Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia:Resolving disputes contains the official policy on dispute resolution for English Wikipedia. Arbitration is generally the last step for user conduct-related disputes that cannot be resolved through discussion on noticeboards or by asking the community its opinion on the matter.

This page is the central location for discussing the various requests for arbitration processes. Requesting that a case be taken up here isn't likely to help you, but editors active in the dispute resolution community should be able to assist.

Shortcuts:
Please click here to file an arbitration case Please click here for a guide to arbitration
WT:RFAR subpages

WT:RFAR archives (2004-2009):
123456789
1011121314151617
181920212223END

Wikipedia talk:Arbitration subpages

Various archives (2004-2011):
122.12.22.32.43
4AE1AE2ARM1ARM2


Ongoing WT:A/R archives (2009-):
1233A45789

Archive of prior proceedings

CasesMotionsDeclined case requests


Amendment request: Discretionary sanctions/article probation (March 2015)[edit]

Original discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Initiated by Rich Farmbrough at 02:56, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Statement by Rich Farmbrough[edit]

I submit that the following remedies are outdated, and therefore:

  1. clutter the list of discretionary sanctions and article probations.
  2. provide unnecessary complexity and instruction creep.
  3. place unwelcoming templates on article talk pages.

None of these remedies have been invoked for several years, if ever, one case has no admin action for nine years.

I have no doubt that there are other outdated remedies but these certainly are.

I propose that these remedies be struck

1[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles

Remedy to be struck: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles#Standard_discretionary_sanctions

Passed: 27 October 2011

Last admin action: Never (22 December 2010 for previous version)

2[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2

Remedy to be struck: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2#Standard discretionary sanctions (Amended version)

Passed: 8 March 2013

Last admin action: 24 July 2009

3[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine

Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine#Article probation

Passed: 1 February 2008

Last admin action: 1 April 2008

4[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris

Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Brahma Kumaris#Article probation

Passed: 2 January 2007

Last admin action: 3 March 2007


5[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi

Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi#Article probation

Passed: 9 November 2006

Last admin action: Never

6[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding

Remedy 1: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding#Article probation
Remedy 2: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding#General restriction

Passed: 5 February 2008

Last admin action: 3 December 2010

7[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming

Remedy 1: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming#Probation
Remedy 2: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming#Mentorship (lapsed)

Passed: c. 6 February 2006

Last admin action: 12 June 2006

8[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland

Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland#Article probation

Passed: 13 March 2008

Last admin action: 29 May 2008


9[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic

Passed: 29 March 2007

Last admin action: 29 February 2008

10[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lapsed Pacifist 2

Remedy: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lapsed Pacifist 2#All articles related to Corrib gas controversy and Shell to Sea

Passed: 12 October 2009

Last admin action: 12 March 2011

11[edit]

Case: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Election

Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Election#Article probation
Remedy: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Election#Status of current editors
Enforcement: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Election#Continuing jurisdiction

Passed: 1 July 2006

Last admin action: None

All the best: Rich Farmbrough03:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC).

@Roger

  • Delaying this for a short while is not a problem, though it is often better to break large tasks down, rather than heaping them up.
  • I would be interested to hear about this other initiative. It might have been worth pinging me about it, given the discretionary sanctions clear up I initiated last year.
  • It would be useful to explain why, for example, the log of admin actions ends in 2010 (Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles#2010): if there are four more years of undocumented admin actions, then this is a significant problem in its own right.
  • Note in regard to Armenia Azerbaijan 2 that DS notifications are not counted as admin actions, as any editor may make a DS notification.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough05:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC).

Thanks T Canens, I have just found that log. I mentally threw my hands up in despair. All the best: Rich Farmbrough05:25, 22 March 2015 (UTC).

@AGK - making it a table is a moment's work, unfortunately one that I am not allowed to perform here. I have created a table at Meta:User:Rich Farmbrough/Article probation. Feel free to import it, with attribution. You could, of course, have made the table yourself, instead of complaining about it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough05:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC).

Comment by T. Canens[edit]

@Rich Farmbrough: The Troubles and ARBAA2 discretionary sanctions logs were moved to the centralized WP:DSLOG. T. Canens (talk) 05:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Statement by Username[edit]

Statement by {other-editor}[edit]

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.

Discretionary sanctions/article probation: Clerk notes[edit]

  • @NativeForeigner: This is the work in progress, plus I believe Roger has a copy on the arbwiki. Or are talking about page in (onwiki) arbspace? Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 12:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
    • @Rich Farmbrough, Rich: I think I've got all of the old article probation remedies there but if you find any other please do let me know (I was only working from the list at WP:GS so I may have missed some which aren't logged there). Chuck them on the talk page and I can stick them into the table if you can't. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 12:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Roger, I agree with both points. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 12:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions/article probation: Arbitrator views and discussion[edit]

  • Comment: Thanks for looking at this, Rich. As there is another initiative afoot to tidy up old sanctions, it's best I think to combine this one, and that one, along with other amendments in a single housekeeping motion in a couple of month's time. We probably need to tidy up some of the old cases and that can be done then too. I don't agree with all your analyses incidentally: DS for The Troubles was used last December and Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 yesterday.  Roger Davies talk 04:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
    • @Callanecc, NativeForeigner: I'd rather we didn't do anything on-wiki until we have all time to actively participate in it. There is also a risk that this will all creep into a big deal, when in fact it all looks routine. After the very major review last year, that seems unnecessary. Best we turn to this again once we have the two current (and likely messy) cases out of the way,  Roger Davies talk 12:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'd also rather wait and do it all at once. Dougweller (talk) 10:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline per above, and I would suggest this would have been tidier submitted in a table. AGK [•] 00:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline. Quite a few of these are still useful. All of them are harmless, and we're going to do a cleanup later this year. Courcelles (talk) 05:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline for now per my colleagues, but we will look at these suggestions as part of the cleanup in a couple of months. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 17:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Might be good to actually set up another subpage for the upcoming tidying initiative. NativeForeigner Talk 00:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • @Callanecc, Roger Davies:. Seems reasonable, let's try and get it up a bit before we actually plan to action it for community comment. That being said with the current two cases + incoming (possible) case at ARCA, it might be a bit. NativeForeigner Talk 23:21, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Motion: Dreadstar desysopped (March 2015)[edit]

Original discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For conduct unbecoming an administrator, namely

  1. sending an insulting e-mail to an editor he had just sanctioned,
  2. edit warring on an article and then protecting his preferred version, and
  3. lifting an arbitration enforcement block out of process,

Dreadstar (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For this motion there are 14 active arbitrators, not counting 1 who is inactive, so 8 support or oppose votes are a majority.

Enacted - --L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Support
  1. Salvio Let's talk about it! 19:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  2. Unfortunate but necessary. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  3. Every last one of these would be worth a desysop, really. In conjunction, no other choice is possible. Courcelles (talk) 19:49, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  4. This vote is based on actions 1 and 3, because, as indicated above, I'm recused with respect to action 2. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  5. Per 2 and 3. -- Euryalus (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  6. LFaraone 19:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  7.  Roger Davies talk 20:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    NE Ent Dreadstar has unilaterally reversed an arbitration action before and has already been given the benefit of the doubt.  Roger Davies talk 06:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  8. GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  9. NativeForeigner Talk 20:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  10. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 01:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  11. as with Thryduulf, based on #1 and #3 DGG ( talk ) 02:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  12. with regret that it became necessary. Dougweller (talk) 08:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  13. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 14:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Oppose
Abstain
Recuse

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.