Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freestylefrappe/Proposed decision

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop 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 he so chooses. 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.

On this case, no Arbitrators is/are recused and one is inactive, so 6 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:

Administrators

1) Administrators of Wikipedia are trusted members of the community and are expected to follow Wikipedia policies. Their powers are to be used only for appropriate reasons, as set forth in those policies, and should never be used in disputes in which the administrator is involved. (See Wikipedia:Administrators.)

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Administrators are responsible to the community

2) Administrators use their powers as representatives of the Wikipedia community, and as such the use of those powers is subject to observation by and comment from members of the community. Administrators are expected to respond courteously and constructively to questions about, and criticisms of, their use of administrator powers.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Civility

3) Wikipedia users are expected to behave calmly, courteously, and civilly in their dealings with other users. If disputes arise, users are expected to use dispute resolution procedures.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Assume good faith

4) Wikipedia editors should assume good faith in keeping with our long-standing tradition of being open and welcoming.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Treatment of new contributors

5) New contributors are prospective "members" and are therefore our most valuable resource. Please do not bite the newcomers.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Inappropriate blocking

6) Administrators should follow the blocking policy when blocking, barring a serious threat to Wikipedia.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Wheel warring

7) Administrators should avoid engaging in repeatedly doing or undoing an administrative action. (See Wikipedia:Wheel war.)

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

focus of dispute

1) Kumanovo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), a city in Macedonia, is a focus of dispute with discourtesy, edit warring, point of view editing and failure to adequately communicate displayed by Freestylefrappe. An administrator, Freestylefrappe has used and threatened to use his administrative powers in relation to an article he was involved in a dispute over [1]. An expression of Freestylefrappe's viewpoint is on his user page at [2].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discourtesy and personal attacks by Freestylefrappe

2) Freestylefrappe has been discourteous to other users [3] [4]. Personal attacks: [5] and [6]. This practice has continued during this arbitration, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Freestylefrappe/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Freestylefrappe.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Failure to communicate adequately

3) Freestylefrappe has failed to communicate in the professional manner expected of an administrator. For example to this communication [7], he responded with [8]. There is also failure to use the talk page effectively during the dispute at Kumanovo, see Talk:Kumanovo. This inquiry requesting information regarding a block [9], he characterizes as "Now I have to deal with harassment by BunchofGrapes." (bottom of page). In response to this explanation [10] and other attempts to communicate he deletes [11] with the comment "removing all comments-too stupid for me to archive".

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Blocking of new user without communication or warning

4) Freestylefrappe blocked Stephenj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as the result of this edit [12]. Stephenj, who describes himself as Director for Technology Services at NDI [13], editing as 67.130.38.2 (talk · contribs) had probably added a mass of unwikified material into NDI. The removal of the lists of names, combined with an unlinked redirect to the article he had edited are typical of the stumbling attempts of a new user. However no warning or other communication was made prior to a 24 hour block. Karmafist had posted a warning [14], but no repetition of the offense had occurred. Freestylefrappe's contemporary comments on the incident [15].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Inappropriate blocking

5) Freestylefrappe blocked Jeffrey O. Gustafson (talk · contribs) for three hours over "modify[ing] the comments of other users" — the "other users" in this case being namely Freestylefrappe himself. When Jeffrey O. Gustafson unblocked himself, Freestylefrappe reblocked for six hours. This constitutes behaviour inappropriate of an administrator, who should not block in a dispute where he himself is a party, nor wheel war. ([16], [17]) Another case involved an anonymous editor: [18] Blocks 70.178.69.165 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for 48 hours on 16 December; anon has had one edit since 6 December and his first, last, and only warning was on 4 December.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Removal of principle from Requests for Comment

6) Freestylefrappe removed a clearly applicable principle from his Request for Comment [19]. Freestylefrappe's viewpoint [20].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Abuse of administrative status

7) Freestylefrappe has used him administrative status to threaten other users [21] and to threaten actions regarding a dispute he was engaged in [22].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Combative attitude

8) Freestylefrappe has a combative attitude incompatible with administrative status, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Freestylefrappe/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Freestylefrappe.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

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:

Freestylefrappe desysopped

1) Freestylefrappe is desyopped. He is free to reapply for adminship at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship after one year.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Freestylefrappe placed on probation

2) Freestylefrappe is placed on Wikipedia:Probation. He may be banned from any article by any administrator for good cause. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Freestylefrappe#Documentation_of_bans

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Enforcement by block

1) In the event Freestylefrappe edits an article from which he is banned, he may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Freestylefrappe#Documentation_of_bans

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

In making my proposals I have focused on difficulties related to administrative status. It is presumed that Freestylefrappe is able to function as a user, with the exception of certain articles he has an obsessive interest in. Fred Bauder 21:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Motion to close

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.