Revision as of 05:39, 28 March 2014 editDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Oversighters, Administrators263,788 edits →Welcome back, Will!: me too← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:58, 28 March 2014 edit undoRoger Davies (talk | contribs)Administrators34,587 edits →Suspension of site ban: fix ambiguityNext edit → | ||
Line 154: | Line 154: | ||
== Suspension of site ban == | == Suspension of site ban == | ||
I've unblocked you per the motion suspending your site ban and will be sending a final e-mail to conclude the appeal process. I removed the tags from your user page and user talk page and reduced the protection level on your user page to allow you to edit it. Please feel free to archive your talk page in due course, though you should keep a copy of the restrictions available to refer to. Additionally, as you requested by e-mail, I'm stating here that the terms of your unban do not extend to |
I've unblocked you per the motion suspending your site ban and will be sending a final e-mail to conclude the appeal process. I removed the tags from your user page and user talk page and reduced the protection level on your user page to allow you to edit it. Please feel free to archive your talk page in due course, though you should keep a copy of the restrictions available to refer to. Additionally, as you requested by e-mail, I'm stating here that the terms of your unban do not extend to permitting you to discuss or comment on the case that led to your ban. If you have any further questions relating to your restrictions, please e-mail us (the Arbitration Committee) in the first instance. ] (]) 03:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:58, 28 March 2014
Template:Archive box collapsible
A beer for you!
Hope you come back one day. --evrik 23:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC) |
- Will, I hope that ArbCom takes up your appeal and agrees to allow you to return to editing. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Current status
redacted
- Have restored this content. No reason to delete it without going through proper channels. Arbcom is free to not comment. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
handling of unblock request
At Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#change_to_block_of_User:Will_Beback I've asked the Arbitration Committee about its response to the unblock request. —rybec 21:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I hope that you can soon continue the necessary, good work that you did if you can promise not be overzealous again and promise not to out people again. Andries (talk) 11:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Will Beback ban appeal
The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, suspended Will Beback's ("WBB") site-ban on the following terms:
- Suspension of ban
- WBB's indefinite site-ban is suspended subject to his unconditional acceptance of and continuing compliance with the terms below, the purpose of which is to enable him to return to active content work. Failure to comply fully with the letter and spirit of these terms may result in the committee revoking the suspension without warning and reinstating the indefinite ban.
- For purposes of enforcement, "on-wiki" refers to any edit in any namespace on the English Misplaced Pages or on any Project or mailing list or email system hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation or in any IRC channel with "wikipedia" or "wikimedia" in the channel name.
- One-way interaction ban
- WBB is directed to immediately cease commenting directly or indirectly on-wiki about User:TimidGuy and User:Keithbob. WBB also agrees to not communicate with the above editors, to not contact either their places of work or their colleagues, and to not seek sanctions for them, by any means.
- Administrators who receive requests for sanctions are requested to inform the Arbitration Committee by email.
- Topic ban: new religious movements
- WBB is indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit on-wiki about, or any edit to any page relating to, new religious movements, broadly construed.
- This restriction replaces WBB's existing new religious movements topic ban.
- Topic ban: conflicts of interest/paid advocacy; real-world identities
- WBB is indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit on-wiki relating to conflicts of interest, paid advocacy or the real-world identity of any editor, broadly construed.
- WBB agrees to not become involved in any investigation broadly construed, either on- or off-wiki, into the real-world identity of any editor or into their real-world interests and affiliations.
- Reconsideration of restrictions
- The original 2012 case has been carefully and extensively reviewed by the 2013 and 2014 Arbitration Committees, who have seen no reason to disturb it. No further review of the case will take place.
- No request for reconsideration of these restrictions may be made until at least twelve months have elapsed since the date on which the suspension of the ban comes into effect.
The record of the vote on the motion can be seen here. For the Arbitration Committee, Carcharoth (talk) 02:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Welcome back, Will!
Live long and prosper! Cullen Let's discuss it 03:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Welcome back from me too! TFD (talk) 03:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
What they said. Writegeist (talk) 04:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, welcome back! Herostratus (talk) 04:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Great news. I personally really missed you in the areas where I edit. I'm sure you'll find enough to do outside your topic ban areas to keep you busy! Dougweller (talk) 05:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Suspension of site ban
I've unblocked you per the motion suspending your site ban and will be sending a final e-mail to conclude the appeal process. I removed the tags from your user page and user talk page and reduced the protection level on your user page to allow you to edit it. Please feel free to archive your talk page in due course, though you should keep a copy of the restrictions available to refer to. Additionally, as you requested by e-mail, I'm stating here that the terms of your unban do not extend to permitting you to discuss or comment on the case that led to your ban. If you have any further questions relating to your restrictions, please e-mail us (the Arbitration Committee) in the first instance. Carcharoth (talk) 03:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)