This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Barkeep49 (talk | contribs) at 15:10, 21 December 2021 (→Warsaw concentration camp: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter: watching, a couple of ?s). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:10, 21 December 2021 by Barkeep49 (talk | contribs) (→Warsaw concentration camp: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter: watching, a couple of ?s)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) "WP:ARC" redirects here. For a guide on talk page archiving, see H:ARC.Shortcut
Requests for arbitration
Arbitration Committee proceedings- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
---|---|---|---|
Warsaw concentration camp | 21 December 2021 | 0/0/0 |
Case name | Links | Evidence due | Prop. Dec. due |
---|---|---|---|
Palestine-Israel articles 5 | (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) | 21 Dec 2024 | 11 Jan 2025 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requestsCurrently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
Arbitrator motionsMotion name | Date posted |
---|---|
Arbitrator workflow motions | 1 December 2024 |
Shortcuts
About this page Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority). Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests. Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide to case requests. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace. To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
Guidance on participation and word limits Unlike many venues on Misplaced Pages, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.
General guidance
|
Warsaw concentration camp
Initiated by Jehochman at 13:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Jehochman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), filing party
- Piotrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Volunteer Marek (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Icewhiz was banned by WMF Legal last year.
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- COIN discussion ending without result 4 December 2021
- Original RFC at Talk:Warsaw concentration camp
- RFC at Talk:Reliability of Misplaced Pages
- An older discussion at WT:List of hoaxes on Misplaced Pages
Statement by Jehochman
Issue: If a newspaper publishes an article critical of an editor's editing, can the editor remove that newspaper article, and content sourced to it, from Misplaced Pages?
On Oct. 4, 2019, Omer Benjakob of Haaretz, Israel's paper of record, published a story about Misplaced Pages's coverage of Poland and the Holocaust, including what Benjakob called Misplaced Pages's longest-running hoax, related to content at the article "Warsaw concentration camp": . In this article, Benjakob interviewed User:Icewhiz and User:Piotrus, among others, and wrote, in the newspaper's voice, content that was critical of Icewhiz, Piotrus, User:Volunteer Marek, and others, as well as Misplaced Pages as a whole. As Benjakob predicted, back in 2019, and again in 2021, Piotrus and Volunteer Marek have removed content about the hoax, and the Haaretz article, from multiple Misplaced Pages pages. (all above statements copied from WP:COIN)
This is yet another hydra head from EEML, a 2009 arbitration case. This matter has been unresolvable due to severe, persistent behavioral problems. The dispute is causing extreme damage to the encyclopedia, by enabling disinformation and ahistory.
A little flavor of the discussion:
Jesus fucking Christ, reading COIN today was a mistake, because this thread makes me want to shove a pickaxe through my skull.
I came across this mess at Misplaced Pages:Closure requests where the closure request has sat, unactioned, for 16 days. Due to the fact that I was one of the people specifically targeted for harassment by EEML, I will not touch it. No other administrator appears willing, or able, to take on this monster, despite there having been at least four long (and heated) discussions. Therefore, I have wrapped it with a bow, and placed it under your Christmas tree (or next to your Festivus pole, etc.). Welcome to the Arbitration Committee!
Statement by Piotrus
Statement by Volunteer Marek
Statement by {Non-party}
Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information.
Warsaw concentration camp: Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).
Warsaw concentration camp: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0>-Warsaw_concentration_camp-2021-12-21T15:10:00.000Z">
Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)
- There's zero doubt that the conversations around this have been very difficult and it's unsurprising that someone would look our way. Questions on my mind: For those who will suggest we accept this case, what do you see as our scope because we're not going to rule on content? For those who would suggest we decline, how do you see this conflict resolving short of a case? Barkeep49 (talk) 15:10, 21 December 2021 (UTC)"> ">