Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Strider12/Proposed decision

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 13 active Arbitrators, so 7 votes are a majority.

Contents

[edit] Proposed motions

Arbitrators may place proposed motions affecting the case in this section for voting. Typical motions might be to close or dismiss a case without a full decision (a reason should normally be given), or to add an additional party (although this can also be done without a formal motion as long as the new party is on notice of the case). Suggestions by the parties or other non-arbitrators for motions or other requests should be placed on the /Workshop page for consideration and discussion.
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

A temporary injunction is a directive from the Arbitration Committee that parties to the case, or other editors notified of the injunction, do or refrain from doing something while the case is pending.

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] Purpose of Wikipedia

1) The purpose of Wikipedia is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopedia in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among contributors. Use of the site for other purposes, such as advocacy or propaganda, furtherance of outside conflicts, publishing or promoting original research, and political or ideological struggle, is prohibited.

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Decorum

2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system, is prohibited.

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Editorial process

3) Wikipedia works by building consensus. This is done through the use of polite discussion—involving the wider community, if necessary—and dispute resolution, rather than through disruptive editing. Editors are each responsible for noticing when a debate is escalating into an edit war, and for helping the debate move to better approaches by discussing their differences rationally. Edit-warring, whether by reversion or otherwise, is prohibited; this is so even when the disputed content is clearly problematic, with only a few exceptions. Revert rules should not be construed as an entitlement or inalienable right to revert, nor do they endorse reverts as an editing technique.

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Template

4) {text of proposed principle}

Support:
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Strider12

1) Strider12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) has engaged in a variety of disruptive and unseemly behavior, including edit-warring ([1]); gaming the system ([2]); personal attacks, incivility, and assumptions of bad faith ([3]); and attempts to use Wikipedia as a battleground along ideological lines ([4]).

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Provided diffs; on Rfc, evidence page, and here; show a lack of decorum that is interfering with consensus discussions. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Template

2) {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] Strider12 banned

1) Strider12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Strider12 has strong views not just about the topic but about other editors that is interfering with her ability to engage in productive consensus discussion. Feedback on the RFC did not help. I see no other choice at this point. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Oppose:
Abstain:

[edit] Strider12 mentored

2) Should Strider12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) resume editing Wikipedia, she shall be assigned a volunteer mentor, who will be asked to assist Strider12 in understanding and following policy and community practice to a sufficient level that continued sanctions will not be necessary.

Support:
  1. Kirill 19:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. This is necessary for her to return. FloNight♥♥♥ 22:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. James F. (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  7. Paul August ☎ 17:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:07, 21 April 2008 (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 pass. Will close around 15:00 most likely. Daniel (talk) 02:25, 21 April 2008 (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. Move to close. Paul August ☎ 17:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Close. Kirill 20:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. Done. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. Close. FloNight♥♥♥ 01:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)