Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions

Help

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia:Arbitration | Requests

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 03:08, 4 August 2024

Requests for arbitration

Arbitration Committee proceedings

Case requests

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

[edit]

Open cases

Case name	Links	Evidence due	Prop. Dec. due
Palestine-Israel articles 5	(t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t)	21 Dec 2024	11 Jan 2025

[edit]

Recently closed cases (Past cases)

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Clarification and Amendment requests

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

Arbitrator motions

Motion name	Date posted
Arbitrator workflow motions	1 December 2024

Shortcuts

About this page

Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority).

Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests.

Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide to case requests. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace.

To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.

File an arbitration request

Guidance on participation and word limits

Unlike many venues on Wikipedia, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.

Motivation. Word limits are imposed to promote clarity and focus on the issues at hand and to ensure that arbitrators are able to fully take in submissions. Arbitrators must read a large volume of information across many matters in the course of their service on the Committee, so submissions that exceed word limits may be disregarded. For the sake of fairness and to discourage gamesmanship (i.e., to disincentivize "asking forgiveness rather than permission"), word limits are actively enforced.
In general. Most submissions to the Arbitration Committee (including statements in arbitration case requests and ARCAs and evidence submissions in arbitration cases) are limited to 500 words, plus 50 diffs. During the evidence phase of an accepted case, named parties are granted an automatic extension to 1000 words plus 100 diffs.
Sectioned discussion. To facilitate review by arbitrators, you should edit only in your own section. Address your submission to arbitrators, not to other participants. If you wish to rebut, clarify, or otherwise refer to another submission for the benefit of arbitrators, you may do so within your own section. (More information.)
Requesting an extension. You may request a word limit extension in your submission itself (using the {{@ArbComClerks}} template) or by emailing clerks-llists.wikimedia.org. In your request, you should briefly (in 1-2 sentences) include (a) why you need additional words and (b) a broad outline of what you hope to discuss in your extended submission. The Committee endeavors to act upon extension requests promptly and aims to offer flexibility where warranted.
- Members of the Committee may also grant extensions when they ask direct questions to facilitate answers to those questions.
Refactoring statements. You should write carefully and concisely from the start. It is impermissible to rewrite a statement to shorten it after a significant amount of time has passed or after anyone has responded to it (see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines § Editing own comments), so it is often advisable to submit a brief initial statement to leave room to respond to other users if the need arises.
Sign submissions. In order for arbitrators and other participants to understand the order of submissions, sign your submission and each addition (using ~~~~).
Word limit violations. Submissions that exceed the word limit will generally be "hatted" (collapsed), and arbitrators may opt not to consider them.
Counting words. Words are counted on the rendered text (not wikitext) of the statement (i.e., the number of words that you would see by copy-pasting the page section containing your statement into a text editor or word count tool). This internal gadget may also be helpful.
Sanctions. Please note that members and clerks of the Committee may impose appropriate sanctions when necessary to promote the effective functioning of the arbitration process.

General guidance

This page is for statements, not discussion.
Arbitrators or clerks may refactor or delete statements, e.g. off-topic or unproductive remarks, without warning.
Banned users may request arbitration via the committee contact page; don't try to edit this page.
Under no circumstances should you remove requests from this page, or open a case (even for accepted requests), unless you are an arbitrator or clerk.
After a request is filed, the arbitrators will vote on accepting or declining the case. The <0/0/0> tally counts the arbitrators voting accept/decline/recuse.
Declined case requests are logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Declined requests. Accepted case requests are opened as cases, and logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Cases once closed.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=1238481228"

Hidden categories:

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 {{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=auto</noinclude>}}
 <noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude>
-== Repeated accusations and harassment ==
-'''Initiated by ''' [[User:Wikieditor662|Wikieditor662]] ([[User talk:Wikieditor662|talk]]) '''at''' 21:54, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
-=== Proposed parties ===
-<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator -->
-*{{userlinks|Wikieditor662}}, ''filing party''
-*{{userlinks|Softlavender}}
-*{{admin|Graham87}}
-*{{userlinks|Gerda Arendt}}
-*{{userlinks|Aza24}}
-*{{userlinks|Usedtobecool}}
-;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. -->
-*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1238244645]
-*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1238244640]
-*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1238244638]
-*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1238244619]
-*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1238244633]
-;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried
-* [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Ban_threats_from_User_talk:Graham87|#Ban_threats_from_User_talk:Graham87]] (In Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents)
-=== Statement by Wikieditor662 ===
-It started when Graham87 suggested I was a sockpuppet and told me that I deserve to be banned in [[User talk:Wikieditor662#Composer is a common word|#Composer is a common word]] under [[User talk:Wikieditor662]]. This was despite sufficient evidence (it was because I redirected the word "composers" to a timeline of composers, and linked the word on a bunch of composers' articles, and if I recall correctly I stopped after being told not to do this. He also said my edits seemed weird for a newcomer) which I believe to be a violation of the [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith]] and later I was told also [[Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers]]. In dispute resolution, where usedtobecool explained why there was no point in calling me a sockpuppet if he wasn't sure, and Graham87 admitted that he has become less kind to newcomers because of his past experiences. Softlavender then commented calling me a "timesink" because I sometimes question the more experienced members (although I usually do what they say) and because some of my edits were undiscussed, reverted, and seemed to be too advanced to a newcomer -- all of which I don't believe count as sufficient evidence and again violate the previously mentioned policies. Thank you. [[User:Wikieditor662|Wikieditor662]] ([[User talk:Wikieditor662|talk]]) 21:54, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
-:Softlavender also said they struggled to find more than one useful edit. However, I expanded, reworded, and added citations to multiple articles such as [[C.P.E. Bach]] and [[Vivaldi]]. For the color codes on [[List of classical music composers by era]], some composers were in a transitionary time period between two eras so I spent hours coloring and figuring out the colors of the transitionary composers between their two eras. And while I don't believe I asked before making these changes (I don't think it's required anyway), one of the members (Gor1995) said that my edits were ok on the first conversation on my talk page. I also don't think asking on there would've gotten any response, I asked about something else on there and nobody responded.
-:Also, I need to correct one of my statements about when I stopped linking the word composers. Usedtobecool explained it best: "Best I can tell, OP [me, Wikieditor662] made a couple edits of the same kind after they received the original warning but did not persist once it became clear the edits were controversial beyond a simple disagreement with Gerda. So, Gerda's expression of disappointment came a bit quick too, in my opinion. I can see how OP might have felt cornered."
-:Thank you once again. [[User:Wikieditor662|Wikieditor662]] ([[User talk:Wikieditor662|talk]]) 05:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-::Also, I had no idea Graham87 was an administrator until filing this case. Still, I should've stopped when he asked me too, although I don't think it violated any rule, since I thought he was an ordinary member. [[User:Wikieditor662|Wikieditor662]] ([[User talk:Wikieditor662|talk]]) 06:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-=== Statement by Softlavender ===
-=== Statement by Graham87 ===
-I don't think I'll dignify this request with a full statement but there are some things that are worth responding to here. [[User:Wikieditor662|Wikieditor662]], you didn't stop after being told not to add these links, as clearly shown by [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Wikieditor662&target=Wikieditor662&offset=20240728080000&limit=36 your contributions at the time]. I like Robert McClenon's term "Bizarre ignorant errors"; Wikieditor662 seems to make many more of those than useful contributions. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 05:04, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-:{{ping|Wikieditor662}} (6:35 (UTC) message): To your credit, you did stop adding these links after [[User talk:Wikieditor662#Composer is a common word|I asked you to]], because my message came about seven hours after Gerda's, but you still kept on defending the link additions. [[User:Graham87|Graham87]] ([[User talk:Graham87|talk]]) 11:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-=== Statement by Gerda Arendt ===
-=== Statement by Aza24 ===
-This is a rather extreme overreaction to a relatively civil conversation at ANI. I don't see any nee for arbitration at this point. – '''<span style="font-family:Lucida;">[[User:Aza24|<span style="color:darkred">Aza24</span>]][[User talk:Aza24|<span style="color:#848484"> (talk)</span>]]</span>''' 06:30, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-=== Statement by Usedtobecool ===
-===Statement by Just Step Sideways===
-This is clearly not a matter for the committee and should be speedily dismissed instead of being voted on for a week. [[User:Just Step Sideways|Just Step Sideways]] [[User talk:Just Step Sideways|<sup>from this world ..... today</sup>]] 22:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
-===Statement by Robert McClenon (Wikieditor662)===
-ArbCom is the only conduct forum in which there isn't a [[WP:BOOMERANG|boomerang]] principle.  So the question for the community of English Wikipedia administrators is how much patience they need to have with the filing editor before deciding that a [[WP:CIR|competency]] block is necessary.  By the way, one reason to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] about this editor actually being a new editor is that redirecting a plural from the singular to a list really is the sort of bizarre error that shows ignorance rather than disruption.  But bizarre ignorant errors sometimes require a [[WP:CIR|competency]] block.
-[[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 02:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
-=== Statement by {Non-party} ===
-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.
-<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
-=== Repeated accusations and harassment: Clerk notes ===
-:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
-*
-=== Repeated accusations and harassment: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0> ===
-{{anchor|1=Repeated accusations and harassment: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)</small>
-*