Misplaced Pages

:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Proposed decision: 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:Requests for arbitration | Episodes and characters 2 Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:07, 3 February 2008 editDaniel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators75,520 edits Halt to activities: enacted← Previous edit Revision as of 02:08, 3 February 2008 edit undoDaniel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators75,520 edits Halt to activities: fixNext edit →
Line 29: Line 29:


===Halt to activities=== ===Halt to activities===
1) For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction.
1)

'''Enacted''' on 02:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC) '''Enacted''' on 02:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction.


:Support: :Support:

Revision as of 02:08, 3 February 2008

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. 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. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case, there are 12 active Arbitrators, so 7 votes are a majority.

Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop. Motions which are accepted for consideration and which require a vote will be placed here by the Arbitrators for voting.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.

Template

1) {text of proposed motion}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

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.

Halt to activities

1) For the duration of this case, no editor shall redirect or delete any currently existing article regarding a television series episode or character; nor un-redirect or un-delete any currently redirected or deleted article on such a topic, nor apply or remove a tag related to notability to such an article. Administrators are authorized to revert such changes on sight, and to block any editors that persist in making them after being warned of this injunction.

Enacted on 02:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Support:
  1. Kirill 01:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  2. FloNight (talk) 02:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Added "television series" to prevent this from conceivably being quoted out of context. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  4. FT2  02:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Support adding tags which are a concern on the matter too. A few loopholes (consensus decisions? new topics? contentious processes?) but this will catch the main ones. Favoring a broad interpretation by administrators, geared to the spirit of this, which is to quell the disputed actions whilst the case is in progress.
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

2) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

3) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

4) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

5) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

6) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

7) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

8) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

9) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

10) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

2) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

3) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

4) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

5) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

6) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

7) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

8) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

9) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

10) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

11) {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:

Template

2) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

3) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

4) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

5) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

6) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

7) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

8) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

9) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

10) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

11) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

12) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

13) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

2) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

3) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

4) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

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.