Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing

Case Opened on 15:02, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Case Closed on 18:17, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Ruling Amended on 10:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at /Workshop and voting on proposed decisions at /Proposed decision.

Involved parties

Administrators

• Phroziac (talk · contribs) - Administrator; directly involved
• Karmafist (talk · contribs) - Administrator; directly involved
• Linuxbeak (talk · contribs) - Administrator; indirectly involved

Nominal defendant

• Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), also known as Andy Mabbett

Statements by complaining parties

Please limit your statement to 500 words

Statement by Karmafist

User:Pigsonthewing, also known as Andy Mabbett, POTW, or Pigs, is a serial breaker of WP:CIVIL, WP:WQT, WP:TROLL and Key Rule #4 of WP:RULES. When I met him a few weeks ago, I was trying to help intercede in a revert war between himself and G-Man at Coleshill, Warwickshire. Little did I know that he was also in the middle of revert wars at Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania and British Sea Power at the same time. My attempts to help alleviate his lack of cooperation with other editors was then met with constant trolling by Pigs and empty allegations of administrative abuse until he attempted to sabotage my nomination to The MedCom. I've come to believe that it's not possible to work with Pigs, and I see no other option than to bring this to the arbcom. A large amount of evidence can be found Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Pigsonthewing. Karmafist 01:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Linuxbeak

I have only limited experience dealing with Pigsonthewing, but what I have observed can be summarized in two words: total stubborness. He did not even acknowledge the existence of the RFC opened up against him, and as of this posting he has yet to indicate that he will answer the RFAr that has been opened up against him. Instead, he continues to target Karmafist in an attempt to discredit him. I only stepped in to make Pigsonthewing aware that the consequences of being uncivil in the way he has been bring dire consequences (not to mention me getting utterly sick and tired of having him post on the Administrators' noticeboard "Abuse by Karmafist" almost daily). Linuxbeak | Talk 14:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Update by Linuxbeak

I have now notified Pigsonthewing twice that he has to answer this RFAr. Seeing that Pigsonthewing has edited pages since being alerted three times, I am fairly certain that he is deliberately ignoring the RFAr (much in the same way as he ignored his RFC). Please see "Requests for clarification" for a relevant question. Linuxbeak | Talk 18:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Pigsonthewing

Please limit your statement to 500 words

Preliminary decisions

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/0/1)

• Just to note that I'm waiting for POTW's input before coming to a decision as to whether to accept or reject. James F. (talk) 12:49, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
• Accept Fred Bauder 19:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
• Accept ➥the Epopt 00:42, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
• Accept. Previous patterns indicate that POTW is unlikely to respond. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 01:02, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
• Brief review indicates that objectionable behavior has not persisted since filing of RfAr. Waiting for evidence that ArbCom intervention is required before accepting. Kelly Martin (talk) 01:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC) Jtkiefer has provided evidence that he is persisting. Accept. Kelly Martin (talk) 03:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunctions

Pigsonthewing banned from Karmafist's user space

1) Enacted on 19:55, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) is banned, until the conclusion of this Arbitration, from editing any page in Karmafist (talk · contribs)'s user space (but not user talk space). He may be blocked for a short time, up to three days, for any edit violating this injunction, and all such edits may be reverted by any editor without regard to the limitations of the three revert rule.

Personal attack parole

2) Enacted on 19:55, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Due to repeated personal attacks, Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) is subject, until the conclusion of this Arbitration, to a standard personal attack parole. Any administrator may ban Pigsonthewing for a short time, up to three days, for any edit which, in the opinion of that administrator, constitutes a personal attack.

Final decision

Principles

Civility

1) Wikipedia requires reasonable courtesy toward other users, including assumption of good faith on their part, see Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. Related policies include Wikipedia:Harassment and Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers.

Passed 8-0

Edit warring considered harmful

2) Edit warring is considered harmful.

Passed 8-0

Nature of categories

3) Categories are a guide to readers to assist them in finding information. They are not part of an article and need not reflect established fact. For example, Golan Heights can legitimately be included in both the categories Geography of Syria and Geography of Israel.

Passed 6-2

Findings of fact

Andy Mabbett is Pigsonthewing

1) Pigsonthewing generally uses the signature User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett.

Passed 8-0

Edit warring by Pigsonthewing

2) Pigsonthewing has engaged in sustained edit wars over trivial matters, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Bill_Oddie, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Coleshill.2C_Warwickshire_edit_war.28s.29 and Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Die_Lustige_Witwe.

Passed 8-0

Conflict between Karmafist and Pigsonethewing

3) Karmafist and Pigsonthewing have been engaged in sustained personal conflict [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6].

Passed 8-0

Use of the epithet "Pigs"

4) Karmafist has habitually used the epithet "Pigs" in referring to Pigsonthewing, see links from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#15 November, and this typical example: "For users who don't know Pigs reading this comment, please check out Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing. Karmafist 04:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)". There have been other personal attacks as Karmafist has lost his patience [7]. These attacks continued despite repeated requests by Pigsonthewing to Karmafist to stop the attacks User talk:Karmafist/POTW Archive#Personal attacks and are even included on the /Evidence page of this arbitration, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Die Lustige Witwe.

Passed 8-0

Loss of patience by Karmafist

5) Karmafist, an administrator, has lost his patience with Pigsonthewing and has resorted to name-calling and threats [8], [9] [10].

Passed 8-0

Pigsonthewing stirs up trouble

6) Finding out about notes Karmafist was making on a user page, Pigsonthewing contacted those mentioned on Karmafist's user page, describing it as a "hate page" Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Attacks.

Passed 8-0

Gaming of 3RR

7) Pigsonthewing, while engaging in lengthy edit-warring, has often successfully skirted the bright line of three reverts within 24 hours; see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Andy's Tactic Regarding Edit Wars.

Passed 8-0

Harassment of Leonig Mig

8) Pigsonthewing engaged in sustained harassment of the new user Leonig Mig (talk · contribs) whose editing style did not suit him [11]. Eventually Leonig Mig gave up and left Wikipedia [12], see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#My Worst Fear, Realized and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pigsonthewing/Evidence#Evidence presented by Leonig Mig.

Passed 8-0

Remedies

Pigsonthewing placed on probation

1) Pigsonthewing is placed indefinitely on Wikipedia:Probation. He may be banned for good cause by any administrator from any page or talk page which he disrupts.

Passed 8-0

Karmafist restricted with respect to Pigsonthewing

2) Karmafist is prohibited from any administrator activity which relates to Pigsonthewing such as blocking him or enforcing probation. This remedy shall be interpreted liberally as chance encounters may be anticipated or both might contribute to policy discussions.

Passed 8-0

Pigsonthewing banned for stirring up trouble

3) Pigsonthewing is banned one day for stirring up trouble by pointing other users to User:Karmafist/users to watch.

Passed 8-0

Pigsonthewing revert limitation

4) Pigsonthewing is limited to one revert per article per week, excluding simple vandalism, for a period of one year. Determination of when this has been violated may be done by any uninvolved administrator.

Passed 6-1

Pigsonthewing banned for one year

A1) Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) (using whatever account or IP address) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.

The above remedy was added by open motion of the Committee, pass 7-1 against, 10:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Enforcement

Enforcement by block of Pigsonthewing

1) Pigsonthewing may be blocked for a short period, up to a week in the case of repeat offenses, should he edit any page from which he has been banned or excessively revert any page. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year.

Passed 8-0

Enforcement by block of Karmafist

2) Should Karmafist engage in personal attacks or threats toward Pigsonthewing or block him or ban him from editing any page he may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the case of repeat offenses. After five blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year.

Passed 5-3

Log of blocks and bans

• Under his general probation, Pigsonthewing is hereby banned from making any infobox-related edits for a period of one month for disruptive editing across a number of articles (see report and discussion here). He may not add or remove infoboxes from articles and may not edit infobox templates. He may make suggestions on appropriate talk pages. This ban may be enforced by blocking (starting with 24 hours and escalating as appropriate). Thatcher131 04:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)