Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae/Proposed decision

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, Arbitrators may place proposals which are ready for voting here. Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain. Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed. Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case, there are 11 active Arbitrators, so 6 votes are a majority.

Motions and requests by the parties

[edit]

Place those on /Workshop. Motions which are accepted for consideration and which require a vote will be placed here by the Arbitrators for voting.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.

Template

[edit]

1) {text of proposed motion}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed temporary injunctions

[edit]

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

[edit]

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed final decision

[edit]

Proposed principles

[edit]

Decorum

[edit]

1) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their interactions with other users, to keep their cool when editing, and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct—including, but not limited to, personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, and gaming the system—is prohibited. Users should not respond to such behavior in kind; concerns regarding the actions of other users should be brought up in the appropriate forums.

Support:
  1. Kirill 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Paul August ☎ 03:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
Abstain:

Editorial process

[edit]

2) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. The dispute resolution process is designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked. Sustained editorial conflict is not an appropriate method of resolving disputes.

Support:
  1. Kirill 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Paul August ☎ 03:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

[edit]

3) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

[edit]

Asgardian

[edit]

1) Asgardian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has frequently engaged in sustained edit-warring ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]), for which he has repeatedly been blocked ([16]), and due to which a number of articles have been protected ([17]).

Support:
  1. Kirill 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:39, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Paul August ☎ 03:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

[edit]

2) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed remedies

[edit]

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Asgardian restricted

[edit]

1) Asgardian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to an editing restriction for one year. He is prohibited from reverting or making any edit that substantially amounts to a revert or partial revert. Should he make such an edit, he may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.

Support:
  1. Kirill 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
  1. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Perhaps one per week per article with an exception for obvious vandalism Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC) Per Fred.[reply]
  4. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain:

Asgardian restricted

[edit]

1.1) Asgardian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to an editing restriction for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. Should he exceed this limit or fail to discuss a content reversion, he may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.

Support:
  1. Second choice. Kirill 16:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fred Bauder 19:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 00:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Paul August ☎ 03:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
Abstain:

Asgardian banned for 90 days

[edit]

2) Asgardian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s editing privileges are revoked for a period of 90 days.

Support:
  1. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 05:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
  1. Too short for a full ban, and not effective after he returns. Kirill 05:50, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC) Per Kirill, Fred.[reply]
  3. Don't see the point in this case. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain:
  1. Not sure, but if he needs to be banned, do it. If you think he can edit productively with restrictions, impose reasonable ones. Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template

[edit]

3) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

[edit]

Enforcement by block

[edit]

1) Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:
  1. Kirill 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Fred Bauder (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. James F. (talk) 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 00:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Paul August ☎ 03:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose:
Abstain:

Template

[edit]

2) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit]

General

[edit]

Motion to close

[edit]

Implementation notes

[edit]

Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

Vote

[edit]

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

  1. Close. Paul August ☎ 03:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Close. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Close. Kirill 06:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Close. Charles Matthews 11:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae/Proposed_decision&oldid=1138653121"