Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Moby Dick

Case Opened on 17:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Case Closed on 22:01, 13 August 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[edit]

Tony_Sidaway (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Moby_Dick (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Davenbelle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Cool Cat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Megaman Zero (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

In the opinion of several administrators, Moby Dick continues to stalk another editor despite warnings. He is believed to be the sock of an editor who was formally warned by the Committee not to engage in this behavior. He may also be in breach of a one-year ban on editing articles which concern politics.

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

This formal notification to Moby Dick. --Tony Sidaway 15:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This formal notification to Davenbelle. --Tony Sidaway 17:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

See:

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive102#Stalking
And this renewed discussion Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive106#Moby_Dick_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29.

Requests for comment[edit]

Statement by Tony Sidaway[edit]

In the opinion of myself, Bishonen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and MONGO (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), Moby Dick exhibits stalking behavior similar to that of Davenbelle (see Cool Cat arbitration) who was one of three editors warned against stalking Cool Cat. He has persisted despite warnings. Davenbelle's last edit is too old to permit technical means to be used to verify this user's identity.

Davenbelle is also enjoined from editing articles which relate to politics (Trey Stone and Davenbelle arbitration, August 2005) and Moby Dick's identity may have a bearing on that ban. --Tony Sidaway 18:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Moby[edit]

This is absurd. User:Cool Cat and his friends are defining stalking as making reasonable edits to articles that he happens to not like. I have made many reasonable edits to articles and talk pages, added cited facts, and have sought consensus. Unfortunately, User:Cool Cat does not like the facts and does not seek consensus. He seeks his way and harasses anyone who does not yield to his will. His allegations of sockpuppetry are merely an attempt to run me off from the very group of articles that he was found to have made many POV edits to.

User:Tony Sidaway has stated that User:Cool Cat repeatedly attempts to promote the removal of categories, templates and content related to an ethnicity that, while not having a single national entity of its own, is significant enough to be treated seriously by an encyclopedia. Editors who complain about his activities and his attitude thus have a solid basis upon which to do so. diff

In User:Cool Cat's current complaint about my editing on wp:an/i, he states that I opposed him on all of the vote options on Talk:Casualties of the Turkish-Kurdish conflict — Not True, he also opposed four of the moves that I opposed. And it is entirely reasonable that I'm involved in that article. I voted on the AFD that resulted in its being renamed and I edited the article proper before User:Cool Cat ever did.

Of course I participated in the CFD on Category:Kurdish inhabited regions, as I did the previous CFD. I have been attempting to categorise Kurdish homelands and User:Cool Cat hates the Kurds and has been highly disruptive of such efforts by myself and others.

User:Cool Cat has shown up on a number of pages right after I've edited them: Talk:Nationalist Movement Party diff, CFD of Category:Imposters of Moby Dick diff. And he has been hyper-aggressive on pages such as Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 May 27#Category:Kurdish inhabited regions, badgering every user that does not agree with his POV.

It is User:Cool Cat who is stalking, harassing and seeking the deletion of encyclopaedic content related to Kurds and the users who edit in ways that he does not like.

--Moby 11:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk notes[edit]

As a participant, Tony Sidaway is recused as a clerk.

Preliminary decisions[edit]

Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (4/0/0/0)[edit]

Accept Fred Bauder 19:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Accept. - SimonP 20:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Accept. James F. (talk) 19:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Accept. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 18:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary injunction (none)[edit]

Principles[edit]

Identity[edit]

1) For the purpose of dispute resolution when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar behavior, they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets.