Deathrocker: Closed on Tuesday, this case involved
Deathrocker and
Leyasu involved in revert wars on various articles related to
Gothic rock. The Arbitration Committee placed both Deathrocker and Leyasu on revert parole, banning them from reverting more than once per 24 hour period, more than twice in any 7 day period, or more than three times in any 30 day period. Deathrocker could be blocked for up to a week for violations of the ban; Leyasu, who was already subject to a revert parole in a previous case, could be blocked for up to a year.
Locke Cole: Closed on Thursday, the case dealt with a dispute between
Locke Cole and
Netoholic. The Arbitration Committee found that Locke Cole's tactic of arguing on previously untouched pages after Netoholic was sufficiently "similar to stalking" to warrant a one-month ban for harassment. Locke Cole was also placed on non-vandalism one revert per page per day parole, requiring all reverts to be explained on the article's talk page. Meanwhile, Netoholic is again subject to restrictions imposed in a
previous case, which had been temporarily suspended. These bar him from editing in the template namespace and restrict him to one revert per page per day. Netoholic was also reminded of Wikipedia's fair use policy, and both Netoholic and Locke Cole are banned from interacting with each other. Locke Cole has since left Wikipedia.
Blu Aardvark: The review of the block status of
Blu Aardvark was closed Friday. Blu Aardvark had been banned by general community agreement on 2 April for a series of disruptive activities, including vandalism, harassment, and creating sockpuppets. An attempt on 28 May by
Linuxbeak and
Raul654 to unblock him after negotiating a mentoring arrangement met with considerable opposition, leading to the arbitration case. Blu Aardvark was unblocked to participate in the case with a temporary injunction limiting his edits to his talk page and pages relating to the case. In the end, it was decided to ban Blu Aardvark for one year, although he claims to have left Wikipedia for good
[1]. The administrators involved in the May incident, which included several unblocks and reblocks, were admonished for block-warring.
Infinity0: This case, involving
Infinity0 and
RJII, was closed Saturday. RJII has been banned for one year, after a number of blocks based on a previous probation. Infinity0 was placed on one-revert-per-day parole for a year, requiring Infinity0 to discuss any reverts on talk pages.
Election: Closed Saturday, this case involved the conduct of editors on
2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities. The dispute traced back to edit-warring on the article, including the addition and removal of a "NPOV" tag. The arbitrators found that the addition of the tag had been "adequately justified". To deal with the situation, they decided to structure a probation around articles rather than users, focusing on a set of nine related articles. Editors may continue to work on the articles, but any editor may be banned by an administrator from this group of articles "for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, incivilty, and original research."
New cases
Two cases were opened this week; both are in the evidence phase.
Eternal Equinox: A case involving
Eternal Equinox. Several users complained that Eternal Equinox has been trying to claim
ownership of articles with edit wars and abuse directed at those who try to edit them. Eternal Equinox claims to have left Wikipedia, but the other parties argued that this was not credible because of a number of similar statements previously.
Hunger: A case involving a dispute about articles related to
The Hunger Project. One of the parties,
Jcoonrod, identifies himself as John Coonrod, an executive with that organization. The dispute has been in mediation about how and whether to include unflattering material about the organization in the article.
8bitJake: A case involving
8bitJake.
badlydrawnjeff, the initiator of the arbitration request, has asserted that 8bitJake's editing on political articles was biased, and that 8bitJake was incivil to other editors on the articles.
Iloveminun: A case brought against
Iloveminun. Evidence presented asserted that Iloveminun violated fair use and image deletion policies by uploading copyrighted images and removing tags. A
checkuser request confirmed that Iloveminun also was involved in sockpuppetry.
Irishpunktom: A case involving
Irishpunktom,
Karl Meier, and
Dbiv. Measures to ban Irishpunktom and Dbiv from editing
Peter Tatchell for one year, place Irishpunktom and Karl Meier on probation for one year, place Irishpunktom on one revert per article per week parole, and desysop Dbiv have the support of two arbitrators.
Saladin1970: A case involving an appeal of
Saladin1970's indefinite block originally placed by
Jayjg, and later by
SlimVirgin. Arbitrator
Fred Bauder has submitted remedies in the case, but none have been voted on by other arbitrators as of press time.
Highways: A case involving naming conventions on
highway-related articles. Current remedies that will likely pass include a probation against move warriors in the case, a ban on moving pages between names until a policy on the names is adopted, and a warning for
JohnnyBGood and
SPUI to remain civil at all times.
Deathrocker: Closed on Tuesday, this case involved
Deathrocker and
Leyasu involved in revert wars on various articles related to
Gothic rock. The Arbitration Committee placed both Deathrocker and Leyasu on revert parole, banning them from reverting more than once per 24 hour period, more than twice in any 7 day period, or more than three times in any 30 day period. Deathrocker could be blocked for up to a week for violations of the ban; Leyasu, who was already subject to a revert parole in a previous case, could be blocked for up to a year.
Locke Cole: Closed on Thursday, the case dealt with a dispute between
Locke Cole and
Netoholic. The Arbitration Committee found that Locke Cole's tactic of arguing on previously untouched pages after Netoholic was sufficiently "similar to stalking" to warrant a one-month ban for harassment. Locke Cole was also placed on non-vandalism one revert per page per day parole, requiring all reverts to be explained on the article's talk page. Meanwhile, Netoholic is again subject to restrictions imposed in a
previous case, which had been temporarily suspended. These bar him from editing in the template namespace and restrict him to one revert per page per day. Netoholic was also reminded of Wikipedia's fair use policy, and both Netoholic and Locke Cole are banned from interacting with each other. Locke Cole has since left Wikipedia.
Blu Aardvark: The review of the block status of
Blu Aardvark was closed Friday. Blu Aardvark had been banned by general community agreement on 2 April for a series of disruptive activities, including vandalism, harassment, and creating sockpuppets. An attempt on 28 May by
Linuxbeak and
Raul654 to unblock him after negotiating a mentoring arrangement met with considerable opposition, leading to the arbitration case. Blu Aardvark was unblocked to participate in the case with a temporary injunction limiting his edits to his talk page and pages relating to the case. In the end, it was decided to ban Blu Aardvark for one year, although he claims to have left Wikipedia for good
[1]. The administrators involved in the May incident, which included several unblocks and reblocks, were admonished for block-warring.
Infinity0: This case, involving
Infinity0 and
RJII, was closed Saturday. RJII has been banned for one year, after a number of blocks based on a previous probation. Infinity0 was placed on one-revert-per-day parole for a year, requiring Infinity0 to discuss any reverts on talk pages.
Election: Closed Saturday, this case involved the conduct of editors on
2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities. The dispute traced back to edit-warring on the article, including the addition and removal of a "NPOV" tag. The arbitrators found that the addition of the tag had been "adequately justified". To deal with the situation, they decided to structure a probation around articles rather than users, focusing on a set of nine related articles. Editors may continue to work on the articles, but any editor may be banned by an administrator from this group of articles "for disruptive edits, including, but not limited to, edit warring, incivilty, and original research."
New cases
Two cases were opened this week; both are in the evidence phase.
Eternal Equinox: A case involving
Eternal Equinox. Several users complained that Eternal Equinox has been trying to claim
ownership of articles with edit wars and abuse directed at those who try to edit them. Eternal Equinox claims to have left Wikipedia, but the other parties argued that this was not credible because of a number of similar statements previously.
Hunger: A case involving a dispute about articles related to
The Hunger Project. One of the parties,
Jcoonrod, identifies himself as John Coonrod, an executive with that organization. The dispute has been in mediation about how and whether to include unflattering material about the organization in the article.
8bitJake: A case involving
8bitJake.
badlydrawnjeff, the initiator of the arbitration request, has asserted that 8bitJake's editing on political articles was biased, and that 8bitJake was incivil to other editors on the articles.
Iloveminun: A case brought against
Iloveminun. Evidence presented asserted that Iloveminun violated fair use and image deletion policies by uploading copyrighted images and removing tags. A
checkuser request confirmed that Iloveminun also was involved in sockpuppetry.
Irishpunktom: A case involving
Irishpunktom,
Karl Meier, and
Dbiv. Measures to ban Irishpunktom and Dbiv from editing
Peter Tatchell for one year, place Irishpunktom and Karl Meier on probation for one year, place Irishpunktom on one revert per article per week parole, and desysop Dbiv have the support of two arbitrators.
Saladin1970: A case involving an appeal of
Saladin1970's indefinite block originally placed by
Jayjg, and later by
SlimVirgin. Arbitrator
Fred Bauder has submitted remedies in the case, but none have been voted on by other arbitrators as of press time.
Highways: A case involving naming conventions on
highway-related articles. Current remedies that will likely pass include a probation against move warriors in the case, a ban on moving pages between names until a policy on the names is adopted, and a warning for
JohnnyBGood and
SPUI to remain civil at all times.
Discuss this story