From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, Arbitrators may place proposals which are ready for voting here. Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain. Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed. 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. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case, there are 10 active Arbitrators of whom none are recused, so 6 votes are a majority.

Contents 1 Motions and requests by the parties 1.1 Template 2 Proposed temporary injunctions 2.1 Template 2.2 Template 2.3 Template 3 Proposed final decision 3.1 Proposed principles 3.1.1 Courtesy 3.1.2 Compliance 3.1.3 Consensus on controversial topics 3.1.4 Template 3.2 Proposed findings of fact 3.2.1 Locus of dispute 3.2.2 Maurice27 3.2.3 Template 3.3 Proposed remedies 3.3.1 Maurice27 banned 3.3.1.1 ... for 30 days 3.3.2 Parties encouraged 3.3.3 Template 3.4 Proposed enforcement 3.4.1 Template 3.5 Discussion by Arbitrators 3.5.1 General 3.6 Motion to close 3.6.1 Implementation notes 3.6.2 Vote

[edit] Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop. Motions which are accepted for consideration and which require a vote will be placed here by the Arbitrators for voting.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed motion}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[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] Template

2) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed final decision

[edit] Proposed principles

[edit] Courtesy

1) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment. Personal attacks are not acceptable.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 13:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
5. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
6. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
7. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Compliance

2) Wikipedia editors are expected to make a good faith effort to comply with policy.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 13:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
5. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
6. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
7. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Consensus on controversial topics

3) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. It is reasonable to expect that this process will require significantly more time and effort when dealing with disputed or controversial article topics than it would otherwise.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 13:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
5. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
6. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
7. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

4) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Locus of dispute

1) The dispute revolves around the political status of Catalonia as well as numerous associated issues, including political, linguistic, and cultural concerns.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 13:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
5. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
6. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
7. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Maurice27

2) Maurice27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) has an extensive history of personal attacks, for which he has been blocked numerous times, and for extended periods. He has demonstrated a clear unwillingness to abide by Wikipedia's conduct policies, and has expressed his contempt for them ([1]).

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 13:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
5. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
6. I support the first sentence more than the second, but there's truth to both. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC). Too strong. I don't believe this is supported by the evidence page.
2. For instance, the most recent retracted indef block does not constitute trolling or vandalism. Unless we expect to classify Barack Obama to be of Kenyan "nationality", then that edit is appropriate. The edit summary "stupid user" is not ideal, but lots of admins would put things there like "rv troll" and nothing would happen. The block before that, the user made a jibe about "little boy", hardly anything worthy of a week. Making scatological analogies about the quality of articles are not personal attacks. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

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] Maurice27 banned

1) Maurice27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. Fred Bauder 13:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC). I would support a brief suspension, 30 days for example.
2. Yes, I think so. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
3. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
5. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Abstain:

[edit] ... for 30 days

1.1) Maurice27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of 30 days.

Support:

1. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
2. Second choice; considering the length of previous blocks, I rather doubt this will do much good. Kirill 20:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
3. Second choice Fred Bauder 13:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
4. See if this works. If not then a ban by the community or the Committee is next. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
5. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
6. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Parties encouraged

2) The parties to the underlying content disputes are encouraged to continue with the normal consensus-building process to produce high-quality articles.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
2. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 04:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
4. Fred Bauder 13:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
5. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
6. FloNight♥♥♥ 18:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
7. SimonP 13:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
8. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 09:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed enforcement

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

[edit] Motion to close

[edit] Implementation notes

Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

• All proposals pass except the one-year ban on Maurice27. The 30-day ban passes instead. Newyorkbrad 16:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vote

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. Close, looks like we're done here. Kirill 16:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
2. Close. Done. FloNight♥♥♥ 20:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
3. Close Fred Bauder 13:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
4. Close. SimonP 13:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)