- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Article | Admin Cailil: Definition of Civility |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | 13:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC) |
| Requesting party | LevenBoy ( talk) |
| Parties involved | LevenBoy ( talk · contribs · logs), admin Cailil ( talk · contribs · logs) |
Request details
Where is the dispute?
WP:BISE and other British Isles related topics, see British Isles naming dispute
Who is involved?
What is the dispute?
On the Wikipedia, there exists a degree of tension surrounding various Irish-related issues which have found their way as far as Arbcom in the past. These have persisted for years. Cailil is an admin who has become involved in these and is lobbied by main protagonists.
Early this year he placed a civility sanction, and blocks, upon me whilst I was unable to question, respond or defend myself against it. At the same time, there was an outstanding false and prejudicial sockpuppet accusation being held against me which he referenced but which was found to be most certainly not related. See: [ [1]]. Note, he was requested to delay the accusation until the sockpuppet case was closed but did not. In my opinion, given the timing, the sanction/block was hurried through.
What would you like to change about this?
I now find myself in a position where I face Cailil as my "judge, jury and executioner" based on an accusation or finding made by him and under the threat of being blocked from editing the Wikipedia. I find this unfair and unethical and the sanction imprecise.
I am very happy to accept community based sanctions if I so deserve them but in this case I believe that the sanction should be reviewed.
How do you think we can help?
In the first place, I want a safe space with a third party as a witness, offering a fair and impartial view, where I can discuss my grievances and gain clarification without the incessant threats to my contribution here.
Mediator notes
This is not a content dispute. A disruptive editor is attempting to game the system and purposefully inflict stress on an administrator (Cailil) who is apparently acting in good faith to enforce Wikipedia's content and behavioral policies and guidelines. As such, this case should be closed with no further action. Jehochman Talk 15:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- You misunderstand what I am requesting here and are seeing it in a extremely negative light. I had nothing to do with the first discussion of my block [2] as I could not. At my first attempt of discussion, I was again blocked by Cailil in mid-discussion of the ethics of it all. [3]. One of things I want from Cailil is a clear definition of what he considers "civil" rather than the current "license to kill".
- It is a trust building exercise between him and I. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 16:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Administrative notes
I'm sure whether this something the Mediation Cabal can help with. It's possible this is closer to an WP:Editor Assistance case. PhilKnight ( talk) 21:03, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Phil but, no. I do not need assistance. I am perfectly acquainted with policy. We are well beyond that at WP:BISE. What I want is an open, safe and mediated discussion with Cailil and a genuinely independent or non-involved third party to look at the issues. I think Cailil stepped clearly over the line pushing through sanctions without waiting or allowing for a defence, and is going even beyond that now.
- As for "community discussion", as you can see from the ANI, neither I nor Triton Rocker were able to comment or defend ourselves at the time. HE was requested to wait. The entire report was framed within a highly prejudicial checkuser in which I was cleared. The only so-called "community" involved were the usual "contributors" to the British Isles renaming dispute except one, Ncmvocalist, who vote with a strong oppose.
- This neither fits a Third Opinion nor a RfC/User although technically I think I could call that. I see mediation as a happy medium and a non-confrontational way of doing so. By all accounts Cailil is an intelligent person, I am sure he cope with it. I have no idea this has to do with anyone else (below). I had no idea even mediation was an open forum for political lobbying and smear campaigns. This is typical of why I precisely think this issue has reached the point of requiring mediation.
- For the record, so far as the accusations of "forum shopping" go. Yes, I am basically working my way through all the other options I have to try before taking matters to Arbcom. I would appreciate your consideration of it. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 12:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Discussion
- I was not notified of this until another user posted to my page. LevenBoy was restricted per WP:GS/BI and the sanction imposed after a community discussion [4]. This is not a content dispute. And I am not in a position to redefine WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL and WP:TPG for LevenBoy. LB had previously raised this precise issue at WP:AN (in October) where the community reconfirmed the sanctions [5]. And another user User:LemonMOnday did the same again on ANI [6] already-- Cailil talk 17:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Forum shopping and/or game playing by a long term disruptive editor against an admin prepared to enforced civility. Should be speedily dismissed as its pretty clearly an attempt to create noise to cover up other activities (see current ANI posting. -- Snowded TALK 17:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- I suggest we let LB have his Sanctions reviewed by the community, when the current Duck case is resolved. Though it'll take up time, it's not gonna harm anybody. As for administrator Cailil? he's doing a great job, enforcing the sanctions. GoodDay ( talk) 17:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- GD, please explain.
LemonMonday
Talk
18:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Have the sanctions review, it's not gonna do any harm.
GoodDay (
talk)
18:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Except they have been 4 times already GD. And LM was asking about your reference to WP:DUCK--
Cailil
talk
19:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, they're a bit like some SPIs. LemonMonday Talk 19:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Except they have been 4 times already GD. And LM was asking about your reference to WP:DUCK--
Cailil
talk
19:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Have the sanctions review, it's not gonna do any harm.
GoodDay (
talk)
18:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Allow for a 5th time, but that's it (on the occasion that the community upholds sanctions again). GoodDay ( talk) 19:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you people are talking about. Please, this is between Cailil and I and has nothing to do with whatever you are dumping here. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 12:52, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Article | Admin Cailil: Definition of Civility |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | 13:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC) |
| Requesting party | LevenBoy ( talk) |
| Parties involved | LevenBoy ( talk · contribs · logs), admin Cailil ( talk · contribs · logs) |
Request details
Where is the dispute?
WP:BISE and other British Isles related topics, see British Isles naming dispute
Who is involved?
What is the dispute?
On the Wikipedia, there exists a degree of tension surrounding various Irish-related issues which have found their way as far as Arbcom in the past. These have persisted for years. Cailil is an admin who has become involved in these and is lobbied by main protagonists.
Early this year he placed a civility sanction, and blocks, upon me whilst I was unable to question, respond or defend myself against it. At the same time, there was an outstanding false and prejudicial sockpuppet accusation being held against me which he referenced but which was found to be most certainly not related. See: [ [1]]. Note, he was requested to delay the accusation until the sockpuppet case was closed but did not. In my opinion, given the timing, the sanction/block was hurried through.
What would you like to change about this?
I now find myself in a position where I face Cailil as my "judge, jury and executioner" based on an accusation or finding made by him and under the threat of being blocked from editing the Wikipedia. I find this unfair and unethical and the sanction imprecise.
I am very happy to accept community based sanctions if I so deserve them but in this case I believe that the sanction should be reviewed.
How do you think we can help?
In the first place, I want a safe space with a third party as a witness, offering a fair and impartial view, where I can discuss my grievances and gain clarification without the incessant threats to my contribution here.
Mediator notes
This is not a content dispute. A disruptive editor is attempting to game the system and purposefully inflict stress on an administrator (Cailil) who is apparently acting in good faith to enforce Wikipedia's content and behavioral policies and guidelines. As such, this case should be closed with no further action. Jehochman Talk 15:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- You misunderstand what I am requesting here and are seeing it in a extremely negative light. I had nothing to do with the first discussion of my block [2] as I could not. At my first attempt of discussion, I was again blocked by Cailil in mid-discussion of the ethics of it all. [3]. One of things I want from Cailil is a clear definition of what he considers "civil" rather than the current "license to kill".
- It is a trust building exercise between him and I. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 16:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Administrative notes
I'm sure whether this something the Mediation Cabal can help with. It's possible this is closer to an WP:Editor Assistance case. PhilKnight ( talk) 21:03, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Phil but, no. I do not need assistance. I am perfectly acquainted with policy. We are well beyond that at WP:BISE. What I want is an open, safe and mediated discussion with Cailil and a genuinely independent or non-involved third party to look at the issues. I think Cailil stepped clearly over the line pushing through sanctions without waiting or allowing for a defence, and is going even beyond that now.
- As for "community discussion", as you can see from the ANI, neither I nor Triton Rocker were able to comment or defend ourselves at the time. HE was requested to wait. The entire report was framed within a highly prejudicial checkuser in which I was cleared. The only so-called "community" involved were the usual "contributors" to the British Isles renaming dispute except one, Ncmvocalist, who vote with a strong oppose.
- This neither fits a Third Opinion nor a RfC/User although technically I think I could call that. I see mediation as a happy medium and a non-confrontational way of doing so. By all accounts Cailil is an intelligent person, I am sure he cope with it. I have no idea this has to do with anyone else (below). I had no idea even mediation was an open forum for political lobbying and smear campaigns. This is typical of why I precisely think this issue has reached the point of requiring mediation.
- For the record, so far as the accusations of "forum shopping" go. Yes, I am basically working my way through all the other options I have to try before taking matters to Arbcom. I would appreciate your consideration of it. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 12:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Discussion
- I was not notified of this until another user posted to my page. LevenBoy was restricted per WP:GS/BI and the sanction imposed after a community discussion [4]. This is not a content dispute. And I am not in a position to redefine WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:CIVIL and WP:TPG for LevenBoy. LB had previously raised this precise issue at WP:AN (in October) where the community reconfirmed the sanctions [5]. And another user User:LemonMOnday did the same again on ANI [6] already-- Cailil talk 17:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Forum shopping and/or game playing by a long term disruptive editor against an admin prepared to enforced civility. Should be speedily dismissed as its pretty clearly an attempt to create noise to cover up other activities (see current ANI posting. -- Snowded TALK 17:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- I suggest we let LB have his Sanctions reviewed by the community, when the current Duck case is resolved. Though it'll take up time, it's not gonna harm anybody. As for administrator Cailil? he's doing a great job, enforcing the sanctions. GoodDay ( talk) 17:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- GD, please explain.
LemonMonday
Talk
18:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Have the sanctions review, it's not gonna do any harm.
GoodDay (
talk)
18:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Except they have been 4 times already GD. And LM was asking about your reference to WP:DUCK--
Cailil
talk
19:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, they're a bit like some SPIs. LemonMonday Talk 19:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Except they have been 4 times already GD. And LM was asking about your reference to WP:DUCK--
Cailil
talk
19:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Have the sanctions review, it's not gonna do any harm.
GoodDay (
talk)
18:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Allow for a 5th time, but that's it (on the occasion that the community upholds sanctions again). GoodDay ( talk) 19:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you people are talking about. Please, this is between Cailil and I and has nothing to do with whatever you are dumping here. -- LevenBoy ( talk) 12:52, 24 November 2010 (UTC)