Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath/Proposed decision
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Arbitrators active on this case
Active:
- Blnguyen
- FloNight
- Fred Bauder
- Jdforrester
- Jpgordon
- Kirill Lokshin
- Mackensen
- Matthew Brown (Morven)
- Paul August
- UninvitedCompany
Away/inactive:
- Charles Matthews
- Flcelloguy
- Neutrality (Ben)
- Raul654
- SimonP
- To update this listing, edit this template and scroll down until you find the right list of arbitrators.
[edit] Susanbryce reminded
I think it would be helpful to Susanbryce for this remedy to link specific policies and guidelines. / edg ☺ ☭ 18:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've added some links to principle #1 to help address this. Kirill 18:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Form of decision
Although quoting from the personal attacks with which RodentofDeath is charged gives a vivid flavor of the problematic user conduct at issue, I would be reluctant to see them quoted at length in the final decision. I suggest that the Clerk be authorized to replace the quotations with links before the decision becomes final and official. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Moved comment
Moved from Proposed decision page. Normally, only Arbitrators and clerks edit Proposed decision pages.
- it may be helpful to keep in mind that complaints on susanbryce's activities started before i joined wikipedia and will not doubt continue if she keeps editing articles she has a conflict of interest in. an example is here.RodentofDeath (talk) 11:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
FloNight (talk) 12:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Original research?
how is posting the contents of a newspaper article and a senate press release original research? if someone is named in the press release and in the newspaper article how is this an attack? RodentofDeath (talk) 05:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
perhaps people are not reading the citation provided in the edit described.[1] here is an excerpt:
Revilla was referring to the allegations made by a certain Susan Bryce who instigated a worldwide petition through www.petitiononline.com. Her article stated that young Filipinas are forced to work up to 20 hours a day as prostitutes in the Angeles city.
Based on the petition letter, which already gathered 2,167 signatories, Pinay sex slaves in Angeles City have an average of 100 customers a week in the sex camps operated by foreigners-Australians, Americans and British.
The complaint also stated that corrupt police, military and city hall officials protect the prostitution dens and the Pinay sex slaves are locked away to sleep, watched over by armed security guards who carry batons, electric prods and shotguns.
"An estimated 150,000 girls work in Angeles City, Philippines as prostitutes, of that about 30,000 are girls as young as six years of age. Despite the fact that prostitution is illegal in Angeles not one person has been convicted of this crime. In the last twenty years in Angeles City, Philippines more than 300,000 women and children have died in the prostitution death camps of Angeles," the Bryce report said.
Bryce added that there is a place in Fields Avenue in Angeles City that looks like a multi-storey restaurant in the outside but is actually a prostitution den. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RodentofDeath (talk • contribs) 05:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Majority?
If 5 votes are now a majority as the list here on the Talk page and the clerks closing statement indicate, then the top of the page should be altered to reflect that, yes? Eluchil404 (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- wouldnt 6 be a majority, 5 a deadlock?RodentofDeath (talk) 08:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ten arbitrators are active on this case (the list above is correct), so a majority is six. The implementation note contained an error and I have removed it. It will be updated when the required majority have agreed on a remedy or remedies. The Clerks apologize for any confusion. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed findings of fact
Replying here since this item is not on the Workshop page.
[edit] Original research by Susanbryce
I agree the population edit is WP:OR. The change of classification edit looks to me more like a misunderstanding that an objective system of classification was in use. The Phillipines regional system for classification of cities was confusing for other editors months later.[2].
I don't want to defend all of Susanbryce's edits, but for what it's worth, both of these edits are from 2006. / edg ☺ ☭ 19:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- and there's more.[3] she has a long history of claiming Angeles is a slum city even though it has been pointed out to her numberous times it is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RodentofDeath (talk • contribs) 08:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed remedies
[edit] RodentofDeath banned
I understand the customary ban is for one year. However ...
"Should be indefinite. This is not an editor." – Fred Bauder[4]
... there seems to be some Arbitrator support for a permanent ban. Can this please be voted on? / edg ☺ ☭ 19:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nah. If the community wants to do an outright ban it can. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Okay I guess. This comment by FloNight led me to believe this wouldn't need to be taken to both ArbCom and the Community. / edg ☺ ☭ 22:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- 2nd such comment, Morven this time.[5] I'm just sayin'. / edg ☺ ☭ 23:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I also think it should be indefinite; but we just don't do that. (If the community wishes to empower us to make permanent bans, I suppose we could live with that; but I like the symbolism of capital punishment being the prerogative of the community, not of ArbCom.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- 2nd such comment, Morven this time.[5] I'm just sayin'. / edg ☺ ☭ 23:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
