Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cantus 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Case Opened on 18:17, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Case Closed on 06:40, August 8, 2005 (UTC)


Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

Contents

[edit] Involved parties

Netoholic is bringing this case against Cantus, on charges that he's failed repeatedly to abide by a previous ruling against him, continues to revert war, fails to gain consensus before making widespread changes, has performed vandalism, has misused anonymous proxies to bypass restrictions placed on him, fails to input edit summaries (particularly when his edits represent major changes), and is generally a persistent disruption to this project.

[edit] Statement by Netoholic

While I don't look forward to or enjoy bringing this case, I feel it is necessary in the best interests of the project's editors. I would say "the project", but frankly it is the constant stress and rework required where Cantus is concerned which is the most damaging aspect. This user has learned nothing since his previous Arbitration involvement.

  • Cantus has broken his revert parole on numberous occasions and has been given blocks of various lengths (Block log). These do absolutely nothing to help him avoid the problems leading up to revert wars. After a block, his usual first actions are to re-revert each and every change. Please note this recent report where hs is shown to have broken the parole four times in one day [1]
  • Wherever Cantus is in disagreement over a page, "slow revert wars" often start. No meaningful dialogue is happening, but Cantus persists in reverting at the rate of about once a day.
  • When blocked, or to avoid breaking his parole, Cantus has employed anonymous proxies to evade detection. For example, the histories of "Developed country" and "Template:Europe" show IP addresses which are reverting to Cantus' preferred version. In Jan 2005, Cantus employed anon proxies to edit war with Gzornenplatz [14].
    • 200.83.181.18 (talk · contribs), 200.83.186.180 (talk · contribs), and 220.110.164.82 (talk · contribs) have recently been used to perform edits which revert directly to Cantus' prefered versions.
  • Cantus fails frequently to submit edit summaries (contribs). Many of these represent reverts or major changes which were not noted.
  • On May 8/9, Cantus made a change to a very commonly used template (see Template talk:Infobox Biography#Death information). Before gathering further opinion, he implemented that change. At first, the change was made just to the template, but that broke all the articles. After User:PRiis fixed the template back, Cantus reverted the template to his version, and proceeded to make an alteration to about 250 articles without leaving edit summaries. This was all done before even 24 hours had passed since he first made his proposal.
  • Cantus' user page (as of today) has a misleading message indicating he is no longer with the project [16], but this is far from the truth.

I ask the Arbitrators to accept this case so that his status can be corrected as necessary. I also ask that an immediate injunction be placed, banning Cantus from editing any pages except his user space and pages related to this case. -- Netoholic @ 08:05, 2005 May 14 (UTC)

To Ambi
I'm intentionally limiting my evidence to occurences after the last Arbitration case involving him. The patterns are the same as noted twice before in Arb cases, so I'm not sure what sort of further dispute resolution is recommended by you. -- Netoholic @ 09:19, 2005 May 14 (UTC)
To Grunt and Raul654
I understand the initial reaction by you to recuse, but I really don't see where our mentorship agreement necessarily means you would have bias one way or another with regards to my providing evidence against Cantus'. Indeed, we can expect many other people to present evidence should this case be opened. Since this request is currently dead-locked, I'd like to ask you to consider un-recusing. -- Netoholic @ 15:46, 2005 May 31 (UTC)
It's not deadlocked anymore - I changed my vote last night (but it got lost in a page duplication). In the meantime, Neutrality has voted to accept, and I've put through the change of vote again. Ambi 16:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough, thanks for the reply. I guess my point is still there, that I don't see the mentorship arrangement as necessarily biasing, but at least this can move forward now. -- Netoholic @

[edit] Statement by Cantus

To Netoholic: Ok, so now that you've been blocked from editing the Wikipedia and Template namespace, you feel so shitty that you want everybody else to suffer from your same punishment? I mean, bringing stuff from four months ago as evidence and declaring previous ArbCom rulings as steps in dispute resolution? This is all really sad, and I await for the arbitrators' quick dismissal of this baseless request. —Cantus…☎ 08:33, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

To arbitrators: Over time I've had a series of restrictions placed upon me by the arbitration committee; these restrictions have been placed without an expiration date (they are equal to life sentences), and there seems to be no policy on how to eliminate these through, for example, good behavior, etc. This makes the whole Wikipedia penal system unfair and counterproductive. I am saddened to say that I won't be able to continue to collaborate to this project if any further restrictions are placed on me, and if these policy flaws are not worked out in time. —Cantus…☎ 14:56, May 31, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Preliminary decisions

[edit] Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (5/2/2/0)

  • Reject. Please pursue other avenues of dispute resolution first - most of these are either not recent (and thus have been dealt with by prior cases) or are too minor to stand on their own. Ambi 08:16, 14 May 2005 (UTC) Accept to consider issues of slow revert wars. Ambi 16:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
  • This could be a dispute of substance. Before accepting or rejecting, I'd like to hear the opinion of Netoholic's mentors on whether it seems not a bad idea. Cantus should also note that Netoholic is not presently restricted in the manner described - David Gerard 11:01, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
    • [Now] Accept. Note that Cantus has violated his revert parole again and is currently on a 24 hour block (username and IP) - David Gerard 08:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Recuse for obvious reasons. -- Grunt   ҈  14:51, 2005 May 14 (UTC)
  • Accept. -- sannse (talk) 20:18, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Recuse, due to my current involvement as Netoholic's mentor. →Raul654 22:42, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
    • I'm no longer Netoholic's mentor and I think I can decide this case fairly. →Raul654 19:58, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Reject - A clarification request seems more appropriate. If such a request were made, then I'd suggest that admins be more willing to impose week long blocks for serial episodes of one-revert-per-day behavior. --mav
  • Reject ➥the Epopt 23:30, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Accept to consider slow revert wars Fred Bauder 10:58, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Accept. --Neutralitytalk 06:43, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Temporary injunction (none)

[edit] Final decision

[edit] Principles

[edit] Sustained edit warring

2) Sustained edit warring is harmful to Wikipedia.

Passed 5-0 with 1 abstention

[edit] Use of Sockpuppets

3) The use of anonymous editing or sockpuppets to evade editing bans is prohibited.

Passed 5-0 with 1 abstention

[edit] Findings of fact

[edit] Prior cases

1) User:Cantus has been the subject of two prior arbitration cases. Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cantus and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cantus vs. Guanaco.

Passed 6-0


[edit] Cantus 1

1.1) The decision in the first case which involved Cantus Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cantus#Remedies provided:

1 Cantus is placed on revert parole, indefinitely, as was applied to Wik. As a result, he may not revert any page more than three times in any 24 hour period. This may be enforced by 24-hour temp-bans at sysop discretion, as per Wik.

2 Cantus is reminded to discuss matters in accordance with good Wikipedia:Wikiquette, and is instructed to not engage in personal attacks, harrassment, or provocation.

3 If Cantus gets into further sterile and pointless revert wars in the future, the Arbitration Committee may ban him from editing the pages involved in order to discourage him from wasting his valuable Wikipedia time.

Decided August 1, 2004

Passed 6-0

[edit] Cantus 2

1.2) The decision in the second case which involved Cantus, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cantus_vs._Guanaco#Remedies, provided, in relevant part:

1) Cantus is banned from editing Clitoris and Siberia and the articles' associated talk pages for a period of one year, for engaging in sterile and pointless edit wars.

3) Cantus is limited to one revert per article per 24 hour period. Should he violate this, an admin may ban him for a short period of time (up to a week).

Decided November 24, 2004

Passed 6-0


[edit] Slow revert wars

2) User:Cantus, has engaged in lengthy edit warring with respect to a number of articles, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cantus_3/Evidence#Developed_country, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cantus_3/Evidence#Template:Europe and Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cantus_3/Evidence#Terri_Schiavo

Passed 6-0


[edit] Use of sockpuppets in revert wars

2.1) User:Cantus has used sockpuppets and anonymous editing in the conduct of these revert wars.

Passed 4-0 with 1 abstention

[edit] Template talk:Infobox Biography

3) User:Cantus, after minimal discussion, made a change to Template talk:Infobox Biography which did not work on a number of pages and was strongly objected to by other editors, after a time he retracted his change, see Template_talk:Infobox_Biography#Death_information

Passed 6-0

[edit] Edit summaries

4) User:Cantus frequently does not enter adequate edit summaries, see his user contributions.

Passed 5-0 with 1 abstention

[edit] Remedies

[edit] Cantus banned from certain articles

2) User:Cantus is banned from editing the articles Developed country, Template:Europe and Terri Schiavo

Passed 6-0

[edit] Edit summaries

3) User:Cantus is reminded to provide adequate edit summaries.

Passed 6-0

[edit] Further revert limitation

4.2) User:Cantus is limited to one revert per article or other page per 30 day period. Should he violate this, an admin may ban him for a short period of time (up to a week).

Passed 4-0

[edit] Sockpuppets and reverts

5) Should User:Cantus break his revert limitation on any page by using sockpuppets or anon editing, an admin may ban him from that page for up to a month. A list of pages that Cantus is banned from shall be kept for the reference of all.

Passed 4-0

[edit] Enforcement

[edit] Enforcing bans

1) Should User:Cantus edit any article from which he is banned he may be blocked from Wikipedia for a short period, up to a week for repeat offenses.

Passed 6-0


[edit] Sockpuppets

1.1) Should User:Cantus use a verifiable sockpuppet to edit articles from which he is banned he may be blocked from Wikipedia for one month.

Passed 5-0

[edit] Log of bans and blocks

Here log any actions taken pursuant to the above remedies. Minimum information to include is the administrator's name, which user is affected, the action taken, and a brief reason.

  1. April 22, 2006, Heah (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) and Jacoplane (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) blocked Cantus for editing Developed country while banned. A difference over the block duration was resolved, and the block stood at 24 hours.
  2. 16:12, 23 April 2006 Tony_Sidaway (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) blocked Cantus with an expiry time of 1 month (Under enforcement clause 1.1 of Cantus 3, banned for one month for using verified sock to evade arbcom ban.)
    • See notice on user's talk page for further details.
  3. 14:45, 25 April 2006 Tony Sidaway blocked Kiw (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) with an expiry time of indefinite (Sock of Cantus used to evade one-month block)