Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Saladin1970 appeal/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miscellany for deletion This miscellaneous page was nominated for deletion on 6 July 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Contents

[edit] Proposed principles

[edit] Administrative privileges

1) Punative administrative actions are to follow Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. While the decision to apply a block is up to the individual administrator, the action should not violate existing policy. Wikipedia:Ban#Decision_to_ban Administrators who grossly violate policy risk losing their privileges.

Support:
  1. Throwaway2 08:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banning

2) The decision to ban a user can arise from four places, the Wikipedia community, the Arbitration Committee, Jimbo Wales and the Wikimedia board of trustees. The decision can not arise from one individual administrator unless there is a community consensus behind the decision.

Support:
  1. Throwaway2 08:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Wrongful ban by SlimVirgin and JayJg

1) Jayjg (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) and SlimVirgin (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) indefinite block of Saladin1970 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) violated Wikipedia's blocking policy.

Support:
  1. Throwaway2 08:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Engaging in wheel warring

2) Template:AdminSlimVirgin engaged in wheel warring when she reverted Ryan_Delaney (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights) reduction of the block to one week.

Support:
  1. Throwaway2 08:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Genuine comment - there's a typo or two in the "proposed final decision"

There's a missing word "is". But I don't wish to pass myself off as an arbitrator by making said change.

1) A user who grossly and repeatedly violates Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines may be banned indefinitely if there is a general community consensus that that there is little hope that they will ever edit productively Wikipedia:Ban#Decision to ban. The touchstone of an appropriate "ban by the community" is that there [IS] no administrator who after examining the matter is willing to lift or reduce the ban.


And there's a disconnect:

2) A user who engages in sustained aggressive biased editing may be banned from affected articles. In extreme cases from the entire site.

which should perhaps be:

2) A user who engages in sustained aggressive biased editing may be banned from affected articles, and in extreme cases from the entire site.

although that's just a matter of style of course...

TheGrappler 15:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)