Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case
Requests for arbitration
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONSTANT HARASSMENT BY Future Perfect at Sunrise | 26 February 2019 | 0/0/0 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Arbitrator workflow motions | 1 December 2024 |
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.
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.
General guidance
|
CONSTANT HARASSMENT BY Future Perfect at Sunrise
Initiated by Stevepeterson (talk) at 16:49, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Stevepeterson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- [diff of notification Future Perfect at Sunrise]
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- Link 2
Statement by Stevepeterson
In a discussion in Talk:North_Macedonia I expressed my opinion that wikipedia should adhere to the recently signed Prespa agreement between North Macedonia and Greece in favour of peace in wikipedia. Specifically I shared my opinion that wikipedia could adopt term "North Macedonia's" as an adjective to the State's name: North Macedonia. This (along with "of North Macedonia") is the adjective recommended by "the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of North Macedonia". Admin User User:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise has expressed that this would lead to poor English grammar and he is an advocate of the term Macedonian as the adjective of North Macedonia. As the discussion with other users went on he started to personally attack me using disgracing words and insults such as:
you really ought to leave this discussion to others who are competent speakers of English and don't have tin ears.
And: you really need to shut up and learn some English and some proper grammatical terminology before you expose your incompetence further here. It's getting quite embarrassing to watch.
Later, he offended all participants in the discussion by trying to collapse the whole conversation claiming "Embarrassing display of linguistic incompetence."
I tried to explain that I feel insulted and disgraced so he should stop this behaviour by posting on his talk page:
I would like to inform you that I consider your "you really ought to leave this discussion to others who are competent speakers of English and don't have tin ears." a Derogatory comment and personal attack to me. .
His response had no regret or apology: You don't need to inform me of that. What you do need to do, however, is to learn how to use talk pages. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise&diff=884735657&oldid=884730558
I brought to to ANI but I received so many personal insults there by Administrators biased towards USER:Future Perfect at Sunrise. There not only did he make the reported comments, he doubled down by linking to an article discussing people of low ability [who] have illusory superiority and mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is. The cognitive bias of illusory superiority comes from the inability of low-ability people to recognize this basic lack of ability.. I have not been rude neither at the ANI nor at the initial discussion page so there should be no action to be taken against me. USER:Future Perfect at Sunrise on the other hand, has selected a telling link (against himself). He says There's never a nice way of telling an incompetent person that they are incompetent which is extremely inappropriate. FP@S has hidden a discussion on my talk page and I believe that his action (WP:INVOLVED is a misuse of the revision deletion tool. The insults I received made lose control of the ANI and instead of a resolution of the conflict with USER:Future Perfect at Sunrise, I am now proposed for Site Ban.
Statement by Future Perfect at Sunrise
Statement by Khajidha
While Future Perfect's wording was extreme, the fact remains that you demonstrate a lack of proficiency in the use of the English language. Especially considering that the argument is about proper English usage. You have been told numerous times, by numerous people, that the phrasing you wish to use is not proper English. You continue to argue based on your mistaken definitions (possessive nouns are NOT adjectives) and seem to refuse to learn from the grammar lessons that everyone is trying to give you. You even engaged in emotional blackmail (see this revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stevepeterson&oldid=885173108), insinuating that you were contemplating suicide based on your treatment here and that others in similar situations in the future may also contemplate such actions. The proposed ban is MORE than earned. --Khajidha (talk) 17:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Statement by Legacypac
The filer is about to be CBAN'd at ANi so nothing needs to be done on this request except close it for they will not be able to participate. Legacypac (talk) 17:44, 26 February 2019 (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.
CONSTANT HARASSMENT BY Future Perfect at Sunrise: Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).
CONSTANT HARASSMENT BY Future Perfect at Sunrise: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0>
Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)