This is a page for working on arbitration decisions. The arbitrators, parties to the case, and other editors may draft proposals and post them to this page for review and comments. Proposals may include proposed general principles, findings of fact, remedies, and enforcement provisions—the same format as is used in Arbitration Committee decisions. The bottom of the page may be used for overall analysis of the /Evidence and for general discussion of the case.
Any user may edit this workshop page. Please sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they believe should be part of the final decision on the /Proposed decision page, which only arbitrators may edit, for voting.
1) Fred Bauder has made an unfounded personal attack against Notmyrealname, one of the parties to this case. See [1]. Notmyrealname 02:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
2)
3)
1) He was blocked for Legal Threats. It was a legitimate block and it appears to have arisen out of frustration with this proceeding. He does not appear to be disruptive and his participation here doesn't inhibit participation by other editors in the same way it stifles work on articles. In fact, being blocked under the cloud of threat is probably more inhibitive than hearing his concerns in his own voice. -- Tbeatty 05:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
2) Reverse Unblock of NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) above. He was unblocked so that he could participate in this proceeding, yet he refuses to participate, and uses the extended duration of this proceeding (extended by his refusal to participate) as an excuse to continue with his troublesome editing pattern. - Crockspot 17:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
3)
4)
1) The special criteria set forth in WP:BLP regarding the use of categories extends, in principle, to the use of Wikipedia's editorial voice in article content.
2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment. Personal attacks are not acceptable.
3) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. The request for comment 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.
4) Wikipedia editors are expected to work collaboratively to improve the encyclopedia. Working on an article does not entitle an editor to own the article, it is important to respect the work of fellow contributors.
5) As noted in Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Well_known_public_figures the applicability of Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons varies with the situation. What is appropriate in a particular instance is determined by sound editorial judgment.
6) Excessive identification of people as "Jews" is inappropriate. Generally, some nexus of the individual with Jewish ethnicity or religion of significance or interest must exist for identification to be appropriate.
6.1) Excessive identification of people by religion or ethnicity is inappropriate. Generally, some nexus of the individual with the ethnicity or religion of significance or interest must exist for identification to be appropriate. In other words, such identification represents undue weight unless either the person themselves, or reliable sources, discuss the identification.
7) When what the appropriate policy is regarding a matter is unclear, the solution is not edit warring but continued discussion and submission of the question to appropriate dispute resolution.
8) Actions taken by users in the course of a good faith dispute are generally not subject to sanction unless they violate the boundaries of reasonable behavior.
9) There is no goal so noble that it justifies the inappropriate or insensitive treatment of religion or sexual orientation regarding a living person. Editors are cautioned not to allow passion about a subject to cloud their common sense and good judgment.
10) Membership in a house of worship does not satisfy the requirement of "public self-identification" described in BLP.
11) Having a connection to Israeli policy, by itself, does not satisfy the requirement in BLP that in order to identify a person's religion, a person's beliefs must be relevant to their notable activities or public life.
12) Although not transparently understandable, the notion of Wikipedia's unattributed editorial voice, introduced by Crockspot, deserves attention. It is the the optional choices made by editors regarding article content, the discretionary choices available. Differing choices, strongly supported, offer the possibility of disputes regarding content which lie outside that part of content resolved by reference to established policy and guidelines.
13) The most effective and persuasive arguments on talk pages are usually brief and to the point. Filling up talk pages and their archives, and then demanding that new editors read all previous postings before making new edits, does not promote consensus, and is a form of edit warring.
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
1) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been blocked three times for edit warring [4] [5] [6]. He has also previously been blocked twice for disruption and incivility [7] [8]. During this arbitration case, NYScholar was blocked indefinately due to making a legal threat [9], but this was later overturned after he rescinded the threat and to take part in the case [10].
2) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been incivil towards other editors [11].
3) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has tried to enforce ownership of articles [12] [13].
4) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has edited disruptively on the Lewis Libby article [14].
5) The nexus of this dispute is repeated insertion into and removal from the Lewis Libby ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) of the information that Lewis Libby and his family are members of a Reform Jewish congregation.
6) Lewis Libby is a prominent American political operative who was convicted in 2007 of perjury related to his testimony regarding events related to his employment at the White House.
7) Due to the notoriety and prominence of the neo-cons and their strong support of the state of Israel, the ethnicity and religious orientation of prominent neo-cons is of interest, if not always of significance. See, for example, Murray Friedman. The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 0521545013
8) There is a "Jewish lobby" on Wikipedia consisting of editors who closely monitor questions concerning Israel, Zionism and related matters. From time to time these editors take exaggerated nationalist positions or display exaggerated ethnic sensitivity [15].
8.1) There is an unfortunate tendency to form cliques, factions, or lobbies based on religious, ethnic, or nationalist grounds, consisting of editors who closely monitor questions on chosen topics, and react as advocates rather than engage in reasoned and constructive debate in an effort to make the encyclopedia better.
(8.2) There is a natural tendency for editors with similar interests to monitor and edit articles on chosen topics. Although many editors voluntarily chose to participate in WikiProjects this is not required. To attribute or insinuate nefarious motives to such editors is a form of conspiracy theorizing and is not a helpful contribution in editing disputes. Notmyrealname 02:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
9) It is maintained that Jayjg played a prominent role in these incidents, engaging in biased editing and making accusations of yellow badging, see the statements by Fermat1999 and Hornplease.
10) Two editors have commented on the exaggerated response to addition of the information that Lewis Libby was Jewish to his article, see comments by Quatloo and Hornplease
11) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar adds a section about the controversy regarding Libby's ethnicity [16]
On March 16 NYScholar added a section to Lewis Libby concerning "Libby's Jewish affiliations" [17], adding more references [18] December, 2005 Tulsa Jewish Review, now removed.
These edits occurred in the context of an ongoing dispute regarding the appropriateness of identifying Libby's religious affiliation, see this comment by Crockspot from March 11 [19]. Going back earlier, a post from February 19, regarding the appropriateness of the category "Jewish American lawyer" [20].
12) The section NYScholar had added was removed, together with all references by Jayjg, with the comment "remove disputed yellow badge trivia, per WP:BLP" [21]. His first posting to the talk page regarding this matter was 4 days later alleging an unreliable source and a a violation of WP:BLP [22].
13) Libby was first identified in the article Lewis Libby as a Jew in an unsourced edit October 30, 2005 by Vulturell ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) adding the category Jewish Americans [23]. That he was a member of a reform congregation was added in an unsourced edit by an anonymous editor October 31, 2005 [24]. A link to the Temples website was added, but there is no transparent way to access a list of members on that site. This information was removed immediately by Peruvianllama ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "rvv to last by Moncrief - rm non-notable inf" [25]. Second insertion by anonymous editor. This information, together with other family information was expanded and elaborated on by Moncrief ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) in an unsourced series of edits and permitted to remain [26].
On January 13, 2006 an anonymous editor added "Libby was born into a Jewish family" as well was the category Jewish Americans in an unsourced edit [27]. This was removed by an anonymous editor August 20, 2006 [28]. On February 8 Vulturell changed category Jewish Americans to Jewish-American businesspeople [29]. On February 14 JJstroker ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) added category "Jewish liberals" This was contested by Will Beback. It was reinserted with the comment that a neo-con was a liberal [30], but removed a few days latter by JJstroker [31]. On March 14 an anonymous editor added the categories Jewish American history and Jewish American writers [32].
On March 29, 2006 (after being in the article, unsourced for 5 months) Sholom ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) removed temple affiliation information with the comment "synagogue affiliation irrelevant" [33].
On October 1, 2006 the category Jewish-American businesspeople was removed by Adam Holland as "a miscategorization" [34]. On October 11, 2006 an anonymous editor added the unsourced sentence "Libby is Jewish" [35]. TransUtopian found a source and moved it to the personal section [36].
The category Jewish American lawyers was added by an anonymous editor December 20, 2006 [37]. On December 25 the information that Libby was from a Jewish family was re-added by an anonymous editor, citing the Kampeas article as printed in the Jerusalem Post [38].
14) On September 24, 2006 NYScholar made his first edit to the article [39]. At that point two categories identifying Libby as Jewish remained but all references to Jewishness had been removed from the article.
February 10, 2007 an anonymous editor adds "Jewish-" to "American lawyer" in the introduction of the article [40]. A few edits later NYScholar adopts this edit citing the category already present [41]. 5 days later an anonymous editor removed this formulation [42]. A few edits later LittleOldMe ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverts using popups [43].
A few days later an anonymous editor in a series of edits changed "Jewish-American lawyer" to "American lawyer" with the comment "Religion not verified by citation. Nor is it relevant."; remove a link to an article on Libby at NNDB with the comment "This is a joke site."; and removed the categories Jewish American lawyers and Jewish American writers with the comment "removing extraneous categories" [44] [45] [46]. NYScholar reverted to "Jewish American lawyer", adding references, but readded only the category Jewish American lawyer [47]. Adding Kampeas article [48].
February 18, 2007 "Jewish American lawyer" again removed from the introduction by an anonymous editor [49] and immediately reverted by NYScholar [50].
15) This edit marks the entry of Isarig ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who changes "Jewish American lawyer" to "American lawyer" in the introduction with the comment "His jewishness is not relevant, and does not belong in intro". NYScholar immediately reverted with the comment "do not delete pertinent content supplied by other editors when it is sourced, notable, and verifiable: see note 3; it is notable, given that article; see categories; other eds. added this info. orig." [52]. Isarig immediately reverted with the comment "rm irrelevant info" [53]. NYScholar reverts [54]. February 20 Isarig reverts with the comment "rm irrelevant info, see Talk" [55].
Isarig made this comment on the talk page:
"You should actually read what those sources say. The Information Clearing house note says "Across the blogosphere, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel conspiracy theorists were quick to tie Libby’s Jewishness to his role in selling the Iraq war, imagining once again a neo-con cabal that has a singular agenda: promoting Israel at all costs.". WP is not the place to give credence to these anti-Semitic conspiracies which originate in blogs. Isarig 02:44, 19 February 2007" [56]
Initial discussion at Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_2#Citations_supporting_notability_and_pertinence_of_Libby.27s_being_a_.22Jewish_American_lawyer.22.
NYScholar again reverts with the comment "yes, see talk page; consensus is against removal; see the sources; it is notable, sourced, pertinent fact; stop removing it and censoring information in W articles" [57]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "your personal opinion is not a "consensus". This is not relevant and does not belong in the intor" [58]. A revert by an anonymous editor follows with the comment "rv see talk - to consensus version" [59]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "No such consensus exists, and you haven't participated in the discussion, anon wikistalker." [60]. Another revert by an anonymous editor with the comment "please Assume Good Faith." [61]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "irrelevant POV pushing. See talk" [62]. NYScholar again reverts with the comment "see nn. 3 and 4 for notability and relevance; q. in full on talk page of article; prev. editing history; other eds' agreement (consensus)" [63].
After a revert by Threeafterthree ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "please stop with insersion of ethnicity into header of article per WP:MOSBIO. I really don't care what the agenda is, this is not appropriate. Thanks" [64], NYScholar gives in and removes the supporting references with the comment "format: with "Jewish" deleted, I've deleted the citations to it; I had already included them in the family background section, where they still seem relevant" [65].
16) With the question of whether Jewish American lawyer belongs in the introduction resolved, NYScholar then placed the references to Libby's ethnicity and religious affiliations in the section "Early life and family" with the comment "fixed notes (typo corrs, format)--populated empty notes lost due to earlier changes" [66]. At this point the only language in the text was "Libby was born in New Haven, Connecticut, to a Jewish family and raised in Florida."
17) On February 25, 2007 Notmyrealname ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) removed the category Jewish American lawyers with the comment "Not mentioned in article. Is there a Catholic American Lawyers section?" [67]. NYScholar reverted with the comment "see personal history early family life etc.; restored category originally added by another earlier editor" [68]. Notmyrealname responded by removing the information that Libby was raised in a Jewish family and all references to him being Jewish with the comment "Born to a Jewish family reads akwardly and is not relevant." [69]. Notmyrealname then removed category Jewish American lawyer with the comment "This is a dubious category, and his inclusion in it is even more dubious. See my note on talk page." [70], Notmyrealname's note. Threeafterthree added back raised in a Jewish family [71]. Notmyrealname immediately reverted with the comment "This is both not relevant and akwardly written. His parents religion is not relevant to his accomplishments and noteriety." [72]. Threeafterthree again reverted with the comment "you are pretching to the choir. I agree, but this material has been added to 99% of the bios. Unless you want to remove it from the other 99%." [73]. NYScholar again adds the Kampeas article as a reference [74] and another, rather poor one, [75]. Shortly thereafter Notmyrealname deleted the poor source as unreliable [76] and removes a duplicate of the Kampeas article [77].
18) Talk:Lewis Libby ( | [[Talk:talk:Lewis Libby|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) from late February, 2007 onward contains extended debate regarding the propriety of including Lewis Libby's ethnic background and religious affiliation.
19) Libby's felony conviction and involvement with the neoconservative movement have been fodder for anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists. According to one source this has even spilled into the mainstream media "The Protocols of the Elders of Zinni. Wikipedia editors have commented on this phenomenon as part of their argument that Libby's ethnicity and religious affiliation is irrelevant or "gives credence" to such theories Isarig Humus sapiens.
20) According to a statement by Jimbo Wales, the NNDB should never be considered a WP:Reliable Source. This was one of the entries repeatedly inserted by NYScholar.
20a) Libby's religious orientation stipulated by a reliable source, namely the Tulsa Jewish Review. That publication has been published continuously for over 70 years. In the point of Libby's case it is very specific to identify his temple. There are additional online sources for Libby's Jewishness which are not reliable (and it is very revealing that an individual here has enumerated those only, and omitted this source).
Anyone may see for themselves dozens of issues they have made available of their publication in PDF format, at [78]. Upon examination any impartial observer would be quite satisfied at their pragmatism and lack of controversiality. They cannot be accused of "yellow badging" because they are intended to serve their local Jewish community. The American Jewish Periodical Center at Klau Library of Hebrew Union College would surely be happy to vouch that they are in fact a real publication: (513) 221-7444 ext. 3396 [79]. They have a run of the publication in their physical collections.
20b) The Jerusalem Post [80] [81] is a reliable source.
21) The entry lists its source as "Wikipedia." This entry was one of the references repeatedly inserted by NYScholar.
22) On February 27, 2007 Steve Dufour ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) deleted the bulk of the personal information together with all references regarding Libby including the information that was "raised in a Jewish family" with the comment "removing uncited and trivial material on living person + we can not say something happening now will be historical" [83]. Threeafterthree re-adds deleted material about Libby's ethnicity [84]. Notmyrealname reverts with the comment "There is no evidence that his family is Jewish. See larger discussion on talk page" [85]. NYScholar restores the material earlier deleted by Steve Dufour [86]. ElKevbo ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverts, complaining about the loss of intermediate edits [87].
23) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar again adds the previously deleted Category Jewish American lawyers [88].
24) Also on March 1, 2007 NYScholar added information about Libby's temple membership [89]. This information had previously been in the article but had been deleted 11 months earlier by Sholom ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "synagogue affiliation irrelevant" [90].
25) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar changes the language "Jewish family" to 'Libby was born to a "prosperous family" in New Haven, Connecticut––his father was an "investment banker"––and "raised in Florida."' [91].
26) Later on March 1, 2007 Armon ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverted to the earlier revert by ElKevbo with the comment "rv to ElKevbo this has been listed at the BLP noticebord" [92]. This discussion, the first of at least two is at this url under Lewis Libby. The complaint, by Notmyrealname, relies heavily on interpretation of Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Categories as requiring "self-identification" The result of the discussion was inconclusive. But see the style guideline Wikipedia:Categorization/Gender, race and sexuality. Another extended discussion from later in March is at [93].
27) According to WP:BLP#Categories, several requirements need to be met before category tags for religion (and sexual orientation) can be placed. The information must be discussed in the text. The person must publicly self-identify with the belief, and "the subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life, according to reliable published sources." The sources presented to date have not satisfied these criteria.
28) The Tulsa Jewish Review, a reliable source, unambiguously stipulates Libby's religious affiliation. The fact that Libby's membership and participation at temple is well-established enough for it to be published as far away as Tulsa is testimony to the public nature of his attendance. As he has taken no efforts to keep his identification private, his public participation is tantamount to self-identification. A further requirement is that "the subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life." This is true by nature of Libby's public office, as a policy-maker towards issues related to Israel, the Jewish state. Whether or not there is proven a conflict of interest in a Jewish individual making policy towards the Jewish state, it is a potential conflict of interest of the highest order and highly relevant. All conditions are thus satisfied. Quatloo 21:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
The Jerusalem Post, also a reliable source, unambiguously stipulate's Libby's religious affiliation. [94]
29) On April 29, 2007, NYScholar inserted Libby's name as the sole member listed in the Temple Rodef Shalom article 7 times, ultimately leading to a block for violating the WP:3RR. The block was extended twice for incivility. Between February 18, 2007 and June 8, 2007, NYScholar inserted links into the Lewis Libby article whose sole or primary purpose and effect were to identify Libby as Jewish 49 times. [96]
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
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.
1) NYScholar is placed on standard civility parole for one year. If he makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then he may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses.
2) NYScholar is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. If he makes any further reverts to a page, he may be blocked for up to one week.
3) If NYScholar is blocked 5 times for breaking remedies of this arbitration case, the maximum time that he may be blocked for will increase to one year.
4) NYScholar is banned indefinitely from editing the Lewis Libby article and its associated talk page.
5) {text of proposed remedy}
6) {text of proposed remedy}
7) {text of proposed remedy}
8) {text of proposed remedy}
9) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
3) {text of proposed enforcement}
4) {text of proposed enforcement}
5) {text of proposed enforcement}
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis
Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_5#Please_use_caution_on_inserting_categories Talk:Temple Rodef Shalom [97] [98] Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_6#Request_for_comment
This is a page for working on arbitration decisions. The arbitrators, parties to the case, and other editors may draft proposals and post them to this page for review and comments. Proposals may include proposed general principles, findings of fact, remedies, and enforcement provisions—the same format as is used in Arbitration Committee decisions. The bottom of the page may be used for overall analysis of the /Evidence and for general discussion of the case.
Any user may edit this workshop page. Please sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they believe should be part of the final decision on the /Proposed decision page, which only arbitrators may edit, for voting.
1) Fred Bauder has made an unfounded personal attack against Notmyrealname, one of the parties to this case. See [1]. Notmyrealname 02:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
2)
3)
1) He was blocked for Legal Threats. It was a legitimate block and it appears to have arisen out of frustration with this proceeding. He does not appear to be disruptive and his participation here doesn't inhibit participation by other editors in the same way it stifles work on articles. In fact, being blocked under the cloud of threat is probably more inhibitive than hearing his concerns in his own voice. -- Tbeatty 05:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
2) Reverse Unblock of NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) above. He was unblocked so that he could participate in this proceeding, yet he refuses to participate, and uses the extended duration of this proceeding (extended by his refusal to participate) as an excuse to continue with his troublesome editing pattern. - Crockspot 17:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
3)
4)
1) The special criteria set forth in WP:BLP regarding the use of categories extends, in principle, to the use of Wikipedia's editorial voice in article content.
2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users. Insulting and intimidating other users harms the community by creating a hostile environment. Personal attacks are not acceptable.
3) Wikipedia works by building consensus through the use of polite discussion. The request for comment 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.
4) Wikipedia editors are expected to work collaboratively to improve the encyclopedia. Working on an article does not entitle an editor to own the article, it is important to respect the work of fellow contributors.
5) As noted in Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Well_known_public_figures the applicability of Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons varies with the situation. What is appropriate in a particular instance is determined by sound editorial judgment.
6) Excessive identification of people as "Jews" is inappropriate. Generally, some nexus of the individual with Jewish ethnicity or religion of significance or interest must exist for identification to be appropriate.
6.1) Excessive identification of people by religion or ethnicity is inappropriate. Generally, some nexus of the individual with the ethnicity or religion of significance or interest must exist for identification to be appropriate. In other words, such identification represents undue weight unless either the person themselves, or reliable sources, discuss the identification.
7) When what the appropriate policy is regarding a matter is unclear, the solution is not edit warring but continued discussion and submission of the question to appropriate dispute resolution.
8) Actions taken by users in the course of a good faith dispute are generally not subject to sanction unless they violate the boundaries of reasonable behavior.
9) There is no goal so noble that it justifies the inappropriate or insensitive treatment of religion or sexual orientation regarding a living person. Editors are cautioned not to allow passion about a subject to cloud their common sense and good judgment.
10) Membership in a house of worship does not satisfy the requirement of "public self-identification" described in BLP.
11) Having a connection to Israeli policy, by itself, does not satisfy the requirement in BLP that in order to identify a person's religion, a person's beliefs must be relevant to their notable activities or public life.
12) Although not transparently understandable, the notion of Wikipedia's unattributed editorial voice, introduced by Crockspot, deserves attention. It is the the optional choices made by editors regarding article content, the discretionary choices available. Differing choices, strongly supported, offer the possibility of disputes regarding content which lie outside that part of content resolved by reference to established policy and guidelines.
13) The most effective and persuasive arguments on talk pages are usually brief and to the point. Filling up talk pages and their archives, and then demanding that new editors read all previous postings before making new edits, does not promote consensus, and is a form of edit warring.
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
7) {text of proposed principle}
1) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been blocked three times for edit warring [4] [5] [6]. He has also previously been blocked twice for disruption and incivility [7] [8]. During this arbitration case, NYScholar was blocked indefinately due to making a legal threat [9], but this was later overturned after he rescinded the threat and to take part in the case [10].
2) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been incivil towards other editors [11].
3) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has tried to enforce ownership of articles [12] [13].
4) NYScholar ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has edited disruptively on the Lewis Libby article [14].
5) The nexus of this dispute is repeated insertion into and removal from the Lewis Libby ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) of the information that Lewis Libby and his family are members of a Reform Jewish congregation.
6) Lewis Libby is a prominent American political operative who was convicted in 2007 of perjury related to his testimony regarding events related to his employment at the White House.
7) Due to the notoriety and prominence of the neo-cons and their strong support of the state of Israel, the ethnicity and religious orientation of prominent neo-cons is of interest, if not always of significance. See, for example, Murray Friedman. The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy. Cambridge University Press, 2006. ISBN 0521545013
8) There is a "Jewish lobby" on Wikipedia consisting of editors who closely monitor questions concerning Israel, Zionism and related matters. From time to time these editors take exaggerated nationalist positions or display exaggerated ethnic sensitivity [15].
8.1) There is an unfortunate tendency to form cliques, factions, or lobbies based on religious, ethnic, or nationalist grounds, consisting of editors who closely monitor questions on chosen topics, and react as advocates rather than engage in reasoned and constructive debate in an effort to make the encyclopedia better.
(8.2) There is a natural tendency for editors with similar interests to monitor and edit articles on chosen topics. Although many editors voluntarily chose to participate in WikiProjects this is not required. To attribute or insinuate nefarious motives to such editors is a form of conspiracy theorizing and is not a helpful contribution in editing disputes. Notmyrealname 02:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
9) It is maintained that Jayjg played a prominent role in these incidents, engaging in biased editing and making accusations of yellow badging, see the statements by Fermat1999 and Hornplease.
10) Two editors have commented on the exaggerated response to addition of the information that Lewis Libby was Jewish to his article, see comments by Quatloo and Hornplease
11) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar adds a section about the controversy regarding Libby's ethnicity [16]
On March 16 NYScholar added a section to Lewis Libby concerning "Libby's Jewish affiliations" [17], adding more references [18] December, 2005 Tulsa Jewish Review, now removed.
These edits occurred in the context of an ongoing dispute regarding the appropriateness of identifying Libby's religious affiliation, see this comment by Crockspot from March 11 [19]. Going back earlier, a post from February 19, regarding the appropriateness of the category "Jewish American lawyer" [20].
12) The section NYScholar had added was removed, together with all references by Jayjg, with the comment "remove disputed yellow badge trivia, per WP:BLP" [21]. His first posting to the talk page regarding this matter was 4 days later alleging an unreliable source and a a violation of WP:BLP [22].
13) Libby was first identified in the article Lewis Libby as a Jew in an unsourced edit October 30, 2005 by Vulturell ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) adding the category Jewish Americans [23]. That he was a member of a reform congregation was added in an unsourced edit by an anonymous editor October 31, 2005 [24]. A link to the Temples website was added, but there is no transparent way to access a list of members on that site. This information was removed immediately by Peruvianllama ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "rvv to last by Moncrief - rm non-notable inf" [25]. Second insertion by anonymous editor. This information, together with other family information was expanded and elaborated on by Moncrief ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) in an unsourced series of edits and permitted to remain [26].
On January 13, 2006 an anonymous editor added "Libby was born into a Jewish family" as well was the category Jewish Americans in an unsourced edit [27]. This was removed by an anonymous editor August 20, 2006 [28]. On February 8 Vulturell changed category Jewish Americans to Jewish-American businesspeople [29]. On February 14 JJstroker ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) added category "Jewish liberals" This was contested by Will Beback. It was reinserted with the comment that a neo-con was a liberal [30], but removed a few days latter by JJstroker [31]. On March 14 an anonymous editor added the categories Jewish American history and Jewish American writers [32].
On March 29, 2006 (after being in the article, unsourced for 5 months) Sholom ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) removed temple affiliation information with the comment "synagogue affiliation irrelevant" [33].
On October 1, 2006 the category Jewish-American businesspeople was removed by Adam Holland as "a miscategorization" [34]. On October 11, 2006 an anonymous editor added the unsourced sentence "Libby is Jewish" [35]. TransUtopian found a source and moved it to the personal section [36].
The category Jewish American lawyers was added by an anonymous editor December 20, 2006 [37]. On December 25 the information that Libby was from a Jewish family was re-added by an anonymous editor, citing the Kampeas article as printed in the Jerusalem Post [38].
14) On September 24, 2006 NYScholar made his first edit to the article [39]. At that point two categories identifying Libby as Jewish remained but all references to Jewishness had been removed from the article.
February 10, 2007 an anonymous editor adds "Jewish-" to "American lawyer" in the introduction of the article [40]. A few edits later NYScholar adopts this edit citing the category already present [41]. 5 days later an anonymous editor removed this formulation [42]. A few edits later LittleOldMe ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverts using popups [43].
A few days later an anonymous editor in a series of edits changed "Jewish-American lawyer" to "American lawyer" with the comment "Religion not verified by citation. Nor is it relevant."; remove a link to an article on Libby at NNDB with the comment "This is a joke site."; and removed the categories Jewish American lawyers and Jewish American writers with the comment "removing extraneous categories" [44] [45] [46]. NYScholar reverted to "Jewish American lawyer", adding references, but readded only the category Jewish American lawyer [47]. Adding Kampeas article [48].
February 18, 2007 "Jewish American lawyer" again removed from the introduction by an anonymous editor [49] and immediately reverted by NYScholar [50].
15) This edit marks the entry of Isarig ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who changes "Jewish American lawyer" to "American lawyer" in the introduction with the comment "His jewishness is not relevant, and does not belong in intro". NYScholar immediately reverted with the comment "do not delete pertinent content supplied by other editors when it is sourced, notable, and verifiable: see note 3; it is notable, given that article; see categories; other eds. added this info. orig." [52]. Isarig immediately reverted with the comment "rm irrelevant info" [53]. NYScholar reverts [54]. February 20 Isarig reverts with the comment "rm irrelevant info, see Talk" [55].
Isarig made this comment on the talk page:
"You should actually read what those sources say. The Information Clearing house note says "Across the blogosphere, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel conspiracy theorists were quick to tie Libby’s Jewishness to his role in selling the Iraq war, imagining once again a neo-con cabal that has a singular agenda: promoting Israel at all costs.". WP is not the place to give credence to these anti-Semitic conspiracies which originate in blogs. Isarig 02:44, 19 February 2007" [56]
Initial discussion at Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_2#Citations_supporting_notability_and_pertinence_of_Libby.27s_being_a_.22Jewish_American_lawyer.22.
NYScholar again reverts with the comment "yes, see talk page; consensus is against removal; see the sources; it is notable, sourced, pertinent fact; stop removing it and censoring information in W articles" [57]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "your personal opinion is not a "consensus". This is not relevant and does not belong in the intor" [58]. A revert by an anonymous editor follows with the comment "rv see talk - to consensus version" [59]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "No such consensus exists, and you haven't participated in the discussion, anon wikistalker." [60]. Another revert by an anonymous editor with the comment "please Assume Good Faith." [61]. Isarig again reverts with the comment "irrelevant POV pushing. See talk" [62]. NYScholar again reverts with the comment "see nn. 3 and 4 for notability and relevance; q. in full on talk page of article; prev. editing history; other eds' agreement (consensus)" [63].
After a revert by Threeafterthree ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "please stop with insersion of ethnicity into header of article per WP:MOSBIO. I really don't care what the agenda is, this is not appropriate. Thanks" [64], NYScholar gives in and removes the supporting references with the comment "format: with "Jewish" deleted, I've deleted the citations to it; I had already included them in the family background section, where they still seem relevant" [65].
16) With the question of whether Jewish American lawyer belongs in the introduction resolved, NYScholar then placed the references to Libby's ethnicity and religious affiliations in the section "Early life and family" with the comment "fixed notes (typo corrs, format)--populated empty notes lost due to earlier changes" [66]. At this point the only language in the text was "Libby was born in New Haven, Connecticut, to a Jewish family and raised in Florida."
17) On February 25, 2007 Notmyrealname ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) removed the category Jewish American lawyers with the comment "Not mentioned in article. Is there a Catholic American Lawyers section?" [67]. NYScholar reverted with the comment "see personal history early family life etc.; restored category originally added by another earlier editor" [68]. Notmyrealname responded by removing the information that Libby was raised in a Jewish family and all references to him being Jewish with the comment "Born to a Jewish family reads akwardly and is not relevant." [69]. Notmyrealname then removed category Jewish American lawyer with the comment "This is a dubious category, and his inclusion in it is even more dubious. See my note on talk page." [70], Notmyrealname's note. Threeafterthree added back raised in a Jewish family [71]. Notmyrealname immediately reverted with the comment "This is both not relevant and akwardly written. His parents religion is not relevant to his accomplishments and noteriety." [72]. Threeafterthree again reverted with the comment "you are pretching to the choir. I agree, but this material has been added to 99% of the bios. Unless you want to remove it from the other 99%." [73]. NYScholar again adds the Kampeas article as a reference [74] and another, rather poor one, [75]. Shortly thereafter Notmyrealname deleted the poor source as unreliable [76] and removes a duplicate of the Kampeas article [77].
18) Talk:Lewis Libby ( | [[Talk:talk:Lewis Libby|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) from late February, 2007 onward contains extended debate regarding the propriety of including Lewis Libby's ethnic background and religious affiliation.
19) Libby's felony conviction and involvement with the neoconservative movement have been fodder for anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists. According to one source this has even spilled into the mainstream media "The Protocols of the Elders of Zinni. Wikipedia editors have commented on this phenomenon as part of their argument that Libby's ethnicity and religious affiliation is irrelevant or "gives credence" to such theories Isarig Humus sapiens.
20) According to a statement by Jimbo Wales, the NNDB should never be considered a WP:Reliable Source. This was one of the entries repeatedly inserted by NYScholar.
20a) Libby's religious orientation stipulated by a reliable source, namely the Tulsa Jewish Review. That publication has been published continuously for over 70 years. In the point of Libby's case it is very specific to identify his temple. There are additional online sources for Libby's Jewishness which are not reliable (and it is very revealing that an individual here has enumerated those only, and omitted this source).
Anyone may see for themselves dozens of issues they have made available of their publication in PDF format, at [78]. Upon examination any impartial observer would be quite satisfied at their pragmatism and lack of controversiality. They cannot be accused of "yellow badging" because they are intended to serve their local Jewish community. The American Jewish Periodical Center at Klau Library of Hebrew Union College would surely be happy to vouch that they are in fact a real publication: (513) 221-7444 ext. 3396 [79]. They have a run of the publication in their physical collections.
20b) The Jerusalem Post [80] [81] is a reliable source.
21) The entry lists its source as "Wikipedia." This entry was one of the references repeatedly inserted by NYScholar.
22) On February 27, 2007 Steve Dufour ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) deleted the bulk of the personal information together with all references regarding Libby including the information that was "raised in a Jewish family" with the comment "removing uncited and trivial material on living person + we can not say something happening now will be historical" [83]. Threeafterthree re-adds deleted material about Libby's ethnicity [84]. Notmyrealname reverts with the comment "There is no evidence that his family is Jewish. See larger discussion on talk page" [85]. NYScholar restores the material earlier deleted by Steve Dufour [86]. ElKevbo ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverts, complaining about the loss of intermediate edits [87].
23) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar again adds the previously deleted Category Jewish American lawyers [88].
24) Also on March 1, 2007 NYScholar added information about Libby's temple membership [89]. This information had previously been in the article but had been deleted 11 months earlier by Sholom ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) with the comment "synagogue affiliation irrelevant" [90].
25) On March 1, 2007 NYScholar changes the language "Jewish family" to 'Libby was born to a "prosperous family" in New Haven, Connecticut––his father was an "investment banker"––and "raised in Florida."' [91].
26) Later on March 1, 2007 Armon ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) reverted to the earlier revert by ElKevbo with the comment "rv to ElKevbo this has been listed at the BLP noticebord" [92]. This discussion, the first of at least two is at this url under Lewis Libby. The complaint, by Notmyrealname, relies heavily on interpretation of Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Categories as requiring "self-identification" The result of the discussion was inconclusive. But see the style guideline Wikipedia:Categorization/Gender, race and sexuality. Another extended discussion from later in March is at [93].
27) According to WP:BLP#Categories, several requirements need to be met before category tags for religion (and sexual orientation) can be placed. The information must be discussed in the text. The person must publicly self-identify with the belief, and "the subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life, according to reliable published sources." The sources presented to date have not satisfied these criteria.
28) The Tulsa Jewish Review, a reliable source, unambiguously stipulates Libby's religious affiliation. The fact that Libby's membership and participation at temple is well-established enough for it to be published as far away as Tulsa is testimony to the public nature of his attendance. As he has taken no efforts to keep his identification private, his public participation is tantamount to self-identification. A further requirement is that "the subject's beliefs or sexual preferences are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life." This is true by nature of Libby's public office, as a policy-maker towards issues related to Israel, the Jewish state. Whether or not there is proven a conflict of interest in a Jewish individual making policy towards the Jewish state, it is a potential conflict of interest of the highest order and highly relevant. All conditions are thus satisfied. Quatloo 21:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
The Jerusalem Post, also a reliable source, unambiguously stipulate's Libby's religious affiliation. [94]
29) On April 29, 2007, NYScholar inserted Libby's name as the sole member listed in the Temple Rodef Shalom article 7 times, ultimately leading to a block for violating the WP:3RR. The block was extended twice for incivility. Between February 18, 2007 and June 8, 2007, NYScholar inserted links into the Lewis Libby article whose sole or primary purpose and effect were to identify Libby as Jewish 49 times. [96]
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
12) {text of proposed finding of fact}
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.
1) NYScholar is placed on standard civility parole for one year. If he makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, then he may be blocked for a short time of up to one week for repeat offenses.
2) NYScholar is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. If he makes any further reverts to a page, he may be blocked for up to one week.
3) If NYScholar is blocked 5 times for breaking remedies of this arbitration case, the maximum time that he may be blocked for will increase to one year.
4) NYScholar is banned indefinitely from editing the Lewis Libby article and its associated talk page.
5) {text of proposed remedy}
6) {text of proposed remedy}
7) {text of proposed remedy}
8) {text of proposed remedy}
9) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
2) {text of proposed enforcement}
3) {text of proposed enforcement}
4) {text of proposed enforcement}
5) {text of proposed enforcement}
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis
Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_5#Please_use_caution_on_inserting_categories Talk:Temple Rodef Shalom [97] [98] Talk:Lewis_Libby/Archive_6#Request_for_comment