected in the findings, Mattisse prepared a plan, as required by remedy 1, while the proposed decision was pending. See preceding paragraphs.)
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 04:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding User:Coffee

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:

Coffee's administrator privileges are restored, effective immediately. He is reminded to abide by all policies and guidelines governing the conduct of administrators.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 15:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Ban appeal: Betacommand

Betacommand (talk · contribs) has appealed his community ban to the Arbitration Committee. The committee would appreciate brief (i) comments on the suitability of his possible return and (ii) proposals for possible editing restrictions should the appeal be successful. Private concerns may be raised with the committee by email at: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org (mailing list info).

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 09:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Advisory Council on Project Development convened

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Advisory Council on Project Development

The Arbitration Committee, with the endorsement of Jimbo Wales, is convening an advisory group with members invited from across the breadth of Misplaced Pages. The group will act as an advisory body to the Arbitration Committee and to the community; will consider various issues facing the project and develop ideas, proposals, and recommendations for improving it; and will serve as a forum for the sharing of best practices among the different areas within the project.

The group will not interfere with normal community discussion in any way; since the group will be purely advisory, anything it might recommend will need to achieve consensus normally, as any other proposal would, before it can be implemented. We see this group as a high-level think-tank, coming up with ideas that either the Committee or the community as a whole might choose to pursue. We hope that the concentration of experience and insight in the group's membership will produce discussions with a very high signal-to-noise ratio, and that the differing experiences and perspectives among the members will lead to better-rounded ideas, with fewer flaws caused by certain aspects not having been considered.

The advisory group will also advise the Committee directly, providing us with feedback and ideas from a cross-section of the community that's not otherwise involved in our work.

The group will be provisionally known as the Advisory Council on Project Development, although this is subject to change; editors are invited to send us suggestions for a more permanent name.

At this time, the following editors have accepted invitations to be the founding members of the group:

We are still awaiting responses to several additional invitations. We are also looking for a few more members; anyone who would like to be a part of this group is invited to send us a note to that effect.

The initial details of the group's logistics will be announced shortly.

The formation of this group was approved by an 8/3 vote, with two abstentions, no recusals, and two arbitrators considered inactive:

  • Support: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Wizardman
  • Oppose: Risker, Stephen Bain, Vassyana
  • Abstain: Carcharoth, Casliber
  • Recused: None
  • Inactive: FayssalF, Newyorkbrad

For the Committee, Kirill  03:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Provisional suspension of community ban: Betacommand

Motion
That the indefinite community ban of User:Betacommand be suspended for as long as he unconditionally agrees to and fully complies with the terms set out below.
Terms

The Arbitration Committee has decided that the community ban of User:Betacommand be provisionally suspended subject to your unconditional acceptance of and full compliance with the following non-negotiable terms:

  1. You edit under only one username and agree to regular checkuser inspection.
  2. For one year, you are (i) topic-banned from any non-free-content-related work and related talk pages; (ii) subject to a 0RR restriction on any free-content-image-related work and related talk pages; (iii) prohibited from operating bots or running automated scripts of whatever nature; (iv) prohibited from inducing or attempting to induce others to operate bots or run automated scripts; and (v) subject to an editing throttle of a maximum of four edits every ten minutes (excludes reversion of blatant vandalism). After six months, you may apply to ArbCom for a review of the terms of this condition.
  3. You agree (i) to a civility restriction and (ii) to not engage in any form of wikilawyering, broadly interpreted.
  4. You agree to mentoring for one year by User:MBisanz and User:Hersfold, who will make monthly progress reports by email to ArbCom. Either mentor may, at his sole discretion, block you for short periods if in his opinion you are in breach of any of these conditions. If either mentor or both mentors withdraw, you will cease all editing until replacement mentors are found. The mentorship will be reviewed, and may be continued, at the end of the first year.

Without prejudice to the foregoing, ArbCom may, at any time, by simple majority vote, reinstate your indefinite community ban by determining by motion of any arbitrator that you are (i) in breach of the spirit or letter of these terms or (ii) engaging in conduct injurious to the encyclopedia.

Support
Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Roger Davies, Stephen Bain, Wizardman
Oppose
Rlevse, Vassyana
Abstain
Carcharoth, John Vandenberg, NewYorkBrad

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 08:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ADHD#Final_decision

Discuss

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

Scuro (talk · contribs) and Jmh649 (talk · contribs) are placed on 1RR with regard to ADHD articles for a period of six months

Scuro (talk · contribs) is placed under mentorship for a period of one year.

Literaturegeek (talk · contribs) is advised to refrain from edit warring.

All involved editors are reminded to be civil and seek assistance in resolving editoral disagreements.

For the Committee MBisanz 00:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Naming conventions (West Bank)

Pursuant to this remedy in the recently closed case on West Bank - Judea and Samaria, consensus has been reached on naming guidelines for the West Bank, now located at Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (West Bank). Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Audit Subcommittee: personnel change

Roger Davies has stepped down from the Audit Subcommittee (AUSC) with immediate effect and will be replaced by Risker until 19 October 2009 for the unexpired part of the term.

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 15:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Golan Heights

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case:

The arbitration committee advises that one or more neutral admins

chair a new and structured Request for Comment on the disputed naming

guidelines on the Golan Heights within a two month time-frame.

It is recommend that those interested use Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration as a staging post.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 17:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification:

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong#Mythdon restricted and placed under mentorship is vacated and replaced with the following:

Mythdon is placed under conduct probabtion

Mythdon is placed under conduct probation for one year, in relation to WikiProject Tokusatsu and Ryulong, broadly construed. This includes, but is not limited to, edit warring and failing to appropriately pursue dispute resolution and to show better communication skills. Mythdon will still be restricted from making edits such as unnecessary questions and abusive warnings to users' talk pages.

Conduct probation enforcement

Any uninvolved administrator may utilize discretionary sanctions, including topic bans and blocks, to enforce this probation. Acting administrators are encouraged to apply sanctions tailored to the circumstances and context. For the purposes of enforcing this measure, any administrator approached directly by Ryulong for enforcement should not act directly. In such a situation, raise both Ryulong's and Mythdon's conduct in normal venues for review.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 19:25, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Publication of half-year summary of arbitration activities

Pursuant to the agenda item Review Committee performance, a half-year summary of arbitration activities has been published at January to June 2009 report. The publication of this summary was approved by an 8/0 vote, with no abstentions, and six arbitrators considered inactive:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Wizardman
  • Oppose: none
  • Abstain: none
  • Inactive: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain, Vassyana

For the Arbitration Committee, Carcharoth (talk) 04:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss announcement - Discuss report

Appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee: Melonite & Geologician

The Ban Appeals Subcommittee has allowed the appeals of:

The text of the decisions and any associated restrictions have been posted on the applicable user talk pages.

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 11:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

ArbCom motion re: Geogre

A motion has been filed concerning Geogre (talk · contribs) at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions.

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 15:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Motion to establish secondary ArbCom mailing list

Motion: that ArbCom urgently establish an arbcom-en-b mailing list solely for discussions involving (i) the conduct of an arbcom-l subscriber or (ii) cases, broadly defined, to which an arbcom-l subscriber is a party. In these instances, those arbcom-l subscribers referred to in clause (i) and (ii) would be removed from arbcom-en-b list for the duration of the discussion. Discussion shall be initiated at arbcom-en-b upon the motion of three uninvolved arbitrators.

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Wizardman
  • Oppose: Coren, Stephen Bain
  • Abstain: none
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, NewYorkBrad, Vassyana

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 07:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Geogre

Per motions at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions:

1) The Utgard Loki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) account is indefinitely blocked. Geogre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely prohibited from maintaining any other alternate account without disclosing it publicly.
2) Geogre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly admonished for sockpuppeting and his actions related thereto.
3.1) It is beyond doubt that Geogre (talk · contribs) used Utgard Loki (talk · contribs) in a manner which created the illusion of greater support for positions held by Geogre, in breach of the "Voting and other shows of support" and "Avoiding scrutiny" sections of the sock puppetry policy.
3.2) Administrators using a second account in a forbidden manner will be summarily de-sysopped, per the "Administrative sock puppets" section of the sock puppetry policy.
3.3) Geogre is desysopped and may regain adminship via the usual means.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Geogre 2

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions:

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz 01:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Amendment regarding Obama articles

The Committee has amended several remedies of Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Obama_articles as follows:

The remedies 4, 5, 9.2, 10.2, and 13 are rewritten as follows: (User) is admonished for his edit-warring. Furthermore, User is subject to an editing restriction for one year. User is limited to one revert per page per week on Obama-related articles (except for undisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. Should User exceed this limit or fail to discuss a content reversion, he may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.

The amended decision may be viewed at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Obama_articles#Remedies.

On behalf of the Committee. MBisanz 03:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration Committee motion regarding Aitias administrator permissions

Per motions of the Arbitration Committee at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions, the administrative permissions of Aitias (talk · contribs · former admin: blocks · protections · deletions · rights · meta · local rights) are removed for disruptive and inappropriate conduct including conduct involving his administrative duties. (Please note that Aitias resigned his tools under a cloud after these motions were passed but prior to their enactment, however this motion and the subsequent note were explicitly requested by the Committee to still be enacted and published.)

Aitias may seek to regain adminship via WP:RFA or by application to the Arbitration Committee. Further, Aitias is restricted to one account and is required to comply with the applicable renaming procedures for restricted users, viewable here, should he rename.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Motion amending Ryulong Arbitration case regarding Mythdon

The Arbitration Committee has amended Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong to include the following terms:

Pursuant to the latest developments related to the recent Arbitration case involving Mythdon and Ryulong and discussions on the Arbitration Committee mailing list, the Arbitration Committee has noted that there has been no changes in the behavior of Mythdon since the closure of the Arbitration case:

a) the user has made no effort whatsoever to find a mentor;
b) the user has made no effort whatsoever to engage himself in serious discussions to produce a guideline for the articles falling under the scope of the Tokusatsu WikiProject as directed by this remedy;
c) the user has targetted another Misplaced Pages area to impose his stance on verifiability disregarding the ArbCom's view concerning his stance on the matter;
d) He recently threatened to mass AfD articles which do not satisfy his standards in terms of reliable sources and verifiability;

Therefore, the Committee has decided to extend the restrictions imposed in order to facilitate more collaboration in the field of conflict and to ensure the smooth running of the project in general and protect other areas in particular. The terms are as follows:

a) Mythdon is prohibited from partcipating at any Misplaced Pages:Articles for Deletion discussion which involves verifiability and reliable sources. That includes —and is not limited to— the WikiProject Tokusatsu. The restriction is indefinite pending the production of a guideline. Mythdon —as well as everyone else— should respect the terms of the guideline once it is produced;
b) Mythdon is reminded of the importance of participating in a good faith effort to help produce a genuine guideline for the cited WikiProject, including but not limited to verifiability. He is again urged to start working on this guideline;
c) Mythdon is prohibited from making any comment on reliable sources or verifiability unless comments are made at the talk pages of those guidelines and policies, or at the Tokusatsu WikiProject talk pages;
d) all other restrictions imposed during the arbitration case involving him remain in place;
e) in the light of Mythdon's resignation from the WikiProject, the ArbCom notes that any similar behavior which had led to this situation would be dealt with similarly. Therefore and as a preventive measure, restrictions apply to all WikiProjects;
f) should Mythdon violate the above restrictions, any administrator may block him for a period up to two weeks per incident, escalating to one year per incident after the fifth one. Any discussion about possible violations should be held at requests for arbitration enforcement;
g) any further request on this matter should go through requests for arbitration enforcement beforehand. Administrators there are able to help answer any question.

These terms have been appended to the Ryulong case page at "New remedies and enforcement added by motion". The motion and surrounding discussion are archived here.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 15:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Jimbo Wales and Bishonen

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case:

  • 1.1) On 21 May, a user added the {{retired}} template to the userpage of another user. An administrator, Bishonen, reverted the addition with the edit summary "Rm 'retired' tag, which is none of business". The user then stated on Bishonen's talk page that "You do not decide what is and what is not my business. Misplaced Pages is everyone's business..." to which Bishonen replied with "Yes, I do, you little shit. Don't interfere with page. Now get lost. Shoo!" The user initiated a discussion about the placement of the tag and Bishonen's comment at the administrators' incidents noticeboard (during which Bishonen made several more condescending remarks towards the user), and as a result of this discussion Jimbo Wales blocked Bishonen for three hours.
  • 1.2) Although people do not "own" their user pages, editors should avoid – with certain well-established exceptions (of which adding retirement templates is not one) – making substantial changes to other people's user pages without their consent. The committee notes the user subsequently apologised for his edit.
  • 1.3) Bishonen's response to the user was grossly uncivil. Her subsequent comments (on the noticeboard and on her talk page) were condescending and unrepentant. While, in this context, a block may be justified on civility grounds, its delayed timing and short duration - and prior interaction between the blocking and blocked editors - made it controversial. Additionally, the block was placed some time after Bishonen had finished posting, at a time when no ongoing conduct was prevented by the block.
  • 1.4) Jimbo Wales did not notify Bishonen immediately of the block, as is required by blocking policy, and it was not until half an hour after announcing it at the incidents noticeboard that he did so. In his announcement of the block on the incidents noticeboard, Jimbo Wales stated "This all seems sadly unbecoming to me, and a direct consequence of our having been too tolerant, for too long, of toxic personalities". Although the use of this latter phrase was later clarified as intending to refer to incivility in general, the phrasing was careless and has been interpreted, reasonably, by some editors as referring to Bishonen.
  • 1.5) The Committee acknowledges (i) Bishonen's recognition that "The way I spoke to was wrong, especially for an admin" and (ii) Jimbo Wales' permanent abdication of the use of the blocking tool. In light of the foregoing, the committee need take no further action at this time.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, MBisanz 04:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

ArbComOpenTasks template

The {{ArbComOpenTasks}} template has now been revised to include tracking for all public Arbitration Committee activity. The template now includes requests to open cases, the stages for accepted cases, recently closed cases, requests for clarification, requests for amendment, and motions. For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 05:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Final call for voting in Checkuser/Oversight election

The August 2009 CheckUser and Oversight elections will end at 23:59 UTC on August 10, in approximately 3.5 hours. Voting is currently underway.

For the Arbitration Committee
Risker (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Reduced activity: 23–31 August 2009

During the period 23-31 August 2009, as significant numbers of arbitrators will be travelling, Arbitration Committee business will be conducted at much reduced levels and only urgent new matters will be accepted.

Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Risker, Roger Davies, Wizardman.
Oppose: Rlevse
Abstain: none
Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain, Vassyana.

For the Arbitration Committee,  Roger Davies 07:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Motion regarding The Rambling Man

Per a motion made at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Motions:

The Arbitration Committee:

  1. Finds that the circumstances of The Rambling Man's resignation during the Date delinking case do not preclude his restoration to bureaucrat status by request, in the discretion of the bureaucrats, and that a new request for bureaucratship is not required.
  2. Encourages any users concerned that the policies and procedures governing restoration of administrator and bureaucrat privileges following a resignation may be unfair or unclear to convene a community discussion on an appropriate policy page and to seek to develop a community-written policy on these matters.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Hersfold 17:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Arbitration motion regarding Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Everyking 3

Per a motion at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:

Having considered the request to lift the remaining restriction (remedy X) in the EK3 case, the Arbitration Committee decides that the request is denied, but that the indefinite nature of the restriction is altered so that the restriction will now expire one year after the enactment of this motion. This expiration date of one year will be reset following any future unsuccessful appeals of this restriction.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety 00:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Announcement: Results of Checkuser/Oversight elections, August 2009

Motion: The Arbitration Committee, on reviewing the results of the August 2009 Checkuser and Oversight elections,

(a) appoints the following editors as checkusers, pending identification to the Wikimedia Foundation:

(b) apppoints the following editors as oversighters, pending identification to the Wikimedia Foundation:

Supporting: Carcharoth, Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Wizardman
Abstaining: Risker (supervising arbitrator), Stephen Bain
Inactive: Vassyana

The Committee thanks the other candidates (Jennavecia (talk · contribs), SoWhy (talk · contribs), Stifle (talk · contribs), Tiptoety (talk · contribs), and VirtualSteve (talk · contribs)), those who applied but were not put forward as candidates, and the community in bringing this election process to a successful conclusion.

For the Arbitration Committee
Risker (talk) 03:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


Discuss this

Appeals to the Ban Appeals Subcommittee: Keeblesound and Arindamp

The Ban Appeals Subcommittee has allowed the appeals of:

As a consequence of the Arindamp appeal, the ban subcommittee has also unbanned Mrinal Pandey (talk · contribs) and Carlisle Rodham (talk · contribs). These three users are topic banned from The Indian Institute of Planning and Management for 6 months.

The text of the decisions and any associated restrictions have been posted on the applicable user talk pages.

For the Arbitration Committee,  John Vandenberg 05:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Categories: