Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

  • Only items that receive a majority aye vote will be enacted.
  • Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
  • Items that do not receive a majority aye or nay vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.
  • Items that receive a majority abstentions will need to go through an amendment process and be re-voted on once.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator in parenthesis after his time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were enacted.

Contents

[edit] Proposed temporary orders

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Aye:
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Editing ban of CheeseDreams

Enacted 1) Pending a final decision in this matter CheeseDreams is banned from editing all articles which relate to Christianity. This ban is based on aggressive POV editwarring as illustrated by the edit history of Historicity_of_Jesus.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 17:01, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
  2. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 13:36, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 21:04, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. mav 06:38, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 13:29, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  6. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. Grunt   ҈  01:42, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  8. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  9. - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed principles

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Aye:
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Customary practices

1) Certain customary practices used on Wikipedia are not written down, but can be ascertained by communication with other users.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:39, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. Users, however, will be forgiven for not knowing of all the customary practices that they should ask about [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:43, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Semi-policy. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. This is commonly referred to as 'cluefulness' - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Archiving of talk pages

2) It is the practice on Wikipedia when a talk page becomes too long for convenient editing to move older material to archives linked from the main page.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:39, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:43, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Refactoring talk pages

3) Talk pages may be refactored in order to improve their usability, brief, unbiased summaries of past discussion may be useful, especially for new editors, see Wikipedia:Refactoring.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 01:08, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:43, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. With due care - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Avoiding personal attacks

4) Wikipedia users are required to avoid personal attacks.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 12:30, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC) This should be stronger, however. Change "expected" to "required"?
  3. I'm with James — we ban people for personal attacks [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:44, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Required - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Three revert rule

5) Wikipedia editors may not revert an article more than three times in a 24 hour period. This rule is based on individual users, not on a group of users who are reverting the same material (CheeseDream's "tag team" concept).

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 23:32, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
  2. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 23:22, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Although two opposing camps should not use this as an excuse to get a revert war started. -- Grunt   ҈  01:44, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. If multiple people are reverting you, then you should reconsider your position. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Although an investigation for sock puppetry may be in order ... but in general, if everyone disagrees with you, you might be wrong - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Modification of other user's edits of Arbitration page

6) Users who modify other user's edits of arbitration pages, inserting peripheral material, and especially deleting them or portions of them will be heavily penalized.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:32, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
  2. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 23:22, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:45, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Not just Arbitartion pages, either. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Disruption

7) Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point

Aye:
  1. →Raul654 13:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Grunt   ҈  01:45, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  5. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. mav 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Aye:
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Koan in Jesus

1) A major issue in this matter is the attempt of CheeseDreams to insert language which relates to Koan, generally considered a Zen Buddhist teaching method, into the Jesus article [1].

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 12:58, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:45, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Grunt   ҈  01:46, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  6. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. mav 04:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Googling for koan and Jesus

2) A google search for "jesus", "koan" and "new testament" returns a little over a thousand hits, including the customer reviews of The Zen Teachings of Jesus at the top.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 12:58, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:45, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Grunt   ҈  01:46, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  6. Although I'd prefer it to bring up three wikipedia articles ;) Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. mav 04:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Summaries on Talk:Cultural_and_historical_background_of_Jesus

3) CheeseDreams has on Talk:Cultural_and_historical_background_of_Jesus repeatedly inserted lengthy summaries of prior material from the talk page archive [2] despite strenuous objections of other editors involved in the article.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:34, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:45, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Grunt   ҈  01:46, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  6. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. mav 04:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Personal attacks by CheeseDreams

4) CheeseDreams has made personal attacks on other users [3].

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 12:33, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:45, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. Good evidence in the evidence section of this. -- Grunt   ҈  01:48, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:54, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Calling someone a Nazi is generally regarded as a personal attack - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. mav 04:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (Would agree with Epopt's vote against if this were the only example, but the sum total of the evidence on /Evidence is sufficient, imo.)
Nay:
  1. The cited line does not rise to the level of an arbitrable attack [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 18:47, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Other accounts of CheeseDreams

5) CheeseDreams also edits under the username User:Cheesedreams and under the IP 81.156.93.151.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 20:30, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 04:45, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Grunt   ҈  01:48, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  6. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (also it seems User:Cheese Dreams and User:Cheese dreams. More that one account is not against policy though)
  9. mav 04:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) (agree with Sannse)
  10. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Modification by Ta bu shi da yu of material by CheeseDreams

6) Ta bu shi da yu has modified an edit in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/CheeseDreams by CheeseDreams to insert a portion of his complaint, see [4]

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:09, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
  2. We need to clarify the "do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case" instruction to allow edits that add the editor to the list of participants [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. Agree with Epopt. James F. (talk) 23:20, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:01, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC) - Although this doesn't seem malicious.
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC) Concur with Raul.
  6. The modification probably wasn't intentional; technical difficulties of the sort do happen. -- Grunt   ҈  01:50, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) Agree with Raul
  10. mav 04:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) This could have been on accident/server bug.
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Deletion of request for temporary injunction

7) CheeseDreams removed a request for a temporary injunction in this matter from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams [5]

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:38, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
  2. moving it to the talk page [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. Indeed, moving it to the talk page, the correct behaviour in the circumstance. James F. (talk) 23:20, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. As with the previous FOF, true, but I don't think it was intended to be malicious. →Raul654 13:01, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  01:51, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav Agree with Raul.
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Vandalism of a user page

8)CheeseDreams vandalized User:Ta bu shi da yu by adding several dispute tags. [6]

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 00:56, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:36, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Grunt   ҈  00:22, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
  5. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  6. mav 22:07, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Disruption

9) CheeseDreams has acted in a way to cause disruption, either to make a point or to force through her preferences. This includes tagging over large numbers of pages with dispute notices [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] without discussion; and recreating disputed pages under new titles (Cultural and historical background of Jesus recreated as Jesus in a cultural and historical background and Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be).

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 00:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:37, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  5. mav 22:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Grunt   ҈  23:35, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Disruption of Arbitration

10) CheeseDreams has acted in such as way as to cause disruption in an attempt to derail the arbitration process. This includes making a survey page calling for an arbitrators resignation, and making accusations of personal attacks.[12]

Aye:
  1. I still believe the actions in question were deliberately aimed at derailing the arbitration process. -- Grunt   ҈  00:24, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:
  1. sannse (talk) 00:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC) not relevant. see note on the proposed Remedy at 6. below.
  2. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:37, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  5. I'm not so sure - what CD wrote seems vague. --mav 22:16, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Problems centre on articles related to Christianity

11) The above difficulties have centred on articles relating to Christianity or issues arising from disputes that started on articles relating to Christianity.

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 00:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:38, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Grunt   ҈  04:44, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
  6. mav 22:17, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed decision

[edit] Remedies

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Aye:
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Modification of other user's material on arbitration page

1) Ta bu shi da yu is banned for 30 days for modifying material (the signature) inserted by CheeseDreams in Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/CheeseDreams, see bottom of edit "P.s. could someone look into blocking all of these sock puppets so that we can find out who they really are?"

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:28, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. I find this explanation sufficient Fred Bauder 04:13, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC):
    The change was obviously a technical accident. The original edit was made by Cheese Dreams [13] In a later edit Cheese Dreams removed TBSDY's comment [14] and then modified her own comment. [15] TBDSY then reverted to his previous version of the Proposed decision page [16], not realizing that Cheese Dreams had made other changes besides removing TBSDY's comment. Jayjg 02:47, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  2. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 23:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 13:03, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Negligible circumstancial evidence to base this on. -- Grunt   ҈  01:52, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  7. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  9. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  10. mav 04:53, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  11. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Deletion of request for temporary injunction

2) CheeseDreams is banned for 90 days for removing a request for a temporary injunction in this matter from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CheeseDreams [17]

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 00:40, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. Agree with the Epopt. →Raul654 12:48, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC) Concur with Epopt and others.
  3. Grunt   ҈  01:52, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Appears to have intended to restore own edit after apparent change from someone else. A confusion - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. mav 04:55, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC) Not sure if this is actionable.
  8. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. I'm unconvinced. CheeseDreams (clearly a participant) moved an edit by Ta bu shi da yu (whose participation status was unclear) to the talk page — with a clear edit summary. I agree that messing with an arbitration page in an attempt to deceive or obfuscate is a heinous offence, but at the same time, there's enough extenuation here to cause me to hesitate. [[User:The Epopt|➥the Epopt of the Cabal]] 14:16, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  2. Concur with Epopt. James F. (talk) 23:21, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Frivolous Requests for Comment

3) For repeatedly filing frivolous Requests for Comment, Cheesedreams is prohibited from filing any RFCs in the future.

Aye:
  1. →Raul654 12:50, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC) I think this is something that needs to be addressed, but this isn't the way to go about it.
  2. I prefer 3.1 - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (Ought to leave this avenue open.)
Abstain:

3.1) For repeatedly filing frivolous Requests for Comment, the number of RFCs open that were started by CheeseDreams is limited to one unless it is demonstrated to an administrator that there is a serious need for the RFC.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  01:56, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  2. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (Simply rejecting them if baseless ought to suffice.)
Abstain:
  1. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. I think this is probably a better remedy than 3.0, but the wording seems rather tortured. What exactly does "the number of RFCs open that were started by Cheeseofdreams" mean? →Raul654 22:18, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
    It means just that: the number of RFCs open that were initially opened by Cheesedreams. -- Grunt   ҈  23:42, 2005 Jan 10 (UTC)
  3. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) I think the concerns expressed in talk about extensions of admin power are valid. Anyone can open an RfC, if Cheesedreams can convince any eligible contributor to participate that should be enough. (I corrected the name above and elsewhere on this page) - also this is not supported by a FoF.
  4. Sannse is right - David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disruptive tagging

4) For tagging over 50 articles with disupte headings [and other disruptive actions], CheeseDreams is banned for one week.

Aye:
  1. →Raul654 12:50, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Grunt   ҈  01:56, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  4. I should think longer, but... --Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Really. Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (added clarification -- sannse (talk) 00:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC))
  7. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  8. mav 22:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Vandalizing other users' pages

5) For vandalizing User:Ta bu shi da yu ([18]), CheeseDreams is banned for 1 day.

Aye:
  1. →Raul654 12:50, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 01:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC) (although it's straight vandalism - I don't know if one day is enough)
  3. Twenty-four hours is a standard vandalism block length. -- Grunt   ҈  01:56, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  5. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. mav 05:03, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Disrupting the arbitration process

6) For attempting to disrupt the arbitration process (in the form of filing RFCs against arbitrators, making accusations of personal attacks, etc) CheeseDreams is banned for 1 week.

Aye:
  1. →Raul654 12:50, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
    Grunt   ҈  01:56, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  2. Neutralitytalk 02:07, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
    David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) we need to be accountable to all parties at any point of the procedure. Accusations (even if they turn out to be false) should not be forbidden.
  2. Sannse is right David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. Sannse raises a good point, but this does not stop me from believing that the above actions were made in bad faith. -- Grunt   ҈  04:54, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
  2. Not sure if this is bad enough to warrant action on our part. --mav 23:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 23:52, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Enforcement

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] RfC removal

1) RFCs filed by Cheesedreams in excess of 3.1 above may be removed at discretion by an administrator if it is percieved that there is not a serious need for the RFC, provided that that administrator is not personally involved

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  01:57, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  2. Assuming 3.1 passes. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 06:06, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 06:40, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 22:20, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC) - I've gone ahead and added the proviso that that admin may not be involved.
  6. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (assuming 3.1 passes)
  7. mav 05:19, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  8. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (Only if it passes, of course.)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Page creation

2) Cheesedreams may not recreate any page after it has been deleted. Should she do so, any administrator may block Cheesedreams up until and including one month. (withdrawn --Neutralitytalk)

Aye:
  1. Neutralitytalk 02:11, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. One month seems to be quite harsh. -- Grunt   ҈  02:46, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  2. One week is fine - David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:


2) Cheesedreams may not recreate any page after it has been deleted. Should she do so, any administrator may block Cheesedreams up until and including one week.

Aye:
  1. David Gerard 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Neutralitytalk 03:40, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  3. →Raul654 22:21, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) I was going to say that the page must have been deleted with the correct procedure - but if this isn't so then we have VfU
Nay:
  1. sannse (talk) 00:01, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC) change vote, not supported by a finding.
  2. Upon reflection, this isn't a serious problem in this case. -- Grunt   ҈  00:02, 2005 Jan 11 (UTC)
  3. Concur with sannse, Grunt. Ambi 01:21, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  5. I didn't see this as a big issue in this case. mav 22:21, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Reversion

3) CheeseDreams may not revert any page more than twice in any 24-hour period, except for simple vandalism. Should he do so, any administrator may block him for a length of time up onto and including 24 hours, with the block length doubling for each violation. Administrators are authorized to determine what constitutes a reversion at their discretion.

Aye:
  1. Neutralitytalk 20:57, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 23:30, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Grunt   ҈  00:15, 2005 Jan 10 (UTC)
  4. mav 05:19, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. sannse (talk) 11:38, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Once is enough, but I can live with twice - David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Jesus-related articles

3bis) Cheesedreams is banned from editing all Jesus-related articles for the period of one year. Administrators are given discretion in determining what articles are "Jesus-related" and may enact blocks of up to one week for each edit. This does not apply to talk pages [but does apply to templates used in, or designed for use in, Jesus-related articles] (addition suggested by sannse). Neutralitytalk 06:06, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Aye:
  1. Neutralitytalk 06:06, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. If the ban length otherwise is less than one year. -- Grunt   ҈  06:09, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
    Bans over one year run one year anyway - David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. David Gerard 06:12, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (But prefer 4, which is a superset.)
Nay:
  1. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. 4 is better mav 22:22, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. Prefer 4. Ambi 06:40, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. 4 is good :-) - David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Christianity-related articles

4) Cheesedreams is banned from editing all Christianity-related articles for the period of one year. Administrators are given discretion in determining what articles are "Christianity-related" and may enact blocks of up to one week for each edit. This does not apply to talk pages [but does apply to templates used in, or designed for use in, Christianity-related articles] (addition suggested by sannse) Neutralitytalk 06:06, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Aye:
  1. Neutralitytalk 06:06, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. If the ban length otherwise is less than one year. -- Grunt   ҈  06:10, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)
  3. David Gerard 06:12, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 06:40, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. sannse (talk) 22:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) (with my suggested wording change above, and only if 5 also passes.)
  6. mav 05:22, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:
  1. →Raul654 22:28, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC) - I'm a bit on the fence about this one. She's caused a lot of trouble on the christianity related articles, but I still hold out hope that she could be a useful contributor to them. And while some could argue that she could use the talk pages, realistically, that doesn't mean much.
  2. sannse (talk) 17:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) Agree with Raul. Cheesedreams has contributed good edits, especially before things got so heated. And Cheesedreams is not the only contributor to have been uncivil here. On further reflection, I think a ban is warranted for a while, but I would like Cheesedreams to have the opportunity to show her ability for cooperative editing (see below)

5) If Cheesedreams can demonstrate a pattern of editing with civility, and without serious conflict, for the next six months, she can apply for a lifting of the above ban on editing Christianity related articles.

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 22:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 23:38, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Grunt   ҈  00:17, 2005 Jan 10 (UTC)
  4. mav 05:22, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. David Gerard 23:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. Goes without saying. Neutralitytalk 03:39, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  7. Delirium 02:39, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC) (Although I think we should consider a request made less than 6 months from now as well, perhaps 3 months.)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

[edit] Motion to close

Four Aye votes needed to close case

  1. Everything's passed. I think we're done here. Ambi 23:38, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Grunt   ҈  23:40, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
  3. mav 23:40, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 23:42, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_arbitration_CheeseDreams_Proposed_decision_3e48.html"