Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions

Edit links
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
/* Gradual Gap Appearance: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter *d/
→‎Gradual Gap Appearance: Removing declined case request <0/7/0/0>
Line 4: Line 4:
<noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
<noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
{{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=53%</noinclude>}}
{{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=53%</noinclude>}}
== Gradual Gap Appearance ==
'''Initiated by ''' [[User:Dbate1|Dbate1]] ([[User talk:Dbate1|talk]]) '''at''' 14:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
=== Involved parties ===
<!-- use {{admin|username}} if the party is an administrator -->
*{{userlinks|Dbate1}}, ''filing party''

*{{userlinks|Akuri}}

<!-- The editor filing the case should be included as a party for purposes of notifications. -->

;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. -->

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dbate1#Arbitration_notice
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Akuri#Arbitration_notice


;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried
<!-- Identify prior attempts at dispute resolution here, with links/diffs to the page where the resolution took place. If prior dispute resolution has not been attempted, the reasons for this should be explained in the request for arbitration -->
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Race_and_intelligence#Original_synthesis

=== Statement by Dbate1===

The matter in dispute is whether the information included in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Gradual_gap_appearance consists of violations of WP:SYNTH.

I have made a number of modifications to appease and alleviate concerns that the section is a violation of WP:SYNTH, but users continued to eliminate the information even after these changes. None of the authors described how the modified material consisted of original synthesis (the only proffered challenges were to the prior sections), yet they simply decided to eliminate the material.

In terms of the sources, all of the information was extensively cited by articles published in notable journals. The information has not been challenged as factually incorrect. Moreover, all of the information cited was reliably supported by multiple sources, including references to each other. Thus, the primary sources challenge is insufficient. Additionally, when primary sources were included no interpretation of the sources is offered, which further conforms to the use of primary sources on Wikipedia. More importantly, the disputed section does not advocate any position. The only information that is included is direct text from the sources themselves, thus the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SYNTH#Synthesis_of_published_material_that_advances_a_position challenge is insufficient.

This appears to be a case of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_SYNTH_is_not#SYNTH_is_not_an_advocacy_tool

=== Statement by Akuri===
I encourage Arbcom to accept a case about the race and intelligence topic, but NOT for the reason given by Dbate1. What he has presented here is a content dispute where he can't get consensus for the changes he wants to make. But there also is a much longer-term dispute around these articles, which has been the subject of (by my count) eight arbitration requests in the past year. This is the ninth.

Some of the issues that I think require arbitration are:

*Future Perfect at Sunrise's history of making poorly-considered admin actions in the topic area despite being a [[WP:INVOLVED]] admin. Cla68 [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=528541723#FPaS.27s_history requested] arbitration about that issue in December, and I am the most recent person to experience it. Shortly after I had [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AThe_Devil%27s_Advocate&diff=538864674&oldid=538700385 criticized] FPAS for blocking [[user:BlackHades]] while involved, he [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:101.0.71.29 threatened] me with a block as well. (This was before I registered, when I was posting as an IP.) His stated reason for the block was to make me register, but when he made the block it was a hard block that disabled registration from my IP range. Contrary to [[Wikipedia:ADMIN#Accountability]], FPAS refused to explain the reason for this inconsistency any of the places he was challenged about it. He did not respond to my query about it in my user talk, did not participate in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive246#Block_of_IP_range AN thread] that The Devil's Advocate about it, and his only [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFuture_Perfect_at_Sunrise&diff=539862364&oldid=539843935 response] when he was challenged in his user talk was a flippant comment that he intended to "ignore this stuff and wait for it to go away." Due to FPAS's refusal to participate in discussions about his block, it took me a month to finally get an account via ACC. This is part of a long pattern of misuse of his admin tools: note in Cla68's request that he previously had them taken away in the Macedonia 2 case.

*There have been several requests about the one-way interaction bans that The Devil's Advocate, Cla68, SightWatcher and TrevelyanL85A2 all have with Mathsci. On at least one occasion Arbcom [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=522269489#Motion almost] made the interaction bans mutual, but changed their minds after Timothesus Canens [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATimotheus_Canens&diff=522269486&oldid=522032684 announced] that he was leaving AE, and was strongly considering lifting every AE sanction he had ever made. I think Mathsci has gamed some of these editors' one-way interaction bans with him, and will present evidence about that if Arbcom wants me to.

In last year's arbitration requests and AE threads, multiple arbitrators and uninvolved editors said the race and intelligence topic requires a full case, and that Arbcom should open one if someone requests it in 2013. For example, Silk Tork said that in this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment&diff=next&oldid=527990848 comment]. It is 2013 now, so please open a case.

I can provide links to some of the many arbitration, AE and AN threads about these issues, if Arbcom needs them.

===Statement by uninvolved Sjones23===

Hello, everyone. I am not involved at all in this dispute, but I will try to explain what is going on at the moment.

{{admin|Future Perfect at Sunrise}}, an [[WP:INVOLVED|involved]] administrator, has a history of misusing his administrative actions in the topic area. As described by Akuri, Cla68, a user, requested arbitration on the issue in December, but was rejected. After Akuri criticized FPAS for blocking BlackHades while he was involved, he threatened Akuri (then as an IP) with a block. As opposed to [[Wikipedia:ADMIN#Accountability]], FPAS failed to respond to good faith community concerns and did not participate in the AN thread. In last years arbitration requests as well as the AE threads, several arbitrators and uninvolved editors said the race and intelligence topic would require a full case and that the Arbitration Committee (Arbcom) should open one if a person requests it in 2013.

There are also some concerns about [[WP:SYNTH]] in the gradual gap appearance section of the [[Race and intelligence]] article. Given that FPAS refuses to admit his administrative actions and there are [[WP:SYNTH]] violations in the race and intelligence article, I would encourage the Arbitration Committee to look over these problems.

===Statement by Looie496===
The topic area is highly fraught, as we all know, but this specific matter is not a viable arbitration case. The filing party, a new editor, is trying to force changes that violate Wikipedia policies into the article against the consensus of all other editors. The community can handle this. [[User:Looie496|Looie496]] ([[User talk:Looie496|talk]]) 02:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

===Statement by Mathsci===
This request from the newly registered account Dbate1 shows a serious misunderstanding of the purpose of arbitration processes on wikipedia. The request should be declined and the appropriate dispute resolution processes explained to Dbate1. Although editing in good faith, he does not appear to understand how things work on wikipedia, either in gaining consensus or in resolving disputes.

Akuri's response is just as problematic. It shows a different misunderstanding of the purpose of arbitration processes. I had already commented in private a few days ago to Newyorkbrad about what appears to be a newly registered disruption-only account. Within his first few edits Akuri has agitated for an arbcom case and his response here, essentially attempting to hijack Dbate1's misconceived and confused request, was made in his 25th edit to wikipedia.

Dbate1's request here and general confusion might partly have resulted from this suggestion by Akuri.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Race_and_intelligence&diff=548112253&oldid=548105044]

There seems to be no reason to request a checkuser. Akuri has edited logged out from the range 101.0.79.0/24 in [[Melbourne]] and
Dbate1 from the IP 130.132.198.222 at [[Yale University]]. There seem to be no issues of sockpuppetry with either account.
{{hat|Detailed comments on the newly registered account Akuri}}

The A while back Dougweller and KillerChihuahua intervened on the article which at this stage many will believe is named after the arbccoom case [[WP:ARBR&I]]. An SPI report suggesting that Dougweller was a sockpuppet of KillerChihuahua (or possibly vice-versa or possibly a meatpuppet) was started and resulted in a one-week block of {{userlink|BlackHades}} by Future Perfect at Sunrise. The SPi report was deleted as an attack page by Rschen7754.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet+investigations%2FKillerChihuahua] The recently created account {{userlink|Akuri}} at that time was IP hopping in the range 101.0.71.0/24.[http://entoolserver.org/~tparis/rangecontribs/index.php?type=range&ips=101.0.71.0%2F24&limit=50] They made similar suggestions of meatpuppetry or behind-the-scences hanky-panky on Dougweller's talk page. When asked to register an account by multiple users, they refused, citing as their reason that they could not think of a suitable username. After their disruptive editing (in particular at [[WP:ANI]]) and refusal to register an account while editing in a contentious area, Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked the range. Appeals for an unblock through multiple open proxies (all blocked now) had no success at [[WP:AN]] but after about a month they succeeded in registering an account (communicating with King of Hearts using multiple open proxies, now blocked by Elockid and Materialscientist). Within their first ten edits, they were already agitating to start an arbcom case. That is contained in the spray of [[WP:ARBR&I]] alphabet soup they have added above. They do this against a backdrop of continued agitation by Captain Occam on wikipediocracy. Occam has confirmed there that evidence presented by Cla68 on arbcom pages was prepared by him. That is a new departure, but it has the benefit of being partially out in the open (eg his plans to bring MastCell to justice in an arbcom case) and certainly makes quite clear that Occam is still agitating about his campaign.

Similar disruption was caused by those sanctioned in the review as well as Zeromus1 (a sockpuppet of Ferahgo the Assassin), Mors Martell (a probable sockpuppet of Ferahgo the Assassin) and Boothello (a probable sockpuppet of a banned user known to have been in off-wiki contact with Ferahgo the Assassin). Akuri has written that while waiting to register an account he has been studying [[WP:ARBR&I]]—"reading the history of arbitration requests and AE threads about R&I". Arbcom cases are not biblical texts and to have them as a declared focus on wikipedia is a prime example of [[WP:NOTHERE]], a journey into meta-meta-meta-meta land.

Akuri has been in discussion with The Devil's Advocate, who, to his credit, has repeatedly discouraged them from attempting to start arbcom proceedings when their account is barely autoconfirmed.

Here are their problematic edits. Prior to this submission, they had made only 24 edits, plus three logged off edits in the range 101.0.79.0/24. [http://toolserver.org/~tparis/rangecontribs/index.php?type=range&ips=101.0.79.0%2F24&limit=50]

*10th edit, appeal to Courcelles concerning a new arbcom case[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles&diff=prev&oldid=547400280]
*11th, 13th, 14th, 18th and 19th edits, similar questions to NE Ent[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NE_Ent&diff=prev&oldid=547592673][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NE_Ent&diff=prev&oldid=547682348][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NE_Ent&diff=prev&oldid=547696536][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NE_Ent&diff=prev&oldid=547929243][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NE_Ent&diff=prev&oldid=548063018]
*16th edit. Accuses Aprock of POV pushing.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Race_and_intelligence&diff=prev&oldid=547919864]
*17th edit, explains on his talk page about his desire to devote time to arbcom processes related to [[WP:ARBR&I]].[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Akuri&diff=prev&oldid=547927091]
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Akuri&diff=prev&oldid=548066371] "while waiting for my account request to be approved I spent some time reading the history of arbitration requests and AE threads about R&I, including the numerous indefinite blocks and one-way interaction bans. The situation that led to my block has existed for a year, at least. It would be unwise to ignore it, because I'm sure it will affect me again sooner or later, even if R&I is not the only topic I edit." That is a clear enough statement that their intention is to cause disruption through misuse of arbcom processes. This is similar to the disruption in the second half of 2012 through multiple submissions (five, six?) at RfAr and C&A.
*25th and 27th edits, their submission here.
*26th edit, indicates to The Devil's Advocate that he intends to hijack Dbate1's flawed request to start his own planned campaign.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Akuri&diff=prev&oldid=548237970]
*28th, 32nd and 33rd edits - lobbies SilkTork, a second attempt to hijack this request.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SilkTork&diff=prev&oldid=548625129][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SilkTork&diff=prev&oldid=548697549][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SilkTork&diff=548758759&oldid=548745447] The content raises doubts as to whether Akuri might not possibly be proxy-editing on behalf of site-banned editors. Akuri wrote, "Is the situation in which you would support opening a case if it were focused on how Mathsci reacts to others, instead of about the race and intelligence topic in general?" This kind of edit is on exactly the same level as the harassing edits he made on Dougweller's talk page and at [[WP:ANI]] when IP hopping within the range 101.0.71.0/24,[http://toolserver.org/~tparis/rangecontribs/index.php?type=range&ips=101.0.71.0%2F24&limit=50] one of the reasons that the narrow IP range was blocked.
*Trolling logged out edits on my talk page confirm this is a disruption-only account. No interest in improving this encyclopedia at all.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mathsci&diff=548656384&oldid=548315794] Jehochman reverted that edit and semiprotected my talk page.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mathsci&diff=548714281&oldid=548714140]
{{hab}}

===Statement by Beyond My Ken===
I suggest to the Committee that this is essentially a content dispute and therefore beyond ArbCom's remit. However, considering the amount of socking and off-Wiki coordination there has been in the history of R&I, I would also suggest that both Dbate1 and Akuri be CheckUsered, as this kind of activity in the very early stage of an account is inherently suspicious. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 06:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

=== Clerk notes ===
:'''Note to Clerk''': Could a Clerk please notify Future Perfect at Sunrise that his actions have been mentioned and that he has the right to submit a statement? Thank you. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 00:17, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFuture_Perfect_at_Sunrise&diff=548409026&oldid=548405695] <small>[[User talk:NE Ent|NE Ent]]</small> 10:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks, Ent. — [[User:Hahc21|<font color="#333333">'''ΛΧΣ'''</font>]][[User_talk:Hahc21|<font color="#336699">'''<sup>21</sup>'''</font>]] 17:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

=== Gradual Gap Appearance: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/7/0/0> ===
{{anchor|1=Gradual Gap Appearance: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse/other)</small>
*'''Decline'''. The issue raised by Dbate1 is a primarily a content disagreement that should be discussed on the talkpage. If a consensus is reached on the talkpage, it should be implemented; no one user has the right to dictate the content of an article. If no consensus is reached, forms of [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] well short of arbitration, which is the final step in our dispute resolution processes, should be used. Dbate1 is also advised that references to "disciplinary action" and "banning" of other editors, as in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Race_and_intelligence&diff=548104219&oldid=548071740 this edit summary], are not appropriate. The issues raised by other commenters do not persuade me that an arbitration case is needed. I have no interest in revisiting the existing interaction bans, and there is no showing of recent misbehavior or ongoing problems that we could be helpful in resolving. I interpret my colleague's prior reference to our accepting a case in 2013 to mean that we should seriously consider accepting a case if actual problems continued, not as a commitment that we would do so simply upon request, and certainly not at the behest of a brand-new editor who seems to have come to Wikipedia for the very purpose of stirring up a case. A statement from Fut.Perf. explaining the actions that Sjones23 has questioned would be in order, but having read the relevant threads I believe I understand the reasoning behind those actions. I will leave it for someone else to assess the suggestion for a checkuser. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 13:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Decline''', largely per Newyorkbrad. [[User:Risker|Risker]] ([[User talk:Risker|talk]]) 03:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' - resolution of the issues raised here should be addressed (or continued to be addressed) by stages in the dispute resolution process prior to arbitration. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 06:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' Recall that this topic area is already under [[WP:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions]] and matters can be taken to [[WP:AE|Arbitration enforcement]] if there is a clear violation of policy. '''<font color="navy">[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|Talk]]</font>)'' 06:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Decline'''. [[User:Timotheus Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:Timotheus Canens|talk]]) 06:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
* '''Decline.''' [[User:AGK|<font color="black">'''AGK'''</font>]] [[User talk:AGK#top|[•]]] 09:42, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
*'''Decline''' [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 23:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:20, 8 April 2013

Requests for arbitration

Arbitration Committee proceedings

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

[edit]
Open cases
Case name Links Evidence due Prop. Dec. due
Venezuelan politics (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) 20 Apr 2024 04 May 2024
[edit]
Recently closed cases (Past cases)
Case name Closed
Conflict of interest management 13 Apr 2024
Mzajac 7 May 2024
Request name Motions  Case Posted
Amendment request: Conduct in deletion-related editing none (orig. case) 30 April 2024
Clarification request: Palestine-Israel articles 4 none (orig. case) 8 May 2024

No arbitrator motions are currently open.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=549248806"