Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard

Arbitration​Committee

This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's Clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.

Announcement archives:

• 0 (2008-12 – 2009-01)
• 1 (to 2009-02)
• 2 (to 2009-05)
• 3 (to 2009-06)
• 4 (to 2009-07)
• 5 (to 2009-12)
• 6 (to 2010-12)
• 7 (to 2011-12)
• 8 (to 2012-12)
• 9 (to 2013-12)
• 10 (to 2015-12)
• 11 (to 2018-04)
• 12 (to 2020-08)
• 13 (to 2023-03)
• 14 (to present)

Audit Subcommittee report of activity for March 2012 through April 2013

The Audit Subcommittee has published its annual summary of activity for the period from March 2012 to April 2013:

From March 2012 through April 2013, the Audit Subcommittee heard thirteen cases:

• In one case, the oversighter voluntarily reversed their suppression and no further action was taken.
• In one case, the complaint related to the use of advanced permissions on another Wikimedia Foundation project, and was outside of the subcommittee's remit.
• In one case, a checkuser inadvertently linked an account with an IP address when there were no grounds to do so. The functionary was cautioned and a reminder of best practice was sent to all checkusers. The log entry linking the account with the IP address had separately been suppressed after a request to the oversight team.
• In one case, no further action was required.
• In one case, a steward had blocked an account after mistakenly selecting the "suppress account" option (which they have access to but are not permitted to use except in an emergency). The action was overturned and no further action was required.
• In two cases, the complaint did not relate to the use of advanced permissions and was therefore dismissed.
• In one case, a functionary was instructed to recuse from using their checkuser tools in certain circumstances (which will not be disclosed in this report), but no deliberate misuse of the checkuser permission was detected and no further recommendation to the Arbitration Committee was made.
• In one case, a use of suppression was overturned and the functionary was warned to take greater care in the future.
• In four cases, a functionary's actions were held to be appropriate and correct and no further action was taken.

Of these thirteen cases, six reviews were requested by another functionary, two reviews were initiated by a member of the subcommittee, and five complaints were received from non-functionary editors.

To read the original copy of this report (and earlier reports), see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Audit Subcommittee/Reports.

For the Audit Subcommittee, AGK [•] 15:16, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Discuss this

BASC statistics: Q1 2013

During the first three months of 2013, the Ban Appeals Subcommittee heard and completed a total of 43 appeals (this number includes multiple appeals by single users). A total of three appeals were granted: Fæ, Int21h, and Russavia. Of the remaining appeals, eleven were either referred to proper venues or were closed as incomplete (the appellants did not respond back to further correspondence or did not provide enough information on which to make a determination.) The median time for processing appeals was 3 days, while the average time was 11 days.

For the Arbitration Committee, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 20:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Discuss This

Successful block appeal by Cla68

The Arbitration Committee has passed the following motion to accept Cla68 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log)'s appeal of his indefinite block for outing other contributors:

Cla68's block is lifted, effective at the passage of this motion, with the following restrictions:

1. Cla68 may not post external links to any internet site, except

   • for the purpose of providing a reference to a reliable source when improving an article, or
   • to add an external link to an article to the official website/webpage of the article subject, or
   • for the purpose of discussing whether or not a reference to a reliable source would be a useful addition to an article

2. Under no circumstances may Cla68 add an external link to any blog, mailing list or forum, regardless of its purported reliability or value as a reference for an article.
3. Any violation of the sanctions governing the use of external links, or any further violation of the Harassment policy may result in an immediate indefinite block from editing. All appeals to blocks will be made directly to the Arbitration Committee, and any blocks referencing this motion will be considered arbitration enforcement blocks if applied by an administrator, or Arbitration Committee blocks if applied by an arbitrator.

Support: Risker (proposing), AGK, Newyorkbrad, Carcharoth, David Fuchs, WormThatTurned, and Timotheus Canens

Oppose: Courcelles, SilkTork, and Salvio giuliano

Not voting: Roger Davies

Recuse: NuclearWarfare, Kirill Lokshin

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 09:41, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Motion regarding Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics

Resolved by motion:

In his evidence submission to this case, Apostle12 (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log) stated he is immediately retiring from editing Wikipedia:

This will be my last submission. I have decided to place a "Retired" notice on my user page and scramble my password, thus tendering my resignation

Apostle12's conduct was a substantial part of the present arbitration case (Race and politics) and hearing this case in Apostle12's absence would serve no purpose. The committee therefore resolves that:

1. The present arbitration case is suspended for two months (from the date this motion passes).
2. If Apostle12 returns while this case is suspended, arbitration proceedings will resume.
3. If Apostle12 does not return to editing before two months have elapsed: he will be indefinitely prohibited from editing any page relating to "race and politics", broadly construed; and this case will be un-suspended and closed.
4. Apostle12 is directed to inform the Arbitration Committee if he returns to editing the English Wikipedia using any account.

Apostle12 (and all of his accounts, if he has created one or more others at that time) may be indefinitely blocked by any uninvolved administrator if he violates the prohibitions in points 3 or 4 of this motion.

For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 02:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Discuss this

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement suspended

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

1) The Tea Party movement case is suspended until the end of June 2013 to allow time for the Tea Party movement/Moderated discussion to attempt to resolve the conflict regarding the Tea Party movement article. Pages relating to the Tea Party movement, in any namespace, broadly construed, are placed under discretionary sanctions until further notice. The Committee will reconvene on 1 July 2013 to determine if the conflict has been resolved; and if not, what further steps the Committee should take.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Argentine History closed

An arbitration case regarding the article Juan Manuel de Rosas has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Cambalachero is banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces.
2. MarshalN20 is banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces.
3. Lecen is reminded to conduct himself in accordance with Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines.

For the Arbitration Committee, — ΛΧΣ²¹ 04:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Discuss this

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement resumed

One month ago, the Arbitration Committee voted in a temporary injunction to suspend the case relating to a dispute over Tea Party movement. Today, we have reviewed the dispute and determined that arbitration of the case is still necessary. We will therefore unsuspend the case and resume voting on our proposed decision. For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 22:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Discuss this