Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lapsed Pacifist/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop 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.
  • 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 she/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 Arbitrator is recused and 1 is inactive, so 7 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 /Workshop.

[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] Disruptive editing

1) A user who disrupts Wikipedia articles by edit warring regarding use of point of view language may be banned from the affected articles, in extreme cases from the site.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Locus of dispute

1) The locus of this dispute is the edits to articles which concern the conflict in Northern Ireland and associated subjects.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Habitual point of view editing

2) Lapsed_Pacifist (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) has habitually engaged in point of view editing, inserting the point of view labeling language preferred by Irish Nationalists, sometimes edit warring for months, see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lapsed Pacifist/Evidence#Evidence presented by Fear.C3.89IREANN.5C.28caint.29.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Departure of Lapsed Pacifist

3) Upon acceptance of this Arbitration case, Lapsed Pacifist ceased editing Wikipedia under that user name. No clear evidence exists that he has continued to edit anonymously or under any other account.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (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] Lapsed Pacifist banned from affected articles

1) Lapsed Pacifist is banned indefinitely from articles which relate to the conflict in Northern Ireland. The ban is intended to include any page in Wikipedia which Lapsed Pacifist engages in a dispute related in any way to the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed enforcement

[edit] Enforcement by block

1) If Lapsed Pacifist edits any article from which he is banned, he may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeat violations. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lapsed Pacifist#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:
  1. Fred Bauder 18:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  2. James F. (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  4. Jayjg (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews 21:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  6. ➥the Epopt 20:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  7. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
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.

[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. Sam Korn (smoddy) 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
  2. Close. Jayjg (talk) 19:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
  3. Close. Charles Matthews 19:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
  4. Close. James F. (talk) 08:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)