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 15:46, 13 May 2016

Shortcut

WP:ARC

Requests for arbitration

Arbitration Committee proceedings

Case requests

Request name	Motions	Initiated	Votes
Black Supremacy case		11 May 2016	{{{votes}}}

[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.

Black Supremacy case

Initiated by Laber□^T at 13:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Involved parties

Laberkiste (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

Statement by Laberkiste

There is constant edit warring on this article wether or not Black supremacy is a racist ideology, which has not been prevented by semi-protection.

I withdraw my nomination since I'm now convinced this can be handled by WP:RFC. --Laber□^T 14:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Clerk notes

This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).

Black Supremacy case: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/5/0/0>

Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse/other)

decline as premature. I recommend use of WP:RFC or one of the other noticeboards (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, to name three venues) before coming here. Outside eyes are needed to establish consensus. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:47, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
decline - for a start, a case needs parties, and this has none. The latest editor is an account which hardly ever edits and who seems to have come back just to make a point about this article, but between protection and editors' watch lists it seems to be in hand. Doug Weller talk 14:22, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decline as premature. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decline --In actu (Guerillero) | My Talk 20:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decline premature and withdrawn. Opabinia regalis (talk) 20:04, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decline as above DGG ( talk ) 14:51, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=720076770"

Hidden categories:

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 <noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}}
 {{Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=53%</noinclude>}}
-== [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive|Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab]] ==
-'''Initiated by ''' [[User:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="blue">Sh</font><font color="red">eri</font><font color="blue">ff</font>''']] | [[User talk:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="black">☎ 911</font>''']] | '''at''' 20:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
-=== Involved parties ===
-<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator -->
-*{{userlinks|SheriffIsInTown}}, ''filing party''
-*{{userlinks|Krzyhorse22}}
-*{{admin|Bbb23}}
-*{{admin|Magog the Ogre}}
-;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
-*Krzyhorse22 ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKrzyhorse22&type=revision&diff=719475876&oldid=719454628 diff])
-*Bbb23 ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABbb23&type=revision&diff=719476433&oldid=719476012 diff])
-*Magog the Ogre ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMagog_the_Ogre&type=revision&diff=719476123&oldid=718870560 diff])
-;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried
-Krzyhorse22 has been reported under [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab]] four times, on [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive#20 November 2014|20 November 2014]] by [[User:Faizan|Faizan]], on [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive#04 October 2015|04 October 2015]] by [[User:Smsarmad|Smsarmad]], on [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive#24 November 2015|24 November 2015]] by [[User:LouisAragon|LouisAragon]] and on [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive#14 April 2016|14 April 2016]] by me.
-=== Statement by SheriffIsInTown ===
-Lagoo sab created a total of 100 socks between 2009 and 2013. The last confirmed sock of Lagoo sab was blocked on 6 November 2013. Krzyhorse22 was created on 29 August 2014 and there is a 9 months difference between the last sock block and the creation of Krzyhorse22. Considering the time difference, there was never going to be a successful CU because of all of the confirmed socks being stale. The cases only can be decided based on the behavioral evidence present in the filings and according to my analysis of all these four cases, there was more than enough evidence each time to block the user based on behavioral evidence e.g. [[WP:DUCK]] as many users have been blocked behaviorally in the past with fraction of the evidence presented as was presented in these filings. There are other editors who have expressed their opinions in those filings such as [[User:Magog the Ogre|Magog the Ogre]] that evidence suggests that Krzyhorse22 is a Lagoo sab sock. The closing admin Bbb23 for the last filing has expressed in the past that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABbb23&type=revision&diff=692548697&oldid=692548575 I won't be the person evaluating the behavioral evidence. I'm familiar with the IP issues]. He has also hinted that the location of Krzyhorse22 might be the same as Lagoo's previous socks but that is irrelevant considering the topics they edit. Based on that admission, i also had the feeling that nobody even evaluated the evidence presented in the last filing to decide whether there is a behavioral match except off-course Magog the Ogre who is not a CheckUser. Thus, i am requesting the committee to analyze the behavioral evidence presented in last four filings, more importantly the last two because they had bulk of evidence in them. Arbitration Committee is the last resort to resolve any matter on Wikipedia and considering the history of disruption by Lagoo sab socks previously and by Krzyhorse22, it is important that Committee reviews this case and give their final decision in this matter. If Committee finds enough behavioral evidence in last four filings then I am requesting that the decision by Bbb23 should be overturned and Krzyhorse22 be blocked, as the decision was only based on IP addresses which clever users can always change before attempting to sock, please also remember when deciding that it has been hinted by Bbb23 that the location is same. The policy violated by this user would be [[WP:SOCK]] by not declaring all previous 100 accounts and by not following the proper procedure for appealing the block and only coming back when the appeal is granted. [[User:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="blue">Sh</font><font color="red">eri</font><font color="blue">ff</font>''']] | [[User talk:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="black">☎ 911</font>''']] | 20:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
-{{withdraw}}: Thank you and sorry for wasting committee's time. [[User:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="blue">Sh</font><font color="red">eri</font><font color="blue">ff</font>''']] | [[User talk:SheriffIsInTown|'''<font color="black">☎ 911</font>''']] | 18:31, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-===Statement by uninvolved Dennis Brown===
-This has been to SPI four times, one of the Arb, {{u|Drmies}} has run a CU, {{u|Bbb23}} has also run a CU.  I can't speak to whether or not these two accounts (plus the 100) are the same, but I say that looking at the SPI archives shows more than a little good faith has been put into trying to make the connection.  In fact, some evidence seem to point to different geographical locations.  I don't think this is an Arb ready case and in fact, may result in a bit of a boomerang, as continually pounding someone and calling them a sock after multiple SPIs have not found a connection could be considered harassment, even if you do it in administrative venues. I would remind {{u|SheriffIsInTown}} that at Arb, just as at any admin-type venue, the behavior of all parties can be examined.  Assuming this is dismissed (as I would expect), I suggest [[WP:STICK|dropping the stick]] and accepting the status quo. [[User:Dennis Brown|<b>Dennis Brown</b>]] - [[User talk:Dennis Brown|<b>2&cent;</b>]] 23:36, 9 May 2016 (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. * -->
-=== Clerk notes ===
-:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
-*
-=== [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive|Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab]]: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/9/0/0> ===
-{{anchor|1=[[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab/Archive|Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lagoo sab]]: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse/other)</small>
-* '''Decline'''.  If Krzyhorse22's edits are somehow disruptive, then the [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/India-Pakistan#Standard_discretionary_sanctions|India–Pakistan–Afghanistan discretionary sanctions]] should be the remedy of first resort; if not, then holding yet another inquiry—when four previous ones have failed to produce any conclusive result—would be a waste of everyone's time. [[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lokshin]] ([[User talk:Kirill Lokshin|talk]]) 02:25, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
-* '''Decline''' I don't see any indication that the previous SPIs, checkusers, etc. were mishandled. An SPI not resulting in the connection you expect does not mean you should take it to ArbCom for another go at it. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 09:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline''' per above. <b>[[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]]</b> ([[User talk:Callanecc|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Callanecc|contribs]] • [[Special:Log/Callanecc|logs]]) 10:55, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline''' per above. [[User:Casliber|Cas Liber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 13:44, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline''' again per above. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 14:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline'''. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;" class="texhtml">  '''[[User:Salvio giuliano|Salvio]]'''</span> [[User talk:Salvio giuliano|<sup>Let's talk about it!</sup>]] 16:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline''' --[[User:In actu|In actu (Guerillero)]] &#124; [[User_talk:Guerillero|<font color="green">My Talk</font>]] 20:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline'''. [[User:Opabinia regalis|Opabinia regalis]] ([[User talk:Opabinia regalis|talk]]) 20:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
-*'''Decline''' as above .'''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 14:52, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 == Black Supremacy case ==