Revision as of 22:10, 26 February 2011 editHJ Mitchell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators121,814 edits You have been blocked from editing for violating an arbitration decision with your edits. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:03, 27 February 2011 edit undoHJ Mitchell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators121,814 edits →Notification of Discretionary Sanctions: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== February 2011 == | == February 2011 == | ||
<div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] To enforce an ] decision, you have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for violation of the 1 revert per editor per article per 24 hours period restriction, as imposed by ], on ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. ] | ] 22:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC) <hr/><p><small>'''Notice to administrators:''' In a <span class="plainlinks"></span>, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as ] or ]). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the ]. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."</small></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> | <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] To enforce an ] decision, you have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for violation of the 1 revert per editor per article per 24 hours period restriction, as imposed by ], on ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the ] and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. ] | ] 22:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC) <hr/><p><small>'''Notice to administrators:''' In a <span class="plainlinks"></span>, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as ] or ]). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the ]. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."</small></div><!-- Template:uw-aeblock --> | ||
== Notification of Discretionary Sanctions == | |||
As a result of ], the ] has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the ], broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad ], described ] and below. | |||
*Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. | |||
*The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. | |||
*Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. | |||
*Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently ]), or the Committee. | |||
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions. | |||
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary. | |||
This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged ]. ] | ] 00:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:03, 27 February 2011
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#The Sham, for breaking 1RR I have brought you to WP:AE. Passionless -Talk 18:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
February 2011
To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violation of the 1 revert per editor per article per 24 hours period restriction, as imposed by WP:ARBPIA, on List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2011. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
Notification of Discretionary Sanctions
As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.
- Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
- The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
- Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
- Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.
These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.
Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.
This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)