Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard
| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
|
|
| Track related changes |
This noticeboard is for announcements and statements made by the Arbitration Committee. Only members of the Arbitration Committee or the Committee's Clerks may post on this page, but all editors are encouraged to comment on the talk page.
Kharkiv07 appointed as a full clerk
The Arbitration Committee is pleased to announce that Kharkiv07 (talk · contribs) is appointed a full clerk.
We also express our thanks and gratitude to all of the arbitration clerks for their diligent assistance with the arbitration process. The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by e-mail to clerks-l
lists.wikimedia.org.
For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:37, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
- Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 32#Kharkiv07 appointed as a full clerk
Amendment to the Ottava Rima restrictions case (Ottava Rima unbanned)
Following a successful appeal, the amendment to the Ottava Rima restrictions case is rescinded, and Ottava Rima (talk · contribs) is unbanned. His participation on the English Wikipedia is strictly limited to:
- Editing Lamia (poem), its talk page, and any future GA, FA, or peer review of this article
- Drafting articles or edits to articles within his own userspace, which may be moved into the mainspace by other unrestricted editors
- Editing his own user talk page, with the additional restriction that he may not use his talk page to discuss other editors
Additionally, he is limited to one revert on a single page in any 24 hour period (1RR), subject to the standard exemptions. Any edits outside of these boundaries are violations of the unban conditions, as is the use of the Wikipedia email feature.
Anyone found to be goading or baiting him may be two-way interaction banned, as an arbitration enforcement action, for no longer than one month. Enforcement blocks (including of Ottava) may be no longer than three days for the first block, and up to one month for repeated violations.
Should Ottava violate these restrictions he may be blocked, as an arbitration enforcement action, for up to one month for the first violation by a consensus of uninvolved administrators. If, after the first block, he violates the restrictions again, the siteban may be reinstated by a consensus of uninvolved administrators and he is to be blocked indefinitely with no email or talk page access.
- Support – Callanecc, Casliber, DGG, Doug Weller, Drmies, GorillaWarfare, Guerillero, Keilana, Kelapstick, Opabinia regalis, Salvio giuliano
- Oppose – Courcelles
- Not voting - DeltaQuad, Gamaliel, Kirill Lokshin
For the Arbitration Committee, GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Amendment to the Ottava Rima restrictions case (Ottava Rima unbanned)
Motion: Carl Hewitt unbanned with restrictions
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
In a 2005 arbitration case, User:CarlHewitt - who is the noted computer scientist of that name - was banned from editing content about himself or his own work (Remedy 1) and was placed on probation (Remedy 2). Following the case, he was found to have engaged in repeated sockpuppetry in violation of those restrictions and was indefinitely blocked in 2009.
Remedy 2 of the Carl Hewitt case is rescinded and his indefinite block is lifted. Carl Hewitt is permitted to edit under the following conditions:
- He is restricted to a single account, User:Prof. Carl Hewitt.
- He may not edit logged out. Accidental logged-out edits should be reported promptly to the oversight team.
- He is permitted to edit only the following:
The purpose of this provision is to allow him to make suggestions on the talk pages of his own BLP (Carl Hewitt) and the talk pages of articles about his work. Suggestions should be polite and brief and should not be repetitively reposted if they do not find consensus.
- article talk pages
- user talk pages
- his own userspace
- project discussions and dispute resolution pages specifically concerning him.
- He is reminded that Remedy 1 of the Carl Hewitt case remains in force.
- He may not engage in personal attacks or make personal comments about other editors.
Violations of any of the above may be managed by blocks as arbitration enforcement actions. Disruptive or tendentious contributions by IP users to the articles or talk pages related to Prof. Hewitt may be managed by blocks and/or protection as needed, and editors are encouraged not to engage in conversation with such users. The standard provisions for enforcement and appeals and modifications applies to sanctions enforcing this decision, all sanctions are to be logged on the case page.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Archived discussion at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 32#Motion: Carl Hewitt unbanned with restrictions
Infoboxes arbitration case amended
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by two motions that:
(1) In the 2013 Infoboxes case, User:Pigsonthewing was subject to editing restrictions which were subsequently revised in a case review in March 2015. With this motion, remedies 1.1 and 3 of the 2015 Infoboxes Review are rescinded. Pigsonthewing is cautioned that the topic of infoboxes remains contentious under some circumstances and that he should edit carefully in this area.
(2) With this motion, remedy 2 of the 2015 Infoboxes Review is rescinded.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:39, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Infoboxes arbitration case amended
Arbitration motion restricting Gamaliel
Per his request, communicated off-wiki to the Committee, Gamaliel is indefinitely restricted from taking any action to enforce any arbitration decision within the GamerGate topic, broadly construed. Any violation of this motion must be reported to WP:ARCA. He may appeal this decision after 12 months to the Arbitration Committee.
- Support: Doug Weller, Courcelles, Opabinia regalis, Drmies, DGG, Kelapstick
- Oppose: Salvio giuliano, Casliber, Callanecc, Guerillero
- Recuse: Gamaliel, GorillaWarfare, Keilana, Kirill Lokshin
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration motion restricting Gamaliel
Motion: Oversight block appeals (Oversight-l)
- For this motion there are 14 active arbitrators. With 0 arbitrators abstaining, 8 support or oppose votes are a majority.
Appeals of blocks that have been marked by an oversighter as oversight blocks should be sent to the oversight team via email (Oversight-llists.wikimedia.org) to be decided by the English Wikipedia oversighters, or to the Arbitration Committee. Blocks may still be marked by the blocking oversighter as appealable only to the Arbitration Committee, per the 2010 statement, in which case appeals must only be directed to the Arbitration Committee.