Revision as of 15:18, 17 May 2007

Case Opened on 19:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this case. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators, the parties, and other editors may suggest proposed principles, findings, and remedies at /Workshop. That page may also be used for general comments on the evidence. Arbitrators will then vote on a final decision in the case at /Proposed decision.

Once the case is closed, editors may add to the #Log of blocks and bans as needed, but closed cases should not be edited otherwise. Please raise any questions at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Requests for clarification.

Involved parties

• Jord (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Jack Cox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Badagnani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• TheQuandry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• TechnoFaye (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• PageantUpdater (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Jeffpw (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Jenolen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Abu badali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Requests for comment

• Requests for comment/Abu badali

Statement by Jord

User:Abu badali repeatedly tags non-free images for deletion even when a fair use justification exists and has been confirmed as being in compliance with Misplaced Pages guidelines by all interested parties who have discussed as such on the page. In at least one case, he deleted all of the source justification on a page and listed it for speedy deletion, as a minor edit, and the image later had to be undeleted by an administrator (Jord's request for undeletion, response).

When other Wikipedians question these activities, User:Abu badali has undertaken wikistalking and harrassment of the complaintants (see here for an example of him doing it to on admins talk page) and mass-tagged all of those users images for deletion.

As a result of these activities, an RfC was started re: User:Abu badali approximately six months ago. User:Abu badali has refused to respond to this RfC despite being aware of it since at least 19 December 2006 when he edited his user page to mock it.

We request that User:Abu badali be banned from editing for a period of time and his activities monitored after that period to ensure he does not continue his unacceptable activity.

Statement by Abu badali

I will briefly comment on the topics in Jord's statement.

1. About my "repeatedly taggings", diffs would be welcome. There are more than one reason a image may be deleted. Probably those taggings were for different reasons.
2. About deleting "all of the source justification", a diff is welcome. I can't think of a reason to do that (unless for bogus source info).
3. About speedy deletions, I tagged with {{db-i7}} images that were tagged as replaceable for weeks but were never reviewed by admins. I stand to my actions.
4. The "wikistalking and harrassment" link is actually a link for a discussion where admin Theresa knott accuses me of stalking and I rebut the accusation. I stand to my actions and words in that case and I have nothing to add.
5. "As a result of these activities, an RfC was started..." - Not quite. The RFC is anterior to all these activities. It was started for reasons that are unclear to discover per the confusion in Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Abu badali#Statement of the dispute.
6. About "mocking the rfc" in my user page... The statements on my user page shouldn't be taken seriously unless you're prepared to accept the fact that I am a Tenebrist character in my real life. For the record, I have "mocked" my failed RFA as well. But if this is really a problem, I can remove theses statements, or add a "this is no serious" warning.

I believe that, if accepted, this ARB case is a greate opportunity to clean up the mess at my RFC. Unfortunately, there isn't enough room here for citing 10% of it's problems.

Best regards, --Abu badali 02:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Statement by TheQuandry

There isn't much to say here beyond what I've already said in his ]. Badali specifically tricked a new editor User:PageantUpdater, by her words, "in such a way as to claim I agreed with his position". This is what I was commenting on with my comments that Abu badali mentions above.

His behavior regarding the fact that multiple editors disagreed with his tagging of certain images was wrong. He generally refused to rationally discuss any of his tags, simply stating that the images weren't free, although a number of people stated that the images were acceptable under fair use. Some editors attempted to change the RFC about badali's behavior into an argument over unfree images, which it was not. I, personally, recognize that a policy is a policy (however much I disagree with it), however if someone is going to attempt to enforce that policy, they need to be civil, they need to be open to the fact that they may have made mistakes, and they should not be digging through the contributions of editors they have disagreements with and mass tagging their uploads. Abu badali HIMSELF states on his own user page that this is what he does.

Abu badali openly mocked the RFC on his user page, and by proxy mocked the concerns of the filer and contributors, which, in my opinion, caused a significant disruption.

For evidence of his perceived wikistalking, see here

Above, Abu badali makes some comment about how I thought he was an admin. This was just a typo I made ages ago, and constantly redirecting to this admin (deleting) vs nonadmin (tagging) issue is neither here nor there. The log-digging and mass-tagging of images uploaded by a single editor is certainly enough to make that editor feel as though they are being harassed, whether they are in the wrong or not, and this behavior is, I feel, highly disruptive.

The basis of my statement in this case is that Abu badali, while believing himself in the right regarding the fair use policy, is behving in such a way as to cause a significant disruption. The fact that an RFC was necessary at all and that it was signed and contributed to by such a huge number of people attests to that. TheQuandry 15:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Preliminary decisions

Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (5/0/0/0)

• Accept. Seems to be a long-running dispute and there are user behavior issues. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 19:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Accept. Kirill Lokshin 20:04, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• Accept. - SimonP 12:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
• Accept. --jpgordon 16:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
• Accept FloNight 00:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Temporary injunction (none)

Final decision (none yet)

All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)

Principles

Findings of Fact

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.

Enforcement

Log of blocks and bans

Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.

• Misplaced Pages Arbitration cases