Revision as of 02:09, 11 March 2007

This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies, Arbitrators will vote at /Proposed decision. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.

Motions and requests by the parties

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed temporary injunctions

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Questions to the parties

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Trolling

1) Problems with Wikipedia should be addressed by discussion, rather than piecemeal attempts to entrap and discredit other editors.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

This is a suggestion based on the observation that the coincidence involved here is rather outrageous: chap suddenly shows up and, in his very first edits, anonymously edit wars with administrator, who overreacts,then the troll and his mates play merry hell until they gets an arbitration case. Whilst the outcome might possibly be advantageous to Wikipedia, such behavior (and the evidence for this is mounting) cannot ever be condoned. --Tony Sidaway 22:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd add that it's rather suspicious that Worldtraveller supposedly doesn't edit Wikipedia for months, then shows up and starts edit warring--and with an administrator, on a topic for which the administrator in question is known to have an interest. I don't say that the administrator in question is without sin, but there's a much, much more serious question here: what on earth is the Scoobie Gang up to? --Tony Sidaway 23:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Scoobie Gang is my informal name for the collection of close associates of Worldtraveller who, purporting to believe the blocked editor to be someone they didn't know, suddenly showed up and started making a very, very loud noise over Inshaneee's behavior [1]. I'd enumerate them as follows: User:Bunchofgrapes, User:Geogre and User:Bishonen. I would welcome a clarification from those editors: did they really not realise their their associate Worldtraveller was trolling Inshaneee? --Tony Sidaway 23:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again I add that Inshaneee's behavior as an administrator may be a serious issue for Wikipedia. Vigilanteism, however, would obviously be a far, far more serious problem. I think there is strong evidence to support the suspicion of vigilanteism here.--Tony Sidaway 23:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Sidaway seems to be suggesting that I decided to remove the 'paranormal' tag from Talk:Red rain in Kerala purely to annoy User:InShaneee. I'm completely astonished by this. Is Tony Sidaway aware that I originally started Red rain in Kerala [2], and contributed a lot of the content? Can he offer an idea as to why he thinks I'd behave like that? Is there anything in my contributions over the last two and a half years that gives him cause to do so? 81.179.115.188 01:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by others:

Um ... the "Scoobie Gang"?? Newyorkbrad 23:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]