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 editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:30, 19 July 2010 view sourceRoger Davies (talk | contribs)Administrators34,587 edits →Call for applications for Checkuser or Oversight permissions: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:43, 25 December 2024 view source AnomieBOT (talk | contribs)Bots6,561,112 editsm Adjusting links to archived content 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{/Header}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{Arb-logo}}
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
{{clear}}
|counter = 14
{{ArbCom navigation}}
|algo = old(20d)
{| style="border: 1px silver solid; background: #f9f9f9; padding: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: auto; margin-left: auto;"
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|-
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
| {{shortcut|WP:AC/N}}'''This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the ]. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's ] may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the ].'''
|minthreadsleft = 4
|-
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive %(counter)d
| style="border-top: 1px silver dotted; padding-top: 0.5em;" | Announcement archives: ] · ] · ] · ] · ] · ] · ]
}}
|} ] ] __NEWSECTIONLINK__ __FORCETOC__


== Change to the CheckUser team, November 2024 ==
== ] ==


At their request, the Arbitration Committee restores the CheckUser permissions of {{userlinks|Spicy}}.
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:
*All editors who are party to this case are instructed to read the principles, to review their own past conduct in the light of them, and if necessary to modify their future conduct to ensure full compliance with them.
*Editors are reminded that when editing in controversial subject areas it is all the more important to comply with Misplaced Pages policies. In addition, editors who find it difficult to edit a particular article or topic from a neutral point of view and to adhere to other Misplaced Pages policies are counselled that they may sometimes need or wish to step away temporarily from that article or subject area, and to find other related but less controversial topics in which to edit.
*Any uninvolved administrator may, in his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor editing Transcendental meditation or other articles concerning Transcendental meditation and related biographies of living people, broadly defined, if, after a warning, that editor repeatedly or seriously violates the behavioural standards or editorial processes of Misplaced Pages in connection with these articles.
*Uninvolved administrators are invited to monitor the articles in the area of conflict to enforce compliance by editors with, in particular, the principles outlined in this case. Enforcing administrators are instructed to focus on fresh and clear-cut matters arising after the closure of this case rather than on revisiting historical allegations.
*From time to time, the conduct of editors within the topic may be re-appraised by any member of the Arbitration Committee and, by motion of the Arbitration Committee, further remedies may be summarily applied to specific editors who have failed to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner.
*] is (i) strongly admonished for incivility, personal attacks, and assumptions of bad faith; and (ii) subject to an editing restriction for one year. Should he make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After three blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month.
*Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block.


''For and on behalf of the Arbitration Committee'' ] (]) 18:39, 6 June 2010 (UTC) On behalf of the Committee, ] (]) 18:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
: Archived discussion at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52|Change to the CheckUser team, November 2024}}'''<!-- ] (]) 18:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes-->


== Proposed motions to improve ArbCom workflow ==
:''']'''


The Arbitration Committee is considering a ''']''' that set forth different approaches to improving the Committee's workflow and handling of its nonpublic work. Comments are welcome at the ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 18:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
== Motion regarding ] ==
: Archived discussion at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52|Proposed motions to improve ArbCom workflow}}'''<!-- ] (]) 18:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes-->


== Off-wiki misconduct in Palestine–Israel topic area ==
Per a <span class="plainlinks"></span> at ]:


As ], the Arbitration Committee received private evidence appearing to reflect off-wiki misconduct related to several editors in the ]. The Committee sent a copy of the evidence to the users in question via email, notified them on their talk pages, and gave them an opportunity to respond. Based on the evidence and the responses, the matter has been resolved as follows:
Remedy 10 of ] ("Radeksz topic banned") is rescinded.


{{ivmbox|1=For making edits in the ] after off-wiki ] requests, and encouraging other users to game the ] and engage in disruptive editing, {{Userlinks|Ïvana}} is indefinitely banned from Misplaced Pages. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.}}
''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ~ <font color="#F09">Amory</font><font color="#555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 20:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:''']'''


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720
== Arbitration motion regarding ] ==


Oppose:
Per a <span class="plainlinks"></span> at ]:


Abstain:
The words "such as ]" are struck from principle #15 of ] ("Obvious pseudoscience"). Finding of fact #9 of ] ("Pseudoscience") is amended to read "Misplaced Pages contains articles on pseudoscientific ideas which, while notable, have little or no following in the scientific community, often being so little regarded that there is no serious criticism of them by scientific critics."


{{ivmbox|1=For making edits in the ] after off-wiki ] requests, and encouraging other users to game the ] and engage in disruptive editing, {{Userlinks|Ïvana}} is topic banned from the ], broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.}}
''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ~ <font color="#F09">Amory</font><font color="#555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
:''']'''


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720
== Arbitration motion regarding ] ==


Oppose:
Per a <span class="plainlinks"></span> at ]:


Abstain:
Remedy 2 of ] ("re {{userlinks|JBsupreme}} ) is changed to read "{{userlinks|JBsupreme}} is subject to an editing restriction for six months. Should JBsupreme make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, JBsupreme may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below." The six months starts from the day this motion passes.


{{ivmbox|1=Based on private evidence, the ] of {{userlinks|Salmoonlight}} may now be appealed only to the Committee. The other provisions of the topic ban remain the same.}}
''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ~ <font color="#F09">Amory</font><font color="#555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 19:26, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
:''']'''


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720
== Arbitration Motion regarding ] ==


Oppose:
Per a <span class="plainlinks"></span> at ]:


Abstain: Moneytrees
Remedy 17 of ] ("Biruitorul topic banned") is lifted.


{{ivmbox|1=For making edits in the PIA topic area after off-wiki ] requests, and violating the ] in the ], {{user|Samisawtak}} is topic banned from the Palestine–Israel topic area, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.}}
''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ~ <font color="#F09">Amory</font><font color="#555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 19:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
:''']'''


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720
== Arbitration motion regarding ] ==


Oppose:
Following a <span class="plainlinks"></span> at ]:


Abstain:
Amendment 4 to ] ("Brews ohare advocacy restrictions") expired with remedy 4.2 of the same case ("Brews ohare topic banned"), as amended by amendment 3 ("Brews ohare").


{{ivmbox|1=For ] the ], the ] of {{Userlinks|CoolAndUniqueUsername}} is revoked. An administrator may, at their discretion, restore it following a request at ] at which CoolAndUniqueUsername shows that they have made 500 substantive edits.}}
''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' ~ <font color="#F09">Amory</font><font color="#555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 20:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
:''']'''


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720


Oppose: HJ Mitchell
== Statement on checkuser blocks ==


Abstain:
The Arbitration Committee would like to remind administrators that those with Checkuser permission may sometimes block accounts as a result of findings that involve confidential Checkuser data. When such blocks are appealed, non-Checkuser administrators will generally not be privy to all the information that the Checkuser relied on in deciding to block. Moreover, in many cases the Checkuser may not be able to share such information because doing so would violate the privacy policy.


{{ivmbox|1=For ] the ], the ] of {{Userlinks|Tashmetu}} is revoked. An administrator may, at their discretion, restore it following a request at ] at which Tashmetu shows that they have made 500 substantive edits.}}
Therefore, in most cases, appeals from blocks designated as "Checkuser block" should be referred to the Arbitration Committee, which will address such appeals as promptly as possible. If an administrator believes that a Checkuser block has been made in error, the administrator should first discuss the matter with the Checkuser in question, and if a satisfactory resolution is not reached, should e-mail the committee. As appropriate, the matter will be handled by the Ban Appeals Subcommittee, by the Arbitration Committee as a whole, or by an individual arbitrator designated by the committee. When an unblock is appropriate -- either because the reviews disagree with the initial checkuser findings, or for other reasons -- it will be granted.


Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, Moneytrees, Primefac, ToBeFree, Z1720
This policy applies only to blocks designated as "Checkuser blocks", that is as blocks relying on confidential checkuser findings. It does not apply to ordinary blocks by an administrator who happens to be a Checkuser, but is not relying on checkuser data in deciding to block. These blocks may be reviewed on-wiki or on unblock-l, the same as any other block. Checkusers are reminded that because designating a block as a "Checkuser block" means that it cannot be reviewed on-wiki or on unblock-l, this term should only be used when confidential information has been used in the blocking decision.


Oppose: HJ Mitchell
The Arbitration Committee has also noted that some administrators (other than Checkusers) have occasionally noted when making certain blocks that the block "should be reviewed only by the Arbitration Committee" or "should only be lifted by ArbCom." This notation is appropriate only when the block is based upon a concern that should not be discussed on-wiki but only in a confidential environment. Bases for such a concern could include information whose disclosure would identify anonymous users, could jeopardize a user's physical or mental well-being, or where the underlying block reason would be defamatory if the block proved to be unjustified. In every such case, the Arbitration Committee should be notified immediately by e-mail of the block and of the reasons for it. The designation "block should be reviewed only by ArbCom" should not be used simply to indicate that administrator feels strongly about the block. Where an administrator is unsure, he or she should feel free to email the arbitration committee mailing list before blocking.


Abstain: Sdrqaz
*Support: Carcharoth, Cool Hand Luke, Kirill Lokshin, Mailer Diablo, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Shell Kinney, Sir Fozzie, Steve Smith
*Oppose: none
*Abstain: none
*Not voting: Coren


For the Arbitration Committee, ] (]) 17:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:''']'''
: Archived discussion at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52|Off-wiki misconduct in Palestine–Israel topic area}}'''<!-- ] (]) 17:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes-->


== 2025 Arbitration Committee ==
== CheckUser/Oversight election statement ==


The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning members following their ]. Their two-year terms formally begin on 1 January 2025:
As was previously announced, while the Arbitration Committee appreciates the participation and good faith of everyone involved in the May 2010 elections for CheckUser and Oversight permissions, the overall result was not satisfactory in that important positions necessary to the project could not be filled. There was at the time of the election, and there remains today, a need for multiple additional CU and OS operators to address significant backlogs in these critical areas.
* {{userlinks|CaptainEek}}
* {{userlinks|Daniel}}
The arbitrators have carefully reviewed the recent request for comments regarding the results of the election. Our evaluation of the community's comments is that they did not indicate a strong consensus for any particular solution to this problem.
* {{userlinks|Elli}}
* {{userlinks|KrakatoaKatie}}
* {{userlinks|Liz}}
* {{userlinks|ScottishFinnishRadish}}
* {{userlinks|Theleekycauldron}}
* {{userlinks|Worm That Turned}}


The one-year terms of these members also begin on 1 January 2025:
The Committee has determined that, until a strong community consensus exists for a workable alternative election system, selection of CheckUser and Oversight operators will once again be made directly by the Committee. There will be a period for community comments to be submitted concerning all proposed candidates, but a formal election will not be held.No additional appointments will be made based on the results of the May 2010 elections.
* {{userlinks|Primefac}}


Upon meeting the Wikimedia Foundation's ] and signing ], all incoming members ] subscribed to ], assigned the CheckUser and Oversight permissions for use in office, and given access to the CheckUser and Oversight queues on the ].
We again thank everyone who participated in the recent election and in the subsequent request for comments.


We also thank our outgoing colleagues, whose terms end on 31 December 2024:
*Support: Carcharoth, Cool Hand Luke, Kirill Lokshin, Mailer Diablo, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Shell Kinney, Sir Fozzie, Steve Smith
* {{userlinks|Firefly}}
*Oppose: none
* {{userlinks|Guerillero}}
*Abstain: none
* {{userlinks|L235}}
*Not voting: Coren
* {{userlinks|Moneytrees}}


Outgoing members are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the ] and ] mailing lists following their terms on the Arbitration Committee. To that effect:
:''']'''
* Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing members, who have not chosen to retain them, after 31 December 2024:
*: CheckUser: Firefly, L235
*: Oversight: Firefly, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees
* Outgoing members are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. That will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
* All outgoing members will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list.
* All outgoing members will be unsubscribed from the ''clerks-l'' mailing list, with the exception of Firefly, Guerillero, and Moneytrees, who have chosen to remain subscribed.


On behalf of the Committee, ] (]) 02:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
== Call for applications for Checkuser or Oversight permissions ==
: Archived discussion at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52|2025 Arbitration Committee}}'''<!-- ] (]) 02:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC) --><!--Template:hes-->

The Arbitration Committee invites applications for Checkuser or Oversight permissions effective with the posting of this motion. The application period will close at 2359 hours UTC on 1 August 2010. For this round of appointments, only administrators will be considered. Candidates who ran in the May 2010 elections elections are encouraged to apply for consideration in this round of appointments. Administrators who applied for permissions in the round leading to the May 2010 election may email the Committee at '''{{NonSpamEmail|arbcom.privileges|wikipedia.org}}''' by the close of the application period, expressing continued interest and updating their prior responses or providing additional information. New applicants must email the Committee at '''{{NonSpamEmail|arbcom.privileges|wikipedia.org}}''' by 30 July 2010 to obtain a questionnaire to complete; this questionnaire must be returned by the close of the application period on 1 August 2010. The Arbitration Committee will review the applications and, on 13 August 2010, the names of all candidates being actively considered for appointment will be posted on-wiki in advance of any selection. The community may comment on these candidates until 2359 on 22 August 2010.

For the Arbitration Committee, &nbsp;] <sup>]</sup> 02:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

:''']'''

Latest revision as of 18:43, 25 December 2024

Weighing scales Arbitration​Committee
Misplaced Pages Arbitration
Open proceedings
Active sanctions
Arbitration Committee
Audit
Track related changes
Shortcuts

This 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:
  • 0 (2008-12 – 2009-01)
  • 1 (to 2009-02)
  • 2 (to 2009-05)
  • 3 (to 2009-06)
  • 4 (to 2009-07)
  • 5 (to 2009-12)
  • 6 (to 2010-12)
  • 7 (to 2011-12)
  • 8 (to 2012-12)
  • 9 (to 2013-12)
  • 10 (to 2015-12)
  • 11 (to 2018-04)
  • 12 (to 2020-08)
  • 13 (to 2023-03)
  • 14 (to present)

Change to the CheckUser team, November 2024

At their request, the Arbitration Committee restores the CheckUser permissions of Spicy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

On behalf of the Committee, Sdrqaz (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Archived discussion at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52 § Change to the CheckUser team, November 2024

Proposed motions to improve ArbCom workflow

The Arbitration Committee is considering a series of motions that set forth different approaches to improving the Committee's workflow and handling of its nonpublic work. Comments are welcome at the motions page. For the Arbitration Committee, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 18:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Archived discussion at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52 § Proposed motions to improve ArbCom workflow

Off-wiki misconduct in Palestine–Israel topic area

As previously announced, the Arbitration Committee received private evidence appearing to reflect off-wiki misconduct related to several editors in the Palestine–Israel topic area. The Committee sent a copy of the evidence to the users in question via email, notified them on their talk pages, and gave them an opportunity to respond. Based on the evidence and the responses, the matter has been resolved as follows:

For making edits in the Palestine–Israel topic area after off-wiki canvassing requests, and encouraging other users to game the extended confirmed restriction and engage in disruptive editing, Ïvana (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from Misplaced Pages. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose:

Abstain:

For making edits in the Palestine–Israel topic area after off-wiki canvassing requests, and encouraging other users to game the extended confirmed restriction and engage in disruptive editing, Ïvana (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is topic banned from the Palestine–Israel topic area, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose:

Abstain:

Based on private evidence, the existing topic ban of Salmoonlight (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) may now be appealed only to the Committee. The other provisions of the topic ban remain the same.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose:

Abstain: Moneytrees

For making edits in the PIA topic area after off-wiki canvassing requests, and violating the extended confirmed restriction in the Palestine–Israel topic area, Samisawtak (talk · contribs) is topic banned from the Palestine–Israel topic area, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, HJ Mitchell, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose:

Abstain:

For gaming the extended confirmed restriction, the extended confirmed permission of CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is revoked. An administrator may, at their discretion, restore it following a request at PERM at which CoolAndUniqueUsername shows that they have made 500 substantive edits.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, Moneytrees, Primefac, Sdrqaz, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose: HJ Mitchell

Abstain:

For gaming the extended confirmed restriction, the extended confirmed permission of Tashmetu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is revoked. An administrator may, at their discretion, restore it following a request at PERM at which Tashmetu shows that they have made 500 substantive edits.

Support: Aoidh, CaptainEek, Guerillero, Moneytrees, Primefac, ToBeFree, Z1720

Oppose: HJ Mitchell

Abstain: Sdrqaz

For the Arbitration Committee, Aoidh (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Archived discussion at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52 § Off-wiki misconduct in Palestine–Israel topic area

2025 Arbitration Committee

The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning members following their election by the community. Their two-year terms formally begin on 1 January 2025:

The one-year terms of these members also begin on 1 January 2025:

Upon meeting the Wikimedia Foundation's criteria for access to non-public personal data and signing its corresponding confidentiality agreement, all incoming members will be subscribed to all Committee-managed email lists, assigned the CheckUser and Oversight permissions for use in office, and given access to the CheckUser and Oversight queues on the VRT system.

We also thank our outgoing colleagues, whose terms end on 31 December 2024:

Outgoing members are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, to remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their terms on the Arbitration Committee. To that effect:

  • Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing members, who have not chosen to retain them, after 31 December 2024:
    CheckUser: Firefly, L235
    Oversight: Firefly, Guerillero, L235, Moneytrees
  • Outgoing members are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. That will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
  • All outgoing members will remain subscribed to the functionaries' mailing list.
  • All outgoing members will be unsubscribed from the clerks-l mailing list, with the exception of Firefly, Guerillero, and Moneytrees, who have chosen to remain subscribed.

On behalf of the Committee, Sdrqaz (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Archived discussion at: Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 52 § 2025 Arbitration Committee
Categories: