Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Zivinbudas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration

1 Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
2 Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
3 Zivinbudas access to Wikipedia
4 Action?
5 Thanks
6 Insanity!
7 sockpuppets
- 7.1 anon ip's

[edit] Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

[edit] Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

Zivinbudas has been asked several times to be more cooperative and less aggresive, both on his talk page and on the talk pages of the respective articles. In most cases to no effect. He was also reported in the Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR several times for violation of three revert rule (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Finally, following his revert war on Indo-European languages a RfC process was started, of which Zivinbudas was notified. Yet, the only response was vandalisation of the RfC page by an anonymous user from the same IP range he has been frequently using ([5], [6], [7]).

After the failure of that process due to lack of cooperation from the side of Zivinbudas, it is clear that filing a request for mediation would be equally fruitless.

[edit] Zivinbudas access to Wikipedia

This user has continued to revert war (e.g. here and here) on Baltic pages. There are so many I simply cannot protect them all - this editor is already responsible for more protected pages on Wikipedia than all other editors put together! So I have again wound up blocking the entire Lithuanian ISP he is using. (I am working with the other Lithuanian editor who is affected by this to allow that editor to continue to edit.)

This means that there will be a delay in any possible response to this Arbitration case. I note that this user made all those edits (above) since the arbitration was filed, and didn't bother to reply on the arbitration issues, so I gather they just don't care about this anyway. I imagine they can email any reaction they do have to an ArbComm member, who can post it for them - I will point this out on their Talk: page. Noel (talk) 19:50, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Action?

I am unfamiliar with RfA procedures, but it is almost two weeks since this page has been alive. Is anybody going to take any decision or is some evidence missing or what? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 21:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I believe there may be not enough active members of Arbitration Committee in the holiday period ? --Lysy (talk) 10:09, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to try and speed things up on this one. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 16:23, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

This would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:52, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I'm glad that this got taken care of... but I wish I'd been around at the time to see it happen, instead of having lost my internet access. Oh well...glad to see that things have been taken care of. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 00:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)