Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rienzo/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

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:
  1. .
Nay:
  1. .
Abstain:
  1. .

[edit] Proposed principles

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Sockpuppet abuse

1) The use of sockpuppet accounts, while not generally forbidden, is discouraged. Abuse of sockpuppet accounts is strictly forbidden.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  14:58, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. mav 01:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:


[edit] No personal attacks

2) No personal attacks.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  15:00, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. mav 01:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:


[edit] IP blocks

3) Admins may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that vandalise Wikipedia for up to one month at a time (Wikipedia:Blocking policy)

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Grunt   ҈  01:31, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  3. Ambi 02:36, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. mav 01:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:19, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed principle}

Aye:
  1. .
Nay:
  1. .
Abstain:
  1. .

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Unity of abusive accounts

1) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 can reasonably be assumed to be the same person.

Aye:
  1. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) The technical evidence shows that (s)he is moderately clever. The circumstantial evidence, however, points to this conclusion.
  2. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) Not including the IP. See 1.1.
Abstain:
  1. Although this point is integral to the case against, it would be best to garner evidence from the developers before rendering judgment here.A chat with the developers indicates no strong technical evidence in favour of these accounts being the same person, and may in fact suggest the opposite. While I am convinced of this now, I prefer 1.1. -- Grunt   ҈  02:07, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
  2. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC) Possible, perhaps even very possible - but not in the case of all the IPs edits, and the lack of strong technical evidence is a problem. See 1.1 + 1.2
  3. mav 01:24, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I'd like to see hard evidense - although I do think these are the same person).

1.1) While there is no strong technical evidence linking Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland and Nasse (Piglet) all these accounts show patterns of behaviour (in particular, abusive posts aimed at a particular user with no sign of previous conflict) that suggest they are second accounts.

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Grunt   ҈  01:33, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  3. mav 01:24, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. On the grounds that the respective remedies treat them as one user - I don't like the potential loophole this opens otherwise. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:20, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:

1.2) 148.136.141.172 is a public computer and is likely to be used by more than one person. Edits indicate various patterns of editing: an apparent test [1] of an offensive phrase removed quickly by the same person; a request for assistance in removing vandalism from the Swedish Wikipedia [2] (etc.); edits regarding "Engalism" and its VfD [3] (etc.); offensive "simple" vandalism [4]; attacks on contributors with the same lack of previous conflict noted in 1.1 above [5]

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Yes, but the above have editted from this public computer before. -- Grunt   ҈  01:33, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 01:58, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
  4. mav 01:24, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Personal attacks

2) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet), NahChyps and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 have engaged in personal attacks. See [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] (particularly bad).

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  15:07, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. mav 01:30, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (note esp this diff ; which is a vile personal attack and user page vandalism)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Abusive vandalism

3) 148.136.141.172 has engaged in abusive vandalism, see this edit to homosexuality

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:50, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Abusive vandalism, personal attack, death threat -- this one edit should have triggered an instant lifetime ban ➥the Epopt 16:51, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    I understand the LART Editor function has sadly yet to be implemented in MediaWiki - David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Ambi 02:09, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. I note, however, that there is a good chance that this is not in fact Rienzo or associated sockpuppet accounts. Grunt   ҈  01:34, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  6. mav 01:32, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:

[edit] NahChyps is a sockpuppet of Rienzo

4) Developer Tim Starling found evidence that NahChyps (who made this diff; see personal attack section above) and user:Rienzo were likely the same person. (I confirmed this on IRC with Tim. --mav 01:59, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC))

Aye:
  1. mav 01:59, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Grunt   ҈  02:00, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
  3. sannse (talk) 02:11, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 03:23, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
Abstain:

[edit] Template

2) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Aye:
  1. .
Nay:
  1. .
Abstain:
  1. .

[edit] Proposed decision

[edit] Remedies

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Ban

1) For repeated personal attacks, Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 are banned for one month.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  15:17, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) Too short.
  2. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. mav 01:52, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (too short)
  5. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

1.1) For repeated personal attacks, Rienzo, NahChyps, Lady Tara, Baffinisland and Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 are banned for three months.

Aye:
  1. Second choice, despite feelings that longer than one month is probably overkill. Grunt   ҈  15:17, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. mav 01:52, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I added User:NahChyps)
  6. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (but not the public computer 148.136.141.172, which should be blocked as required by usual blocking policy)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:

1.2) For repeated personal attacks, Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 are banned for two weeks.

Aye:


Nay:
  1. Shorter than one month is not enough. Grunt   ҈  15:17, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Too short. Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Way too short. --mav 01:52, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Personal attack parole

2) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 shall be placed on indefinite personal attack parole. If any of these accounts makes edits which are judged by an administrator to be personal attacks, then the account in question shall be temp-banned for a short time, up to one week.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  02:11, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
  2. Neutralitytalk 03:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
    ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC) Agree with Ambi ➥the Epopt 16:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. 2.1 is better; this just allows for sockpuppets to be abused. Ambi 06:54, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Agree with Ambi ➥the Epopt 16:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:


2.1) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and NahChyps and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 shall be placed on a one year personal attack parole (starting after successful completion of any ban term). If any of these accounts makes edits which are judged by an administrator to be personal attacks, then all of the above accounts shall be shall be temp-banned for a short time, up to one week.

Aye:
  1. Ambi 06:54, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Agree with Ambi ➥the Epopt 16:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. I am now more sure about the unity of these accounts. -- Grunt   ҈  01:57, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
  4. mav 02:08, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I added NahChyps and reduced term to the max allowed by our policy)
  5. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (but not the public computer 148.136.141.172, which should be blocked as required by usual blocking policy)
  6. Neutralitytalk 00:36, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  7. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:
Remain unsure about the unity of the person behind the attacks. -- Grunt   ҈  02:11, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
Am I missing something, or is this exactly the same as 2? Ambi 03:28, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
It's not; this variant blocks all of the accounts in question if one of them is abusive. -- Grunt   ҈  16:01, 2005 Jan 9 (UTC)
In this case, I vote to accept. Ambi 06:54, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Good behaviour

3) If Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and/or NahChyps and/or the user editing from 148.136.141.172 can demonstrate editing behaviour completely free of personal attacks, they may apply to the arbcom to have the above restrictioned lessened or removed.

Aye:
  1. Grunt   ҈  15:20, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
  2. Neutralitytalk 01:59, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:10, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (I added NahChyps)
  4. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (but not the public computer 148.136.141.172, which should be blocked as required by usual blocking policy)
  5. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. "relatively" free is not good enough ➥the Epopt 04:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Ban for abusive vandalism

4) User:148.136.141.172 is banned for one year due to abusive vandalism.

Aye:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:54, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
  2. For multiple exhortations to lynch? Too bad we can't impose lifetime bans. ➥the Epopt 17:12, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. A year? No. Besides, this is only one account. -- Grunt   ҈  14:38, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC) 148.136.141.172 is a public computer. This is unfair to those people who might use that computer for -- Grunt   ҈  01:37, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  2. mav 02:13, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (agree with Grunt)
  3. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (as before, this IP should be blocked as required by usual blocking policy)
  4. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:36, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) Public machine.
Abstain:


4.1) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 are banned for one year due to abusive vandalism.

Aye:
  1. For multiple exhortations to lynch? This is not long enough. ➥the Epopt 17:12, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. This is too long. -- Grunt   ҈  14:38, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC) 148.136.141.172 is a public computer. I do not believe the one action cited above to have been instigated by Rienzo or sockpuppets. -- Grunt   ҈  01:37, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  2. mav 02:13, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (maybe next time this person comes before us)
  3. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:36, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

4.2) Rienzo, Lady Tara, Baffinisland, Nasse (Piglet) and the user editing from 148.136.141.172 are banned for three months due to abusive vandalism.

Aye:
Grunt   ҈  14:38, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
  1. For multiple exhortations to lynch? Only if we can't go longer. ➥the Epopt 17:12, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:
  1. 148.136.141.172 is a public computer. I do not believe the one action cited above to have been instigated by Rienzo or sockpuppets. -- Grunt   ҈  01:37, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  2. mav 02:13, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) (other bans seem enough)
  3. sannse (talk) 02:23, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:36, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

4.3) 148.136.141.172 should be blocked under the usual blocking policy guidelines on any occasion that pages are vandalised in any way via this public computer. No Arbitration ruling is required for this routine blocking.

Aye:
  1. sannse (talk) 23:29, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. Grunt   ҈  01:37, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:13, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  4. Ambi 01:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  5. Neutralitytalk 00:36, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  6. David Gerard 00:52, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Nay:


Abstain:

[edit] Enforcement

proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Aye:
  1. .
Nay:
  1. .
Abstain:
  1. .

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

[edit] Motion to close

Four Aye votes needed to close case

  1. Everything likely to pass has passed. Ambi 00:53, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  2. David Gerard 00:54, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  3. Only once 00:53 28 Jan 2005 UTC has been reached. -- Grunt   ҈  00:55, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)
  4. Neutralitytalk 00:56, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Only once 00:53 28 Jan 2005 UTC has been reached. mav 01:12, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  6. once some time in the future is has been reached ➥the Epopt 19:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_arbitration_Rienzo_Proposed_decision_d857.html"