Revision as of 18:51, 19 February 2007

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, arbitrators may 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 they so choose. 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.

As of the opening of this case, there are 13 active arbitrators and none are recused, so 7 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

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Neutral Point of View

1) Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view, official policy, requires that all significant points of view regarding a subject be included in an article on that subject.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Biographies of living persons

2) Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons, official policy, requires that biographies of living people should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Controversial material must be verified by reference to reliable sources.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Outside conflicts

3) The participants in disputes which are the subject of Misplaced Pages articles may be banned, or otherwise restricted, from editing those articles if their editing is disruptive.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Using online and self-published sources

4) Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources#Using_online_and_self-published_sources, a guideline, warns against use of sources whose content is controlled by their owner., "A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication."

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Partisan, corporate, institutional and religious sources

4.1) Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources#Partisan.2C_corporate.2C_institutional_and_religious_sources, a guideline, cautions against use of partisan sources:

The websites, print media, and other publications of political parties, companies, organizations and religious groups should be treated with caution, since they may be used to advance particular political, corporate, institutional or religious viewpoints. Of course such political, corporate, institutional or religious affiliation is not in itself a reason to exclude a source.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Extremist sources

4.2) Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources#Extremist_sources, a guideline, cautions against use of extremist sources:

Organizations and individuals that are widely acknowledged as extremist, whether of a political, religious, racist, or other nature, should be used only as sources about themselves and their activities in articles about themselves, and even then with caution.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 17:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Conflict of interest

5) Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest, a guideline, warns:

1. avoid editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
2. avoid participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;

and must always:

1. avoid breaching relevant policies on Misplaced Pages:Autobiography and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view,
2. avoid linking to the Misplaced Pages article or website of your organization in other articles (see Misplaced Pages:Spam).

Bite: Can you explain why it’s a bad idea for a PR firm to be editing Misplaced Pages on behalf of a client? How does the Misplaced Pages community react to such activity?

Wales: It is a bad idea because of the conflict-of-interest. It is perfectly fine to talk to the community, to show them more information, to give them things that show your client in the best light. But it is wrong to try to directly participate in the process when you have an agenda.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Point of view editing

6) Users who engage in disruptive, point of view editing may be banned from affected articles.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Advocacy and propaganda

7) Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not, official policy, precludes use of Misplaced Pages for advocacy or propaganda.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Ilena

1) Ilena (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Ilena Rosenthal, a women's health activist, see User:Ilena and Ilena Rosenthal on Misplaced Pages. She was the appellant in Barrett v. Rosenthal, defendant at the trial court level. In addition to that article she also edits with respect to alternative medicine.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Struggle by Ilena

1.1) Ilena has engaged in combative behavior which, besides being rude, betrays misunderstanding of Misplaced Pages policies .

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Disruption by Ilena

1.2) Ilena in her editing aggressively advances the partisan viewpoints expressed on her website and those associated with alternative medicine.

Stephen Barrett

2) Stephen Barrett is a retired physician and health activist. He is one of the founders of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) and webmaster of twenty-two websites that describe what he considers to be "quackery and health fraud," most notably Quackwatch. While this dispute revolves about him and his involvements, his editing is believed to be limited to comments on talk pages, Sbinfo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Fyslee

3) Fyslee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Paul Lee, a health activist who participates in a number of internet sites critical of alternative medicine, see "user=fyslee" and (contains list of sites)

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Incivility and personal attacks by Fyslee

3.1) Fyslee has engaged in incivility and personal attacks .

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Use of unreliable sources by Fyslee

3.2) Fyslee has repeatedly used Quackwatch and similar partisan sites as references .

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Disruption by Fyslee

3.3) Fyslee in his editing aggressively advances the partisan viewpoints expressed on his own website and those associated with Quackwatch.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

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.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Ilena banned

1) Ilena is banned from Misplaced Pages for one year.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Ilena banned from editing

2) Ilena is banned indefinitely from editing articles which relate to alternative medicine, Quackwatch and related articles, and litigation she was involved with. The ban includes talk pages with the exception of articles with relate to breast implants.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Fyslee banned from editing

3) Fyslee is banned from editing Barrett v. Rosenthal, all articles which relate to Quackwatch and similar activities, and all articles which relate to alternative medicine. He may comment and make suggestions on talk pages.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Enforcement by block

1) Violation of bans imposed by this decision may be enforced by blocks of appropriate length. All blocks to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Barrett_v._Rosenthal#Log_of_blocks_and_bans

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Misplaced Pages is not an appropriate vehicle for advocacy or propaganda. Fred Bauder 18:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Motion to close

Implementation notes

Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

Vote

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.