Case Opened on 11:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Case Closed on 20:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Review Opened on 01:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Review Closed on 23:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC) See motion to dismiss on review page
Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this case. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.
Arbitrators, the parties, and other editors may suggest proposed principles, findings, and remedies at /Workshop. That page may also be used for general comments on the evidence. Arbitrators will then vote on a final decision in the case at /Proposed decision.
Once the case is closed, editors may add to the #Log of blocks and bans as needed, but closed cases should not be edited otherwise. Please raise any questions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requests for clarification.
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Requests for comment
Statement by uninvolved Durova (intiator)
Certified.Gangsta and Ideogram have disputed for months on articles that relate to Taiwan and have each accumulated five userblocks, most of which are for WP:3RR and edit warring. I initiate this arbitration request in response to a community ban proposal initiated by Ideogram at WP:CN#Certified.Gangsta_redux. Although the editor has downgraded the ban proposal to a 1RR proposal, the extensive revert warring history of both these editors renders any unilateral community sanction inappropriate. It is appears that the CN proposal is a political attempt to get the upper hand in an editing dispute - and even if that appearance proves to be mistaken the CN thread could become a dangerous precedent if it proceeds there. Durova Charge! 13:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Could you please describe the nature of the remedies you would hope the Committee might issue? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not certain at this point because my involvement in this issue has been rather slight: I made a brief attempt to mentor CG shortly before last month's resumption of edit warring and I've read the RFC. Kept my distance until yesterday's WP:CN thread where I intervened on the basis of community sanction principles. So I hesitate to attempt any reply to this question, but mutual 1RR or topic banning come to mind. I offered WP:CEM and Ideogram declined it. Durova Charge! 15:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Statement by User:Ideogram
I have extensively documented three edit wars focused on Gangsta at the RFC above. Note especially that I was not involved in any of the three edit wars and that many editors have endorsed my summary. At this point I do not see a need to document Gangsta's behavior further.
As for my block log, let me note that two of the blocks were overturned, and the other two involved my reversion of my own comments back to talk pages, not article content. If my block log becomes an issue in this case, I will expect a ruling on whether deletion of other people's comments from talk pages is acceptable. -- Ideogram 07:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I note that Blnguyen was one of those who blocked me, a block that was overturned. Should he recuse? -- Ideogram 07:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Responding to Jumping cheese's categorization of my political views: I am not really involved in Taiwanese politics and don't think I can be categorized as Pan-Blue or Pan-Green. And HongQiGong is interested in Hong Kong, not Taiwan. -- Ideogram 18:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/1/0)
Accept. Recused per reminder. Prolific edit-warring appears to be prevalent. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 06:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)- Accept. Edit-warring is unacceptable, especially to this degree. Matthew Brown (Morven) ( T: C) 08:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept. Mackensen (talk) 15:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 23:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept FloNight 01:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Temporary injunction (none)
Final decision Information
All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)
Consensus
1) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. The dispute resolution process is designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked. Sustained edit-warring is not an appropriate method of resolving disputes, and is wasteful of resources and destructive to morale.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Tu quoque
2) Wikipedia editors are expected to adhere to policy regardless of the behavior of those they are in disputes with; inappropriate behavior by others does not legitimize one's own.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Disruptive editing
3) Users who engage in disruptive editing may be banned from affected articles or in extreme cases the site. Other remedies, such as revert paroles, may be used to assist an editor in contributing in a more collaborative manner.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Locus of dispute
1) The dispute revolves primarily around a number of articles related to Taiwan (particularly Culture of Taiwan); other articles have also become forums for the dispute as parties have moved to editing them.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Certified.Gangsta
2) Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has engaged in extensive edit-warring ( [1]).
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram
3) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has engaged in extensive edit-warring ( [2]).
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram's stance
4) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) believes that poor behavior is acceptable when another editor has engaged in it first; he has stated that "I allow other people to show me what rules they play by and then play by their rules" ( [3]).
Passed 6 to 1, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
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.
Certified.Gangsta placed on revert parole
1) Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
This edit restriction was lifted, see here. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram placed on revert parole
2) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram admonished
3) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to fully adhere to all Wikipedia policies regardless of the degree to which other editors may or may not do so.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Enforcement by block
1) Violations of paroles and probations imposed on parties of this case shall be enforced by blocks for an appropriate period of time. Blocks and bans are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram#Log of blocks and bans.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours due to violation of revert parole— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 09:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 48 hours due to violation of revert parole on Political status of Taiwan ( [4] and [5]). Sean William 21:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 1 week due to multiple violations of revert parole. He made several reverts across multiple articles without discussion on the talk page as required by parole. Vassyana 16:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Removal of restrictions on Certified.Gangsta
December 16, 2007, the Arbitration Committee announced that it has determined to lift the restrictions on Certified.Gangsta imposed under this decision. See discussion from WP:RfAr moved to talkpage. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 21:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Case Opened on 11:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Case Closed on 20:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Review Opened on 01:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Review Closed on 23:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC) See motion to dismiss on review page
Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this case. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.
Arbitrators, the parties, and other editors may suggest proposed principles, findings, and remedies at /Workshop. That page may also be used for general comments on the evidence. Arbitrators will then vote on a final decision in the case at /Proposed decision.
Once the case is closed, editors may add to the #Log of blocks and bans as needed, but closed cases should not be edited otherwise. Please raise any questions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requests for clarification.
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Requests for comment
Statement by uninvolved Durova (intiator)
Certified.Gangsta and Ideogram have disputed for months on articles that relate to Taiwan and have each accumulated five userblocks, most of which are for WP:3RR and edit warring. I initiate this arbitration request in response to a community ban proposal initiated by Ideogram at WP:CN#Certified.Gangsta_redux. Although the editor has downgraded the ban proposal to a 1RR proposal, the extensive revert warring history of both these editors renders any unilateral community sanction inappropriate. It is appears that the CN proposal is a political attempt to get the upper hand in an editing dispute - and even if that appearance proves to be mistaken the CN thread could become a dangerous precedent if it proceeds there. Durova Charge! 13:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Could you please describe the nature of the remedies you would hope the Committee might issue? The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not certain at this point because my involvement in this issue has been rather slight: I made a brief attempt to mentor CG shortly before last month's resumption of edit warring and I've read the RFC. Kept my distance until yesterday's WP:CN thread where I intervened on the basis of community sanction principles. So I hesitate to attempt any reply to this question, but mutual 1RR or topic banning come to mind. I offered WP:CEM and Ideogram declined it. Durova Charge! 15:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Statement by User:Ideogram
I have extensively documented three edit wars focused on Gangsta at the RFC above. Note especially that I was not involved in any of the three edit wars and that many editors have endorsed my summary. At this point I do not see a need to document Gangsta's behavior further.
As for my block log, let me note that two of the blocks were overturned, and the other two involved my reversion of my own comments back to talk pages, not article content. If my block log becomes an issue in this case, I will expect a ruling on whether deletion of other people's comments from talk pages is acceptable. -- Ideogram 07:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I note that Blnguyen was one of those who blocked me, a block that was overturned. Should he recuse? -- Ideogram 07:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Responding to Jumping cheese's categorization of my political views: I am not really involved in Taiwanese politics and don't think I can be categorized as Pan-Blue or Pan-Green. And HongQiGong is interested in Hong Kong, not Taiwan. -- Ideogram 18:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/1/0)
Accept. Recused per reminder. Prolific edit-warring appears to be prevalent. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 06:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)- Accept. Edit-warring is unacceptable, especially to this degree. Matthew Brown (Morven) ( T: C) 08:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept. Mackensen (talk) 15:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 23:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Accept FloNight 01:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Temporary injunction (none)
Final decision Information
All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)
Consensus
1) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. The dispute resolution process is designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked. Sustained edit-warring is not an appropriate method of resolving disputes, and is wasteful of resources and destructive to morale.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Tu quoque
2) Wikipedia editors are expected to adhere to policy regardless of the behavior of those they are in disputes with; inappropriate behavior by others does not legitimize one's own.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Disruptive editing
3) Users who engage in disruptive editing may be banned from affected articles or in extreme cases the site. Other remedies, such as revert paroles, may be used to assist an editor in contributing in a more collaborative manner.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Locus of dispute
1) The dispute revolves primarily around a number of articles related to Taiwan (particularly Culture of Taiwan); other articles have also become forums for the dispute as parties have moved to editing them.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Certified.Gangsta
2) Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has engaged in extensive edit-warring ( [1]).
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram
3) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has engaged in extensive edit-warring ( [2]).
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram's stance
4) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) believes that poor behavior is acceptable when another editor has engaged in it first; he has stated that "I allow other people to show me what rules they play by and then play by their rules" ( [3]).
Passed 6 to 1, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
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.
Certified.Gangsta placed on revert parole
1) Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
This edit restriction was lifted, see here. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:48, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram placed on revert parole
2) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Ideogram admonished
3) Ideogram ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished to fully adhere to all Wikipedia policies regardless of the degree to which other editors may or may not do so.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Enforcement by block
1) Violations of paroles and probations imposed on parties of this case shall be enforced by blocks for an appropriate period of time. Blocks and bans are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram#Log of blocks and bans.
Passed 7 to 0, 20:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours due to violation of revert parole— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍) 09:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 48 hours due to violation of revert parole on Political status of Taiwan ( [4] and [5]). Sean William 21:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Certified.Gangsta ( talk · contribs) blocked for 1 week due to multiple violations of revert parole. He made several reverts across multiple articles without discussion on the talk page as required by parole. Vassyana 16:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Removal of restrictions on Certified.Gangsta
December 16, 2007, the Arbitration Committee announced that it has determined to lift the restrictions on Certified.Gangsta imposed under this decision. See discussion from WP:RfAr moved to talkpage. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 21:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)