Revision as of 16:52, 18 November 2019

WP:ARC

Requests for arbitration

Request name	Motions	Initiated	Votes
Civility in portal deletion discussions		18 November 2019	0/0/0

[edit]

Open cases

Currently, no arbitration cases are open.

[edit]

Recently closed cases (Past cases)

Case name	Closed
Venezuelan politics	25 May 2024

Clarification and Amendment requests

Request name	Motions	Case	Posted
Amendment request: Article titles and capitalisation	none	(orig. case)	7 June 2024
Clarification request: mentioning the name of off-wiki threads	none	none	4 June 2024
Amendment request: India-Pakistan	none	(orig. case)	7 June 2024
Clarification request: Contentious topics restrictions	none	none	10 June 2024
Amendment request: World War II and the history of Jews in Poland	none	(orig. case)	21 June 2024

Arbitrator motions

Motion name	Date posted
Block of Rp2006	21 June 2024

Shortcuts

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 Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.

File an arbitration request

This page is for statements, not discussion.

If you must reply to another user's statement, do so in your own section (more information).
Your section must not contain more than 500 words (Word Count Tool; internal gadget). This includes your replies to other users. To request an extension, either make the request in your statement section or email the clerks email list.
Arbitrators or clerks may refactor or delete statements, eg off-topic or unproductive remarks, without warning.
Banned users may request arbitration via the committee contact page; don't try to edit this page.
Under no circumstances should you remove requests from this page, or open a case (even for accepted requests), unless you are an arbitrator or clerk.
After a request is filed, the arbitrators will vote on accepting or declining the case. The <0/0/0> tally counts the arbitrators voting accept/decline/recuse.
Declined case requests are logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Declined requests. Accepted case requests are opened as cases, and logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Cases once closed.

Civility in portal deletion discussions

Initiated by ToThAc (talk) at 16:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Involved parties

ToThAc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Northamerica1000 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Robert McClenon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Moxy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Mark Schierbecker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Newshunter12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

[diff of notification BrownHairedGirl]
[diff of notification Northamerica1000]
[diff of notification Robert McClenon]
[diff of notification Moxy]
[diff of notification Mark Schierbecker]
[diff of notification Newshunter12]

Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case § Portal Issues (declined)
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1020 § Portal updates reverted
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Portals (See here for additional discussions.)

Statement by ToThAc

This has been a recurring debate ever since the separate mass deletions of portalspam created by The Transhumanist.

As summarized in Robert McClenon's essay on issues surrounding portals, the necessity of portals in general has been heavily debated over the course of several months. In April 2018, The Transhumanist started an RfC on deprecating portals, which was closed with a rough consensus to not delete all portals. However, a few users took this as a sign that Wikipedia needed more portals, and began creating automated spam that eventually led to a portal topic ban applied to The Transhumanist and the aforementioned mass deletions.

However, several users, myself included, have repeatedly called the necessity of certain portals into question, and have slowly been nominating additional portals for deletion. This has caused us to clash with the so-called "portal advocates" who wish to keep certain portals.

More recently, this has led to extremely heated arguments between BrownHairedGirl and Northamerica1000. During portal deletion discussions, both users have displayed, at best, questionable behavior. BHG has become increasingly frustrated with her interactions with NA1k, even going as far as to calling him "sneaky" and "either a liar or an idiot or both". However, NA1k's actions are also a cause for concern; he has repeatedly demonstrated fait accompli behavior, failing to disclose his methodology for the kinds of selected content he added to portals, not to mention implementing said changes without an adequate community consensus. (While NA1k's proposed organization method of selected content was well-received in this discussion, nothing there was ever formally closed, and NA1k has failed to cite whether he based his edits off of that discussion.) The ongoing back-and-forth at the deletion discussion for Portal:Transport is a good example of what I'm talking about here.

However, as generally agreed upon in this ANI discussion, singling out one user in this whole mess would appear to poison the atmosphere one way or another. Since it appears that nothing else has succeeded in cooling this debate, I strongly urge the Arbitration Committee to review the conduct of all users involved in this debate, myself included. ToThAc (talk) 16:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by BrownHairedGirl

Statement by Northamerica1000

Statement by Robert McClenon

Statement by Moxy

Statement by Mark Schierbecker

Statement by Newshunter12

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.

Civility in portal deletion discussions: Clerk notes

This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).

Civility in portal deletion discussions: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0>

Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 <noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
 {{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=43%</noinclude>}}
+== Civility in portal deletion discussions ==
+'''Initiated by ''' [[User:ToThAc|ToThAc]] ([[User talk:ToThAc|talk]]) '''at''' 16:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
+=== Involved parties ===
+<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator -->
+*{{userlinks|ToThAc}}, ''filing party''
+*{{admin|BrownHairedGirl}}
+*{{admin|Northamerica1000}}
+*{{userlinks|Robert McClenon}}
+*{{userlinks|Moxy}}
+*{{userlinks|Mark Schierbecker}}
+*{{userlinks|Newshunter12}}
+;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
+<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. -->
+*[diff of notification BrownHairedGirl]
+*[diff of notification Northamerica1000]
+*[diff of notification Robert McClenon]
+*[diff of notification Moxy]
+*[diff of notification Mark Schierbecker]
+*[diff of notification Newshunter12]
+;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried
+*[[Special:Diff/890992728|Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case § Portal Issues]] (declined)
+*[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1020#Portal updates reverted|Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1020 § Portal updates reverted]]
+*[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Portals|Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Portals]] (See [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Previous portal discussions|here]] for additional discussions.)
+=== Statement by ToThAc ===
+This has been a recurring debate ever since the [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Mass-created portals based on a single navbox|separate]] [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Second batch of mass-created portals based on a single navbox|mass deletions]] of portalspam created by {{u|The Transhumanist}}.
+As summarized in {{u|Robert McClenon}}'s [[Wikipedia:The Problems with Portals|essay on issues surrounding portals]], the necessity of portals in general has been heavily debated over the course of several months. In April 2018, The Transhumanist started [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/RfC: Ending the system of portals|an RfC on deprecating portals]], which was closed with a rough consensus to not delete all portals. However, a few users took this as a sign that Wikipedia needed more portals, and began creating automated spam that eventually led to [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive307|a portal topic ban applied to The Transhumanist]] and the aforementioned mass deletions.
+However, several users, myself included, have repeatedly called the necessity of certain portals into question, and have slowly been nominating additional portals for deletion. This has caused us to clash with the so-called "portal advocates" who wish to keep certain portals.
+More recently, this has led to extremely heated arguments between BrownHairedGirl and Northamerica1000. During portal deletion discussions, both users have displayed, at best, questionable behavior. BHG has become increasingly frustrated with her interactions with NA1k, even [[Wikipedia:Hounding|going as far as to]] calling him "[[Special:Diff/920897512|sneaky]]" and "[[Special:Diff/925456783|either a liar or an idiot or both]]". However, NA1k's actions are also a cause for concern; he has repeatedly demonstrated [[Wikipedia:Fait accompli|fait accompli]] behavior, failing to disclose his methodology for the kinds of selected content he added to portals, not to mention implementing said changes without an adequate community consensus. (While NA1k's proposed organization method of selected content ''was'' well-received in [[Wikipedia talk:Portal/Guidelines/Archive 6#Portals are moribound|this discussion]], nothing there was ever formally closed, and NA1k has failed to cite whether he based his edits off of that discussion.) The ongoing back-and-forth at [[Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Transport|the deletion discussion for Portal:Transport]] is a good example of what I'm talking about here.
+However, as generally agreed upon in [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Portals|this ANI discussion]], singling out one user in this whole mess would appear to poison the atmosphere one way or another. Since it appears that nothing else has succeeded in cooling this debate, I strongly urge the Arbitration Committee to review the conduct of all users involved in this debate, myself included. [[User:ToThAc|ToThAc]] ([[User talk:ToThAc|talk]]) 16:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
+=== Statement by BrownHairedGirl ===
+=== Statement by Northamerica1000 ===
+=== Statement by Robert McClenon ===
+=== Statement by Moxy ===
+=== Statement by Mark Schierbecker ===
+=== Statement by Newshunter12 ===
+=== 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.
+<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
+=== Civility in portal deletion discussions: Clerk notes ===
+:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
+*
+=== Civility in portal deletion discussions: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0> ===
+{{anchor|1=Civility in portal deletion discussions: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)</small>
+*