Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement
For appeals: create a new section and use the template {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}}
See also: Logged AE sanctions
Important information Please use this page only to:
For all other problems, including content disagreements or the enforcement of community-imposed sanctions, please use the other fora described in the dispute resolution process. To appeal Arbitration Committee decisions, please use the clarification and amendment noticeboard. Only autoconfirmed users may file enforcement requests here; requests filed by IPs or accounts less than four days old or with less than 10 edits will be removed. All users are welcome to comment on requests except where doing so would violate an active restriction (such as an extended-confirmed restriction). If you make an enforcement request or comment on a request, your own conduct may be examined as well, and you may be sanctioned for it. Enforcement requests and statements in response to them may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. (Word Count Tool) Statements must be made in separate sections. Non-compliant contributions may be removed or shortened by administrators. Disruptive contributions such as personal attacks, or groundless or vexatious complaints, may result in blocks or other sanctions. To make an enforcement request, click on the link above this box and supply all required information. Incomplete requests may be ignored. Requests reporting diffs older than one week may be declined as stale. To appeal a contentious topic restriction or other enforcement decision, please create a new section and use the template {{Arbitration enforcement appeal}}.
|
Dev0745
Dev0745 is given a formal logged warning for poor editing practices including synthesis and use of poor quality sources, and that if these issues continue sanctions are likely to be placed. Dympies is reminded to be mindful of civility in communication with other editors. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Dev0745
Problem with all these 4 diffs is that the cited source,[2] does not support the wording that " This is happening even after long discussions at User_talk:Dev0745#Nagpuria_people, User_talk:Dev0745#November_2022, User_talk:Dev0745#Please_add_nothing_to_the_article_Dom_(caste)_without_modern_academic_sources. Now if I revert him, then he will edit war and if I discuss him then he will be simply choosing to double down on his incompetence.
Response: Dev0745 was already warned by Johnuniq that if he engaged in misrepresentation of sources then he will be topic banned from entire subject of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.[4][5] Below response by Dev0745 shows he engaged in WP:OR and he is still misrepresenting the source. How " This is why I believe that Dev0745 should be topic banned. He is just not able to edit in this area with this much incompetence. Dympies (talk) 05:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Discussion concerning Dev0745Statements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by Dev07451.Source mention Y Haplogroup H* 18.18% and 9.09% H1 among Gujarat Bhils in table:1, which makes H haplogroup 27.27%.[8] So 27.27% is correct. The page Y-DNA haplogroups in populations of South Asia has also same figure. 2. Article title is " I think the user Dympies has some issue in explaining his/her point to other users as he/she may sometimes right but not always. Dympies's first point i.e terming 27.27% of Y Haplogroup among bhil as incorrect is wrong as according to data table it is correct. The second is my minor misinterpretation as in palce of muslim clerics, some muslim clerics should be added. So it is minor mistake of interpretation. I think there are chances of such minor mistake of interpretation by any editor. Also I had exam, so I have not read Wikipedia policy fully. I only know few basic policy. I will edit Wikipedia after reading Wikipedia policy fully. Response: Dhanbad district is in Jharkhand. So I think some muslims clerics in Jharkhand ban music and dance in weddings is not incorrect. Dev0745 (talk) 11:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
References
Statement by (Bookku)
Statement by Srijaxn22Dev0745 is very frequent with his misrepresentation of sources. It was was already called out on October - November 2022 at Talk:People of Assam#Tea Labourers. Instead of agreeing with the problem he was edit warring by terming another editor's edit as "please don't speard propaganda".[13] On Kol people he described "some grievances has been come out from the adivasi leaders that the Biharis used to call them 'Kol' which means pig, that in turn aroused bitterness and hatred against the Biharis" (from source), a lame slur as: "According to another theory, Kol means Pig."[14] But there is no "theory". He used completely unreliable source here on 7 November. I also recall Lohra (tribe) which he created on 30 October. Here, he has made yet another misrepresentation of another source by claiming " A topic ban from anything related to Indian social communities is the least I would recommend. Srijanx22 (talk) 13:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Statement by (username)References Result concerning Dev0745
|
Scientelensia
Scientelensia topic banned gender-related disputes and from people associated with gender-related disputes for twelve months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Scientelensia
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
I have never before filed a request for enforcement of discretionary sanctions, and am unaware if this is the best way to proceed in a case like this, or if I am filing it correctly, but this editor is not engaging article talk and is repeatedly adding sub-par content to a Featured article that saw a widely attended Featured article review this year. With the first two diffs, I understand the new-ish editor may not have been familiar with the FAR, and by the third diff, may still not have understood discretionary sanctions. But by the fourth diff, it appears some stronger guidance is in order. 3RR does not seem to be the appropriate place to seek admin intervention, as the content added has varied. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
@Callanecc, Seraphimblade, and In actu: As of 24 Dec, Scientelensia is edit warring on another JKR- and gender-related article, and does not seem to be getting the message:[17] [18] there are too many diffs at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gender_Recognition_Reform_(Scotland)_Bill&action=history for 24 December alone to list. (I can come back with list when not iPad editing if needed.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
(Nothing that Scientelensia is not the only editor who is edit warring who is already aware of DS). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Notified, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC) Discussion concerning ScientelensiaStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by ScientelensiaSorry, I take full responsibility, I did not really understand that you should use the talk page for featured articled but I will now. Scientelensia (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
References
Statement by (username)Result concerning Scientelensia
|
ZaniGiovanni
Consensus that this be referred to ArbCom at WP:ARCA. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning ZaniGiovanni
On the 2022 blockade of the Republic of Artsakh article, ZaniGiovanni repeatedly removed (diff #1 & #2) an article from JAMnews, a reliable third-party source. ZaniGiovanni asserts that the article is unreliable because it was published in Baku (Azerbaijan) and refers to it as a ZaniGiovanni was also recently engaged in edit wars on the same article (diff #4). The administrator confirmed that ZaniGiovanni's was edit warring and issued verbal warnings before closing the report as Stale. This is a direct violation of ZaniGiovanni's February warning by El C. Reply 1 @Rosguill and El C: ZaniGiovanni is not a new user who made a single mistake and was reported, nor is this the first time they have been informed of their problematic behavior. ZaniGiovanni's behavior not only on the pages I've linked to, but also on this page, is a clear violation of WP:TE. ZaniGiovanni made more than three reverts within 24 hours on the 2022 blockade of the Republic of Artsakh article, as the closing administrator informed them. However, they insist, even here, that their edits weren't edit warring. A textbook example of WP:TE. Rosguill, your point about the validity of questioning sources would be correct if the actions weren't so blatantly one-sided, which reveals that this questioning isn't done to obtain reliable sources, but rather to protect one viewpoint over another. As evidenced by ZaniGiovanni using the same source when it supported their position ([21]) but questioning it when it did not (diff #1 & #2). (WP:SOURCEGOODFAITH; WP:CPP: Furthermore, in another discussion, ZaniGiovanni was unconcerned with reliability when they referred to the propagandistic website panarmenian.net [22] or pre-election advertisement article by Rachael Rose Luckey on citywatchla.com[23]. A quote from the citywatchla.com:
When I challenged[24] the sources, ZaniGiovanni told me to ZaniGiovanni has been warned or sanctioned in this topic area at least 3 times this year alone ([27], [28], [29]). Their topic ban expired a month ago, and they've already been reported for 3RR and at AE in that time. It is perplexing to see how ZaniGiovanni manages to avoid adequate punishment for their infractions repeatedly, despite the fact that no other editor in AA2 has received such leniency in the past. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 11:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Last Reply The below diffs isn't to debate whether ZaniGiovanni was right, but to demonstrate how exhausting it is when they repeatedly revert without thinking, and after search for sources to justify revert, resulting in them tossing irrelevant or low quality sources without examination. This frequently leads to absurd scenarios in which they reject your concerns and demand you to take the blatantly low quality sources (like pre-election advertisement article on citywatchla.com), which were brought up by them, to the RSN ([30]). For instance: On 19 December 2022 ZaniGiovanni, without any comment or talk, manually undid ([31]) number of the edits. Including edit ([32]), which replaced partisan source with eurasianet.org and added missing attribution. When I protested that ([33]), ZaniGiovanni barely addressed any of their reverts:
Discussion concerning ZaniGiovanniStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by ZaniGiovanni1) 2) 3) 4) 5)
Statement by KhndzorUtoghExactly how has Zani "returned to the same problematic behaviour that resulted in their original Tban" if they have not mentioned another user’s ethnicity since? And if the 3RR was deemed stale a week ago, why would that be any different now? It also appears that Abrvagl did not attempt any discussion first for any of these sources; instead they came straight to AE to request sanctions for the user they are disagreeing with. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 16:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Statement by IxtalAs someone that moderated their DRN thread some months ago and have reached out to both on their talk pages at different points to attempt and convince them to avoid conflict, it seems that ZaniGiovanni and Abravgl will continue to find themselves unable to collaborate on here productively. I'm not placing blame on either or both of them, but I do think if the arbs or other admins find this report deeply insufficient to consider placing some kind of temporary restriction on Abravgl's filing of requests and/or ANI threads. They are a relatively newer editor that was shown the drama backrooms of Wikipedia too early due to their focus on armenia/azerbaijan and so didn't really learn how to resolve conflicts without external punitive measures or when to file requests/threads. I remember my own ban from ANI (3 months, 2021) as a crucial guardrail that has helped me immensely and think Abravgl could benefit similarly. Additionally, their statement Statement by GrandmasterZaniGiovanni twice removed a reference to Jamnews, claiming it was a "Baku based source", which it is not. [47] [48] Jamnews is an international news outlet with reporters in all 3 South Caucasus states. It is the same as saying that Reuters is "Baku based", because it has reporters in Azerbaijan, and thus unreliable. I could understand if ZaniGiovanni made a case for attribution of the information to a particular source, but I don't find it to be acceptable to simply delete information claiming it is unreliable because of the reporter's nationality, especially considering that the reporter represents an international news outlet. Grandmaster 17:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC) Result concerning ZaniGiovanni
|
Paddykumar
Paddykumar (talk · contribs) is topic banned from any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated peoples, broadly construed, for twelve months. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 20:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Paddykumar
I think this demonstrates how Paddykumar has a fundamentally unsustainable approach to editing in the GENSEX topic area, which has persisted over half a year, including a block for edit warring. Some of these diffs would not be actionable on their own, but are part of the larger pattern, which comprises most of Paddykumar's contributions in this area.
Discussion concerning PaddykumarStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by PaddykumarStatement by (TheTranarchist)I want to reaffirm the previous statement, and also add that overall it is obvious from their edit history that Paddykumar is WP:NOTHERE. Their edits are frequently removing pertinent information, or adding irrelevant ones, particularly to articles related to trans topics. They have a focus on disparaging trans people, from their insistence on misgendering at Irreversible Damage and Sealioning about it, to their misgendering in Mermaids (which has a disproportionate number of fully deleted edits) and in the whole "rude" pictures debacle to their misgendering and edit warring at Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshul, despite being warned repeatedly in the past not to do, to name but a few highlights. I feel their continued presence on Wikipedia would not benefit the encyclopedia at all, only serving to make trans editors uncomfortable by accepting recurring bigotry and increasing the workload of editors forced to deal with them in general. The majority of their edits within the GENSEX topic area have been reverted. If possible, an indefinite general ban seems the best option, but an indefinite topic ban could also fit, as their edits outside the topic seem at a glance less ideologically driven. Statement by (username)Result concerning Paddykumar
|
PreserveOurHistory
PreserveOurHistory (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages and discussions concerning India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, broadly construed. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning PreserveOurHistory
Notwithstanding the efforts to get this editor to appreciate and observe policies of the site, they have shown they are more interested in wikilawyering. The foregoing context also shows that their approach to the matter has been domineering, and that neither the policies or other people's words seem to matter to them.
Discussion concerning PreserveOurHistoryStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by PreserveOurHistoryStatement by (username)Result concerning PreserveOurHistory
|
Maitrey M. Telang
Maitrey M. Telang is given a logged warning regarding citing sources for edits. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Maitrey M. Telang
Discussion concerning Maitrey M. TelangStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by Maitrey M. TelangStatement by (username)Result concerning Maitrey M. Telang
|
Ronar~enwiki
Ronar~enwiki blocked indefinitely as a normal admin action. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 04:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
This request may be declined without further action if insufficient or unclear information is provided in the "Request" section below. Request concerning Ronar~enwiki
Discussion concerning Ronar~enwikiStatements must be made in separate sections. They may not exceed 500 words and 20 diffs, except by permission of a reviewing administrator. Statement by Ronar~enwikiStatement by (username)Result concerning Ronar~enwiki
|