This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies, Arbitrators will vote at /Proposed decision.. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.
1) A large number of IP addresses is listed at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Arthur Ellis, which edit from Ellis' ISP in a characteristic Ellis-like manner, including the vandal IPs listed above. Mackensen deferred the checkuser request to Arbcom pending the opening of this case. Due to the time it took to open the case, some of the relevant log data may be in danger of disappearing. Recommend that the arbitrators run any checks needed for this case ASAP.
1) This arbitration be abandoned because (a) none of the parties except Arthur Ellis appear to be willing or interested in discussing the actual edits to the article and (b) most of the people involved in editing the article (HistoryBA, Crazyrussian, RadioKirk Geedubber, CJCurrie) have failed to present evidence or show interest in the project. As well, I rarely bother editing Wikipedia anymore. Arthur Ellis 13:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
1)
1) Arthur Ellis has just been caught using socks to violate 3RR at Rachel Marsden. I propose a temporary injunction from editing the articles listed as affected in this case. Buck ets ofg ✐ 14:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
1)
1)
1)
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground prohibits importation of personal disputes. It is grossly inappropriate to use Wikipedia as a venue for pursuit of a personal political battle.
2) Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons requires that information which concerns living subjects be adequately sourced and that biographies "should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone."
3) in an instance where one user has engaged in outrageous behavior which has resulted in others also engaging in minor violations, the focus of an arbitration case will be on the one who caused the trouble; on the presumption that the other users can carry on in a more or less satisfactory way if the main problem is dealt with.
4) Wikipedia:Autobiography, a guideline, offers advice to persons who are the subject of an article.
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) The locus of the dispute is editing of the articles concerning [Warren Kinsella]] and other figures prominent in the Canadian political blogosphere. There is some evidence that the principals in this matter are themselves participants in the Canadian political blogosphere, especially Mark Bourrie. The dispute between these two gentlemen involved legal actions concerning alleged libel [1].
2) There is substantial evidence that Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who previously edited as Mark_Bourrie ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Ceraurus ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) ,has also edited as Marie_Tessier ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Isotelus ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and numerous sockpuppets Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Warren_Kinsella/Evidence#First_Assertion:_rampant_sock.2Fmeat-puppetry.
2) Mark Bourrie is a Canadian blogger [2]. Involved in an ongoing dispute with Warren Kinsella. He has, in addition to his main blog, created Kinsella archives a blog targeted at Kinsella.
3) Ceraurus has been involved in conflict regarding Rachel Marsden [3]
4) Ceraurus has previously used at least one sockpuppet, Isotelus ( talk · contribs), confirmed by checkuser. Additional Checkuser and circumstantial evidence indicate that it is likely that Ceraurus is now editing as Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). See Arthur Ellis's first edit.
5) Edits by Arthur Ellis to Warren Kinsella take a critical point of view [4]. His edits to Mark Bourrie, possibly his own article, are supportive, drawing detailed information from his own blog [5].
6) 64.26.147.188 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has edited as Mark Bourrie [6] [7].
7) Pete_Peters ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a participant in the controversy, making his first edit on June 27, 2006 to Mark Bourrie describing him as a "Wikipedia enthusiast and suggesting Ceraurus and Arthur Ellis as user names, reference to Bourrie's account being blocked.
8) Pete_Peters ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been subject to a series of anonymous attacks [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] User contributions 206.191.56.115
9) Pete Peters has been subject to wikistalking; having his edits on unrelated articles reverted by the same IP addresses involved in this conflict. [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]
10) 207.35.190.72 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who takes a generally pro-Kinsella point of view [23] [24], edit warring even [25], has made edits which denigrate Mark Bourrie "deranged blogger Mark Bourrie and criticize his alleged editing on Wikipedia [26] [27] [28].
11) There has also been tendentious editing regarding Pierre Bourque, another Canadian blogger. IP addresses from Magma (associated with Arthur Ellis) have repeatedly removed what they describe as "vanity" information [29] [30] [31] and inserted negative information [32] [33]. Pete Peters and a number of other IP addresses have defended the article by reinserting the positive information and removing negative information [34] [35] [36] [37] . Arthur Ellis has alleged that Pete Peters is Pierre Bourque.
12) According to Canadian blogers, Warren Kinsella, an attorney licensed in Canada, has responded to negative information regarding him and disclosures of personal information in the Canadian political blogosphere with treats of legal action [38] [39] [40] [41], including at least one action against Mark Bourrie entry for June 23, 2006.
13) 70.51.52.253 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
14) Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ceraurus
15) Marie_Tessier ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a suspected sock of has made personal attacks [42].
16) There have been nasty personal attacks by ips compatible with Arthur Ellis [43].
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {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) {text of proposed remedy}
1) Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned indefinitely from Warren Kinsella and articles which relate to Canadian politics and its blogosphere. Any article which mentions Warren Kinsella is considered a related article for the purposes of this remedy. This includes all talk pages other then the talk page of Mark Bourrie.
This is based on two unproven and false assumptions: 1. That I am Mark Bourrie; and 2. Mt edits of Warren Kinsella have been inaccurate, an issue which has never been addressed by anyone here, simply because they cannot show the edits were not factual. Arthur Ellis 13:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
2) Arthur Ellis is required to use one registered account.
1) Articles which are the locus of dispute ( Warren Kinsella, Rachel Marsden, Mark Bourrie, Pierre Bourque, and related articles about the Canadian political blogosphere) are placed on probation. Any editor may be banned from any or all of the articles, or other reasonably related pages, by an administrator for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, incivilty, and original research.
Second, how did the Rachel Marsden article make the list? Third, the remedy in this section exists now. Fourth, some administrators (Bucketsofg, Crazyrussian and RadioKirk have shown very high levels of bias that have been ignored by this process. Arthur Ellis 13:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis
This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies, Arbitrators will vote at /Proposed decision.. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.
1) A large number of IP addresses is listed at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Arthur Ellis, which edit from Ellis' ISP in a characteristic Ellis-like manner, including the vandal IPs listed above. Mackensen deferred the checkuser request to Arbcom pending the opening of this case. Due to the time it took to open the case, some of the relevant log data may be in danger of disappearing. Recommend that the arbitrators run any checks needed for this case ASAP.
1) This arbitration be abandoned because (a) none of the parties except Arthur Ellis appear to be willing or interested in discussing the actual edits to the article and (b) most of the people involved in editing the article (HistoryBA, Crazyrussian, RadioKirk Geedubber, CJCurrie) have failed to present evidence or show interest in the project. As well, I rarely bother editing Wikipedia anymore. Arthur Ellis 13:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
1)
1) Arthur Ellis has just been caught using socks to violate 3RR at Rachel Marsden. I propose a temporary injunction from editing the articles listed as affected in this case. Buck ets ofg ✐ 14:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
1)
1)
1)
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground prohibits importation of personal disputes. It is grossly inappropriate to use Wikipedia as a venue for pursuit of a personal political battle.
2) Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons requires that information which concerns living subjects be adequately sourced and that biographies "should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone."
3) in an instance where one user has engaged in outrageous behavior which has resulted in others also engaging in minor violations, the focus of an arbitration case will be on the one who caused the trouble; on the presumption that the other users can carry on in a more or less satisfactory way if the main problem is dealt with.
4) Wikipedia:Autobiography, a guideline, offers advice to persons who are the subject of an article.
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) {text of proposed principle}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) The locus of the dispute is editing of the articles concerning [Warren Kinsella]] and other figures prominent in the Canadian political blogosphere. There is some evidence that the principals in this matter are themselves participants in the Canadian political blogosphere, especially Mark Bourrie. The dispute between these two gentlemen involved legal actions concerning alleged libel [1].
2) There is substantial evidence that Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who previously edited as Mark_Bourrie ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Ceraurus ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) ,has also edited as Marie_Tessier ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Isotelus ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and numerous sockpuppets Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Warren_Kinsella/Evidence#First_Assertion:_rampant_sock.2Fmeat-puppetry.
2) Mark Bourrie is a Canadian blogger [2]. Involved in an ongoing dispute with Warren Kinsella. He has, in addition to his main blog, created Kinsella archives a blog targeted at Kinsella.
3) Ceraurus has been involved in conflict regarding Rachel Marsden [3]
4) Ceraurus has previously used at least one sockpuppet, Isotelus ( talk · contribs), confirmed by checkuser. Additional Checkuser and circumstantial evidence indicate that it is likely that Ceraurus is now editing as Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). See Arthur Ellis's first edit.
5) Edits by Arthur Ellis to Warren Kinsella take a critical point of view [4]. His edits to Mark Bourrie, possibly his own article, are supportive, drawing detailed information from his own blog [5].
6) 64.26.147.188 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has edited as Mark Bourrie [6] [7].
7) Pete_Peters ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a participant in the controversy, making his first edit on June 27, 2006 to Mark Bourrie describing him as a "Wikipedia enthusiast and suggesting Ceraurus and Arthur Ellis as user names, reference to Bourrie's account being blocked.
8) Pete_Peters ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been subject to a series of anonymous attacks [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] User contributions 206.191.56.115
9) Pete Peters has been subject to wikistalking; having his edits on unrelated articles reverted by the same IP addresses involved in this conflict. [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]
10) 207.35.190.72 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who takes a generally pro-Kinsella point of view [23] [24], edit warring even [25], has made edits which denigrate Mark Bourrie "deranged blogger Mark Bourrie and criticize his alleged editing on Wikipedia [26] [27] [28].
11) There has also been tendentious editing regarding Pierre Bourque, another Canadian blogger. IP addresses from Magma (associated with Arthur Ellis) have repeatedly removed what they describe as "vanity" information [29] [30] [31] and inserted negative information [32] [33]. Pete Peters and a number of other IP addresses have defended the article by reinserting the positive information and removing negative information [34] [35] [36] [37] . Arthur Ellis has alleged that Pete Peters is Pierre Bourque.
12) According to Canadian blogers, Warren Kinsella, an attorney licensed in Canada, has responded to negative information regarding him and disclosures of personal information in the Canadian political blogosphere with treats of legal action [38] [39] [40] [41], including at least one action against Mark Bourrie entry for June 23, 2006.
13) 70.51.52.253 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
14) Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ceraurus
15) Marie_Tessier ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a suspected sock of has made personal attacks [42].
16) There have been nasty personal attacks by ips compatible with Arthur Ellis [43].
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}
1) {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) {text of proposed remedy}
1) Arthur_Ellis ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned indefinitely from Warren Kinsella and articles which relate to Canadian politics and its blogosphere. Any article which mentions Warren Kinsella is considered a related article for the purposes of this remedy. This includes all talk pages other then the talk page of Mark Bourrie.
This is based on two unproven and false assumptions: 1. That I am Mark Bourrie; and 2. Mt edits of Warren Kinsella have been inaccurate, an issue which has never been addressed by anyone here, simply because they cannot show the edits were not factual. Arthur Ellis 13:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
2) Arthur Ellis is required to use one registered account.
1) Articles which are the locus of dispute ( Warren Kinsella, Rachel Marsden, Mark Bourrie, Pierre Bourque, and related articles about the Canadian political blogosphere) are placed on probation. Any editor may be banned from any or all of the articles, or other reasonably related pages, by an administrator for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, incivilty, and original research.
Second, how did the Rachel Marsden article make the list? Third, the remedy in this section exists now. Fourth, some administrators (Bucketsofg, Crazyrussian and RadioKirk have shown very high levels of bias that have been ignored by this process. Arthur Ellis 13:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed remedy}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
1) {text of proposed enforcement}
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis