< Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration | Xed 2 Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 23:17, 21 December 2005 editJdforrester (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators21,245 edits →Proposed final decision: Thoughts.← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 02:13, 27 May 2011 edit undoNukeBot (talk \| contribs)Bots4,368 editsm →Motion to close: Noindexing Arbitration pages
(35 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 52:		Line 52:
	:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - while provocation does not excuse making personal attacks, it can be seen as a mitigating factor.		:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - while provocation does not excuse making personal attacks, it can be seen as a mitigating factor.
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#Concur with Raul. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 67:		Line 71:
	:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 82:		Line 90:
	:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 96:		Line 108:
	:# ] 16:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 16:26, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] 01:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 113:		Line 130:
	:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 121:		Line 142:

	====Editing issues====		====Editing issues====
	1.1) An early issue was whether the word occupation could be used in the article with 209.212.72.19 inserting the word and removed by Jayjg and A second issue concerned the movie not being considered for an Academy Award , information by 209.212.72.19, removed by Jayjg with the comment "rv massive unsource POVing"; Xed reverted with the comment "rv bizarre censorship".		1.1) An early issue was whether the word "occupation" could be used in the article with 209.212.72.19 inserting the word and removed by Jayjg and A second issue concerned the movie not being considered for an Academy Award , information by 209.212.72.19, removed by Jayjg with the comment "rv massive unsource POVing"; Xed reverted with the comment "rv bizarre censorship".

	:Support:		:Support:
Line 127:		Line 148:
	:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 139:		Line 164:
	:Support:		:Support:
	:# ] 20:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 20:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# <s>] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)</s>

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
	:#(A) We shouldn't be deciding content, and (B) the methedology of this is flatly wrong. Googling for "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" gets 123,000 hits - that doesn't mean they are real. Jay was simply demanding sourcing from people who were adding Zionist conspiracy nonsense into the article. ] 16:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)		:#(A) We shouldn't be deciding content, and (B) the methedology of this is flatly wrong. Googling for "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" gets 123,000 hits - that doesn't mean they are real. Jay was simply demanding sourcing from people who were adding Zionist conspiracy nonsense into the article. ] 16:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# As with Raul, we shouldn't try to decide content. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# As with Raul, we shouldn't try to decide content. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# As per Raul. ArbCom should not decide content disputes, and we should not validate the wholly invalid "Google test". ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# As above. ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 14:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
Line 156:		Line 186:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 164:		Line 198:

	===Jayjg insists===		===Jayjg insists===
	4) Again Jayjg insists on a specific reference with the comment "if there are "many observers", then please provide evidence of it. So far you have one non-notable (see talk), also, please don't remove ~~requers~~ for citation, instead provide citations".		4) Again Jayjg insists on a specific reference with the comment "if there are "many observers", then please provide evidence of it. So far you have one non-notable (see talk), also, please don't remove request for citation, instead provide citations".

	:Support:		:Support:
Line 171:		Line 205:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 186:		Line 224:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 201:		Line 243:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 216:		Line 262:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 231:		Line 281:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 246:		Line 300:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 06:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 254:		Line 312:

	===Xed makes another personal attack===		===Xed makes another personal attack===
	10) Xed restores with the comment "you've been caught lying. you can't review all those pages in 3 minutes!" ~~(actually~~ 9 minutes had elapsed between the sources being provided and being removed.)		10) Xed restores with the comment "you've been caught lying. you can't review all those pages in 3 minutes!" In actuality, 9 minutes had elapsed between the sources being provided and being removed.

	:Support:		:Support:
Line 261:		Line 319:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 06:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 276:		Line 338:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 06:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 290:		Line 356:
	:# ] 16:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 16:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 06:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 303:		Line 373:
	:# ] 19:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
			:# ] 01:08, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
	:#
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC), still seems to be editing

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
	:#		:#
Line 321:		Line 393:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 336:		Line 412:
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 352:		Line 432:
	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
	:# Jay and Viriditas should be commended for their work keeping "Zionists are evil!" conpiracy theories out of our articles. ] 16:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)		:# Jay and Viriditas should be commended for their work keeping "Zionists are evil!" conpiracy theories out of our articles. ] 16:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# On the balance, I think Viriditas, at least, has striven toward NPOV more than POV, and therefore oppose any censure of this editor. ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
	:# I agree with both Fred and Raul's points, and as such, abstain. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# I agree with both Fred and Raul's points, and as such, abstain. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# Per James. ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

	===Viriditas commended===		===Viriditas commended===
	3.1) ~~Veriditas~~ is commended for continuing to work with the article substantially improving it while maintaining a courteous attitude toward the difficult user Xed.		3.1) Viriditas is commended for continuing to work with the article substantially improving it while maintaining a courteous attitude toward the difficult user Xed.

	:Support:		:Support:
Line 363:		Line 447:
	:# ] 16:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 16:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 14:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
Line 379:		Line 468:
	:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - Concur with Epopt		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - Concur with Epopt
			:# I don't believe Xed's offenses deserve to be labeled as "trivial". ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
	:# Not sure. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# Not sure. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# A good principle in general to carefully investigate first, and Snowspinner is often hasty to act, but in this case I don't think the reminder is necessary. ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	====Snowspinner commended====		====Snowspinner commended====
Line 389:		Line 482:
	:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
	:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)		:# ] 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
			:# Too hasty ] 01:10, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
	:#

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
	:# Not sure. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# Not sure. ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
			:#]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

	===Xed banned===		===Xed banned===
Line 400:		Line 497:

	:Support:		:Support:
	:# ] 19:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)		:# <s>] 19:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)</s>
	:# ] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC) Though this is unnecessary if he really has left.		:#: <s>] ] 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC) Though this is unnecessary if he really has left.</s>
			:# ] (]) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
			:::* Note that Kelly is, alas, no longer an Arbitrator, so could not withdraw this vote even if she wanted to ] 01:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
			:#: <s>]<sup>]</sup> 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
			:#: <s> Not to deny the good work he has done, and I think this is perhaps a bit long. But I've been really taken aback at Xed's abrasiveness and failure to work with others respectfully, and I don't think the personal attack parole from the previous case has helped. ] ] 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)</s>

	:Oppose:		:Oppose:
			:# No basis for this ] 23:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
	:#
			:# Some editors have expressed to me their opposition to this. ]<sup>]</sup> 01:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# Xed is a highly political editor, this leads to conflicts but it also leads to an impressive dedication to adding content covering underrepresented parts of the world. I would suggest a one year ban from certain areas of the encyclopedia, or a period of confinement to Africa related topics. This might limit the conflicts and still allow him to contribute. A total ban is excessive and it would be a shame to lose Xed's very useful contributions. - ] 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
			:# This remedy seems to be standing in the way of closing this case, so I'm withdrawing it ] 01:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

	:Abstain:		:Abstain:
			:# For the moment. Reasonable people have asked me to reconsider and I'm not so committed to my vote not to do so. ] ] 19:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
	:#
			:# Switched to abstain pending further deliberation. ] ] 12:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

	==Proposed enforcement==		==Proposed enforcement==
Line 430:		Line 535:
	<small>24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close. </small>		<small>24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close. </small>

			Case is finished, every vote has a majority. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
	:#

			:# ]<sup>]</sup> 21:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
			:#: <s>Close ] 23:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
			:# Close ] 14:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
			:#: <s>Close. ] ] 07:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)</s> Abstain for now. ] ] 19:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
			:#: <s>Close. ] ] 16:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)</s>
			:# Nice little deadlock, but time to close it. ] 01:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
			:# Close, let's finish this before its three month anniversary. - ] 15:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

			{{NOINDEX}}

Latest revision as of 02:13, 27 May 2011

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop place proposals which are ready for voting here.

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, 2 Arbitrators is recused and 2 are inactive, so 4 votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop.

Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

No personal attacks

1) Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks requires users to refrain from personal attacks. There is no exception for instances when a user may be provoked by inappropriate behavior.

Support:

Fred Bauder 22:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Raul654 19:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - while provocation does not excuse making personal attacks, it can be seen as a mitigating factor.
James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Concur with Raul. Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Neutral point of view

2) Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view requires fair representation of all significant points of view regarding a topic. This foundational policy of Misplaced Pages rules out gaming of Misplaced Pages' consensus process by masking point of view editing as demands for sources which, when provided, are then deleted together with the information they support.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Use reliable sources

3) Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources requires that a cited source contain the information for which it is the cited source.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Scrutiny is part of parole

4) A user on parole must expect that his or her actions will be subject to closer-than-normal scrutiny. Such attention is an innate aspect of parole.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Divine Intervention (film)

1) One issue raised by Snowspinner is Xed's editing and comments relating to Divine Intervention (film) which concerns a man who lives in East Jersusalem. His girlfriend lives in the West Bank city of Ramallah. The viewpoint presented is of life under Israeli occupation.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Editing issues

1.1) An early issue was whether the word "occupation" could be used in the article with 209.212.72.19 inserting the word and removed by Jayjg and A second issue concerned the movie not being considered for an Academy Award , information by 209.212.72.19, removed by Jayjg with the comment "rv massive unsource POVing"; Xed reverted with the comment "rv bizarre censorship".

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Sources demanded

2) After Xed restored, Jayjg demanded sources despite the fact that a simple Google search gives 80,000 hits. He also removed any reference to occupation.

Support:

Oppose:

(A) We shouldn't be deciding content, and (B) the methedology of this is flatly wrong. Googling for "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" gets 123,000 hits - that doesn't mean they are real. Jay was simply demanding sourcing from people who were adding Zionist conspiracy nonsense into the article. Raul654 16:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
As with Raul, we shouldn't try to decide content. James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
As per Raul. ArbCom should not decide content disputes, and we should not validate the wholly invalid "Google test". Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
As above. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 14:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Abstain:

Personal attack by Xed

3) Xed then reverted with the comment, "remove weasel-like wording from propagandist".

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Jayjg insists

4) Again Jayjg insists on a specific reference with the comment "if there are "many observers", then please provide evidence of it. So far you have one non-notable (see talk), also, please don't remove request for citation, instead provide citations".

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Revert warring by Xed

5) Rather than supplying a reference Xed reverted with the comment "rv weasel"

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Viriditas joins the edit war

6) Viriditas then joined the edit war with the comment "Reverted edits by Xed to last version by Jayjg. Please do not remove citation requests."

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Xed continues with personal attacks

7) Xed then reverted with the comment "rv weasel tag-team".

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Xed provides references

8) Xed provides references

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

References and content removed by Viriditas

9) Viriditas removes content and references with the comment "After reviewing your citations and observing that they do not claim what you say they claim, I have removed the citation request as well as the disputed content; rm superfluous content and links" and "rm opinion by "Tariq Shadid". If he's not a film critic, I fail to see the relevance of a MD."

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Xed makes another personal attack

10) Xed restores with the comment "you've been caught lying. you can't review all those pages in 3 minutes!" In actuality, 9 minutes had elapsed between the sources being provided and being removed.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Jayjg makes a valid point

11) Addressing the matter of a "vigorous campaign by Zionist activists to bar the movie", Jayjg points out the inadequacy of the cited source with the comment 'link does not refer to any "vigorous campaign" or any "zionist activists"'.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Further work by Viriditas

12) Veriditas has continued to work with the article and has substantially improved it while maintaining a reasonably courteous relationship with Xed. See edits of 19 Dec and Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Xed_2/Proposed_decision#Dog_with_a_bone.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Xed has left Misplaced Pages

13) In an e-mail message to Fred Bauder, Xed has stated that he has left Misplaced Pages.

Support:

Oppose:

Fred Bauder 01:08, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC), still seems to be editing

Abstain:

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Xed warned regarding personal attacks

1) Xed, who remains on personal attack parole, is reminded to avoid personal attacks even in the face of extreme provocation.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Xed warned regarding citing unreliable sources

2) Xed is warned regarding use of a source such as this one which does not support the information it is cited in support of.

Support:

A source must explicitly set information forth, not be something which if read between the lines, might support a contention. Fred Bauder 22:53, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Raul654 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Viriditas and Jayjg reminded regarding NPOV

3) Viriditas (talk · contribs) and Jayjg (talk · contribs) are reminded that Misplaced Pages is a cooperative enterprise which operates by consensus. Masking of POV editing under the guise of citing NPOV and demanding sources is inappropriate.

Support:

Oppose:

Jay and Viriditas should be commended for their work keeping "Zionists are evil!" conpiracy theories out of our articles. Raul654 16:28, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
On the balance, I think Viriditas, at least, has striven toward NPOV more than POV, and therefore oppose any censure of this editor. Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Abstain:

I agree with both Fred and Raul's points, and as such, abstain. James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Per James. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Viriditas commended

3.1) Viriditas is commended for continuing to work with the article substantially improving it while maintaining a courteous attitude toward the difficult user Xed.

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Snowspinner reminded

4) Considering the triviality of Xed's offenses when considered in context, Snowspinner (talk · contribs) is reminded to carefully investigate the context in which offenses occur before making a decision to act as a prosecutor with respect to actions of one user to the exclusion of the others involved in a conflict.

Support:

Fred Bauder 00:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

➥the Epopt 03:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Raul654 19:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC) - Concur with Epopt
I don't believe Xed's offenses deserve to be labeled as "trivial". Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Abstain:

Not sure. James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
A good principle in general to carefully investigate first, and Snowspinner is often hasty to act, but in this case I don't think the reminder is necessary. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Snowspinner commended

4.1) Considering Xed's current parole status, Snowspinner's actions were appropriate.

Support:

Oppose:

Too hasty Fred Bauder 01:10, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Abstain:

Xed banned

5) Xed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for one year.

Support:

~~➥the Epopt 19:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)~~
~~James F. (talk) 23:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC) Though this is unnecessary if he really has left.~~
Kelly Martin (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Note that Kelly is, alas, no longer an Arbitrator, so could not withdraw this vote even if she wanted to ➥the Epopt 01:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

~~Neutrality 21:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)~~

Not to deny the good work he has done, and I think this is perhaps a bit long. But I've been really taken aback at Xed's abrasiveness and failure to work with others respectfully, and I don't think the personal attack parole from the previous case has helped. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

No basis for this Fred Bauder 23:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Some editors have expressed to me their opposition to this. Neutrality 01:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Xed is a highly political editor, this leads to conflicts but it also leads to an impressive dedication to adding content covering underrepresented parts of the world. I would suggest a one year ban from certain areas of the encyclopedia, or a period of confinement to Africa related topics. This might limit the conflicts and still allow him to contribute. A total ban is excessive and it would be a shame to lose Xed's very useful contributions. - SimonP 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
This remedy seems to be standing in the way of closing this case, so I'm withdrawing it ➥the Epopt 01:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Abstain:

For the moment. Reasonable people have asked me to reconsider and I'm not so committed to my vote not to do so. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Switched to abstain pending further deliberation. James F. (talk) 12:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Motion to close

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

Case is finished, every vote has a majority. Neutrality 21:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality 21:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
~~Close Fred Bauder 23:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC)~~
Close ➥the Epopt 14:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
~~Close. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)~~ Abstain for now. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 19:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

~~Close. James F. (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)~~
Nice little deadlock, but time to close it. Fred Bauder 01:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Close, let's finish this before its three month anniversary. - SimonP 15:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)