Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Skyring/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 "support" vote will be passed.
  • Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
  • Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" 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.

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

On this case, 1 Arbitrators is recused and 4/5 are inactive, so 4 votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Contents

[edit] Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on the discussion page.

[edit] Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:


[edit] Proposed final decision

[edit] Proposed principles

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Not a soapbox or forum

1) Wikipedia is not a soapbox or forum for discussion.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:11, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Courtesy

2) Wikipedia editors are expected to exhibit courtesy toward other users.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:11, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Limited bans on editing

3) Editors whose activities are troublesome and disruptive may be banned from areas which have been the focus of their activities.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:11, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:


[edit] "wiki-stalking"

4) The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This is distinct from following a contributor in order to clear repeated errors.

Support:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 12:45 (UTC)
  2. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 14:27 (UTC)
  3. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Mutual discourtesy

1) Both User:Skyring and User:Adam Carr have sometimes been discourteous [1] [2] [3] [4] Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#Arguing_with_trolls [5]

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 12:27, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Content dispute

2. User:Skyring has been engaged in a content dispute regarding Government of Australia and related articles, see Talk:Government_of_Australia/Archive_6#Vote_on_contents_of_Government_of_Australia for a restatement of the issues under dispute by User:Adam Carr, (The result of the vote is at Talk:Government_of_Australia/Archive_6#Vote). The dispute is complex, but essentially revolves about characterization of Australia as a republic.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 22:46, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Articles affected

2.1) Other articles affected include Governor-General of Australia and Republic.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 23:10, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Debate

2.2) Extended debate has occurred at Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_1#Lead_section, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_1#Current_debate_on_whether_Australia_is_a_republic, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_1#Republic.3F, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_1#Constitutional_Scholars, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_1#ARM.27s_statement_on_Aust_head_of_state, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#The_real_issue, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#Moving_on_to_unprotection, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#After_unprotection, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#Lead_section, Talk:Government_of_Australia/archive_2#Head_of_state_and_Republican_movement (incomplete)

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 00:21, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Head of state

2.3 The debate to some extent turns on whether the Governor-General is head of state or the Queen, it being maintained that if the Queen is head of state then Australia is a constitutional monarchy by definition.

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 00:21, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Australian Republican Movement

2.4) There is a Republican political movement (ARM) which advocates change of the government of Australia to a republic Paper "We are on our own: the global and historical context of an Australian Republic"

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 17:52, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Skyring's position

2.5) Skyring's position is that, regardless of the formal statements in the documents which relate to the structure of the government of Australia, its structure and form of government is, in fact, that of a republic [6] "I say that Australia is a republic because the best definitions of the word include Australia, and because Australia has been described as "a crowned republic" since Federation. It is hardly an original view. Skyring 20:57, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)"

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 17:52, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Citations by Skyring

2.6) Skyring cites certain websites as authority for his position, Palmer's Oz Politics, see also "An Australian Republic", Alexa rank about 300,000 "Who Must Open the Sydney Olympic Games?" (see 2000_Summer_Olympics#Day_1_-_September_15).

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 22:37, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Adam Carr's position

2.7) Adam Carr's position is that the Queen (of Australia) is head of state, despite most duties and power having been delegated to the Governor-General [7].

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 12:37, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] State of the article Government of Australia

2.8) The current version of Government of Australia seems to adequately and accurately set forth the nature of Australia's government and the situation of its head of state, see Government_of_Australia#Head_of_state despite the exclusion of User:Skyring's participation by the other editors of the article, see [8]

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 13:00, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC) I considered this for some time, it is rather too close to a content decision imo. However, I would say this is the consensus opinion of the various participants (other than Skyring of course), and on that basis I will support.
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC) - I agree with sannse that it's close to the line, but everyone save Skyring seems to agree so I think it's OK
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Extended talk page discussion

2.9) Due to User:Skyring's extended discussion of certain points, Talk:Government of Australia has become quite inflated with voluminous archives.

Support:

  1. Fred Bauder 13:00, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Wiki-stalking by Skyring

3) On 13 June User:Skyring followed User:Jtdirl, editing a large set of articles that had recently been edited by Jtdirl (see contributions for 13 June). While it is not possible to fully assess intent, this action, and some of the edit summaries used, seem designed to provoke: "enfeebled minds", "Some professional standards, please!", "A common pattern for this editor to produce poor English", "Low quality of Irish editor"

Support:

  1. sannse (talk)
  2. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  4. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 18:00 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:55 (UTC)
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Blind reverting by Jtdirl

User:Jtdirl reverted many of User:Skyring's edits, taking the articles back to versions with spelling mistakes and inaccuracies in several cases: [9], [10], [11], [12].

Support:

  1. sannse (talk)
  2. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  4. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 18:00 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:55 (UTC)
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Limit on editing by Skyring

1) User:Skyring is banned for one year from editing any article (or talk page) which relates to the government or governance of Australia.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:04, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. I do support this, though preferably in conjunction with 2 and 3 - while this would have sufficed on the first case, the second requires stronger action. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC) added "or governance" for clarity
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC)
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Skyring banned for wikistalking

2) User:Skyring is banned from Wikipedia for one year for wiki-stalking and acting in bad faith towards other contributors, as demonstrated in evidence. Any attempt at sockpuppetry shall, as per policy, result in this ban being reset.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 17:26, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
  2. →Raul654 22:48, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
  3. ➥the Epopt 04:22, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  5. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

2.1) User:Skyring is banned from Wikipedia for two months for wiki-stalking and acting in bad faith towards other contributors, as demonstrated in evidence. Any attempt at sockpuppetry shall, as per policy, result in this ban being reset.

Support:
  1. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:49 (UTC)
  2. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  3. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 17:36 (UTC) 3rd choice
  4. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 19:01 (UTC) too long, although if another similar case occured with Skyring, I would be voting for longer that this
  2. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC) Too lenient, in light of recent events. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  3. Too lenient. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Skyring banned for a week

2.2) User:Skyring is banned from Wikipedia for a week for wiki-stalking.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 18:34 (UTC) First choice
  2. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 19:01 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. Too lenient. This remedy is a disgrace. Ambi 28 June 2005 18:40 (UTC)
  2. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC) - concur with Ambi
  3. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 20:39 (UTC)
  4. Too lenient. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  5. Too lenient. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:

[edit] Skyring banned for a month

2.3) User:Skyring is banned from Wikipedia for a month for wiki-stalking and acting in bad faith towards other contributors, as demonstrated in evidence. Any attempt at sockpuppetry shall, as per policy, result in this ban being reset.

Support:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 19:01 (UTC) second choice (An attempt at compromise on the ban length)
  2. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 19:03 (UTC) 2nd choice
  3. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 20:01 (UTC) - 2nd choice
  4. second choice ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 20:39 (UTC)
Oppose:
  1. Too lenient, and serves no purpose whatsoever. Ambi 29 June 2005 01:36 (UTC)
  2. Too lenient, in light of recent events. Jayjg (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Abstain:
  1. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC) - not sure, this still seems a bit lenient.

[edit] Skyring placed on personal attack parole

3) User:Skyring is placed under a one-year personal attack parole. Should any administrator consider one of his edits a personal attack, he may be blocked for up to 24 hours.


Support:
  1. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:51 (UTC)
  2. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  3. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 17:36 (UTC)
  4. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC) - particularly the comment about Jtdirl being a "low quality Irish writer"
Oppose:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 19:01 (UTC) This is unbalanced, with the relatively few personal attacks documented by Skyring in the evidence.
Abstain:
  1. Not sure that this would be useful, as per sannse. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Carr admonished

4) User:Adam Carr is admonished to avoid discourtesy and personal attacks

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:04, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC) - given what he had to put up with, his reaction is understandable, but none-the-less he should not do it again.
  7. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:


[edit] Jtdirl reminded of good editing practice

5) User:Jtdirl is reminded that the best response to attempts to provoke is not to be provoked, and that valid edits should not be blindly reverted.

Support:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 16:12 (UTC)
  2. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 16:15 (UTC)
  3. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:51 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC) - Same as above - "given what he had to put up with, his reaction is understandable, but none-the-less he should not do it again."
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Skyring admonished

6) User:Skyring is admonished to be more civil and to cease attempts to provoke other contributors.

Support:
  1. sannse (talk) 28 June 2005 16:12 (UTC)
  2. Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 16:15 (UTC)
  3. Only in conjunction with ban and parole. With the new evidence from the merged case, I don't think this is enough on its own. Ambi 28 June 2005 16:51 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  5. →Raul654 June 28, 2005 19:58 (UTC)
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed enforcement

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Provision for temporary ban

1) In the event User:Skyring edits any article (or talk page) which relates to the government of Australia he may be banned for a short period by any administrator (1 day for initial offenses, up to a week for repeat offenses)

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 13:07, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Ambi 14:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. mav 02:38, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. sannse (talk) 21:43, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. ➥the Epopt 28 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)
  6. James F. (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

The proposed remedies arose out of my attempt to research this case which involved reading of the extensive efforts of Skyring to make his point over and over and over. Fred Bauder 13:13, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Motion to close

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

  1. If 4 is a majority, everything likely to pass has passed. →Raul654 June 29, 2005 08:38 (UTC)
  2. agreed -- sannse (talk) 29 June 2005 09:05 (UTC)
  3. Fred Bauder June 29, 2005 12:15 (UTC)
  4. ➥the Epopt 29 June 2005 14:15 (UTC)

[edit] Motion to close 2

  1. With 3 arbs inactive, 5 is a majority, so the new measure has enough to pass →Raul654 21:24, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Support closing it again. James F. (talk) 21:19, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support. Jayjg (talk) 21:28, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
  4. Close Fred Bauder 21:52, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_arbitration_Skyring_Proposed_decision_dfed.html"