Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:41, 14 October 2014

Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD

Misplaced Pages Arbitration
About arbitrationTalk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appealsReport
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics (Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss+ Contact Members Procedures ElectionsTalk History Clerks+ Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk StatisticsTalk Reports (pre-2016)
Track related changes
v t e

If you wish to submit evidence, please do so in a new section (or in your own section, if you have already created one). Do not edit anyone else's section. Please keep your evidence concise, and within the prescribed limits. If you wish to exceed the prescribed limits on evidence length, you must obtain the written consent of an arbitrator before doing so; you may ask for this on the Evidence talk page. Evidence that exceeds the prescribed limits without permission, or that contains inappropriate material or diffs, may be refactored, redacted or removed by a clerk or arbitrator without warning.

Any editor may add evidence to this page, irrespective of whether they are involved in the dispute. You must submit evidence in your own section. Editors who change other users' evidence may be blocked without warning; if you have a concern with or objection to another user's evidence, contact the committee by e-mail or on the talk page. The standard limits for all evidence submissions are: 1000 words and 100 diffs for users who are parties to this case; or about 500 words and 50 diffs for other users. Detailed but succinct submissions are more useful to the committee. This page is not designed for the submission of general reflections on the arbitration process, Misplaced Pages in general, or other irrelevant and broad issues; and if you submit such content to this page, please expect it to be ignored. General discussion of the case may be opened on the talk page. You must focus on the issues that are important to the dispute and submit diffs which illustrate the nature of the dispute or will be useful to the committee in its deliberations.

You must use the prescribed format in your evidence. Evidence should include a link to the actual page diff in question, or to a short page section; links to the page itself are inadequate. Never link to a page history, an editor's contributions, or a log for all actions of an editor (as those change over time), although a link to a log for a specific article or a specific block log is acceptable. Please make sure any page section links are permanent, and read the simple diff and link guide if you are not sure how to create a page diff.

The Arbitration Committee expects you to make rebuttals of other evidence submissions in your own section, and for such rebuttals to explain how or why the evidence in question is incorrect; do not engage in tit-for-tat on this page. Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop, which is open for comment by parties, Arbitrators, and others. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies, Arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only Arbitrators (and Clerks, when clarification on votes is needed) may edit the proposed decision page.

Evidence presented by Cas Liber

Editing patterns

Part of the problem is a lack of objectivity and assumptions made by editors about other editors' behaviour. One way of taking stock and getting a more objective view is to do a quantitative analysis of editing patterns of the people involved. I intend to start this by examining the last 500 contributions of each party up until the end of September in the first instance. The reason for doing this is that it just antedates the acceptance of the case, i.e. before folks realised a case was going to be opened and hence dial it back for fear of sanctions. These will be listed below. I might go further back, not sure. May even look until the present to compare. Comments can be made below. Also, ultimately we are about building an encyclopedia, so below each party, folks are invited to provide (with diffs) how that editor has helped them build an encyclopedia. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Robert McClenon

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

Eric Corbett

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

Two kinds of pork

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

SPECIFICO

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

Carolmooredc

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

Neotarf

last 500 contribs until Oct 1

How has this editor helped build an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

How has this editor been disruptive or hindered building an encyclopedia

• Folks invited to comment here with diffs.

{Write your assertion here}

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

Evidence presented by Lightbreather

Past conduct

It is clear from his block log, first as Malleus Fatuorum and then as Eric Corbett, that Eric has little or no respect for civility policies. The arbcom "Civility enforcement" case that closed February 2012 proposed these findings of fact: , including being banned from RFA discussions.

Recent conduct

His conduct since July 24, 2014, makes clear that his opinion about the WP civility policy is unchanged and that his opinion of WP:GGTF is that it is, in a word, bad, and overrun with editors with a "feminist agenda." It is also clear that his participation in GGTF discussions is meant to disrupt, mostly through baiting and comments that some interpret as personal attacks.

24-29 July 2014 at WT:AN, GGTF, Jimbo Wales' talk page, ANI

• Lightbreather asked: "Where and how can I go about making a formal request to make a unique noticeboard area?"
• Eric Corbett replied: easiest way to avoid being called a cunt is not to act like one. Baiting at least. Others agreed that it was a personal attack.
• Scalhotrod replies to Eric's comment: "Brilliantly put!"
• Lightbreather joined GGTF.
• Scalhotrod joined GGTF.
• Lightbreather complained and quit.
• During related discussion on Jimbo's talk page, Eric asked Saffron Blaze if they were "hiding behind the door when God handed out brains."
• Eric was blocked by BrownHairedGirl for 72 hours. (DangerousPanda unblocked him.)

1 August - 17 September 2014 at GGTF (87 edits by Eric over nine discussions)

Civility board OP SlimVirgin 27 July 2014 notified GGTF about the civility board discussion at AN.

• 1 August many of those complaining about incivility seem to feel that actually writing content is a menial job for those lesser beings they want to police

94% of wiki users female OP Rich Farmbrough 26 August 2014.

• 27 August - Baiting Carolmooredc, Elaqueate

Re "On average, males and females have different interests" OP Anne Delong 28 August 2014.

• Baiting Carolmooredc, EvergreenFir, Anne Delong, Elaqueate

Back to Hatting vs. closing vs. immediate archiving OP Carolmooredc 29 August 2014.

• Baiting Carolmooredc

Active nomination of women for administrators OP LawrencePrincipe 31 August 2014.

• 2 September Baiting LawrencePrincipe, Carolmooredc, EvergreenFir, Anne Delong

ANI on “disruption of Wikiproject” OP Carolmooredc 4 September 2014.

• Baiting Neotarf

Effect of 16/84 ratio OP Eric Corbett 4 September 2014.

• Nothing would be different (about WP's content if its editors were 50% women rather than 16%).
• The gender gap is just the current fad
• I really couldn't care less whether or not more women are recruited. I'm here because I think that too many of you have got your heads up your proverbial arses, attacking windmills that are simply mirages.
• I'm tired and I'm fed up with these repeated accusations that I'm some kind of monster misogynist. Can you can find any evidence at all to support the accusation that I hate all women? (No one said or suggested that.)
• Why should I be expected to leave lies alone? (In response to q: If you don't believe in , can't you just leave it alone?
• Frankly I think I'm one of the few here who's actually not seeing everything through the prism of some feminist agenda.

An idea... OP Knowledgekid87 4 September 2014.

• Baiting Knowledgekid87, Neotarf

Notice of relevant discussion elsewhere OP Carolmooredc 16 September 2014.

• Direct rudeness, belittling Carolmooredc, GRuban; baiting EvergreenFir, Milowent

Evidence presented by {your user name}

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

{Write your assertion here}

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

{Write your assertion here}

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