The
Arbitration Committee accepted one new case during the past week. No cases were closed this week.
New case
Allegations of apartheid: This new case concerns the conduct of various editors in connection with a group of articles whose titles include the words "Allegations of apartheid". It has been alleged that these articles were created in violation of
Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, after several deletion debates concerning
Allegations of Israeli apartheid resulted in that article being kept. Issues have also been raised concerning comments made in deletion discussions and reviews. Several users who have created and edited the "Allegations of apartheid" articles have strongly denied any inappropriate conduct.
Catalonia: A case brought by
Physchim62 involving alleged edit warring, possible sockpuppetry, and other misconduct by various editors on
Catalonia,
Valencian Community, and related articles.
Great Irish Famine: A case initiated by
SirFozzie, involving allegations including misuse of sources and harassment relating to
Great Irish Famine and other Ireland/Northern Ireland articles. Arbitrators are voting on arbitrator
Mackensen's proposals to place the Great Irish Famine article under the "mentorship" of three to five administrators and restrict
Sarah777's editing, as well as proposals by arbitrator
Kirill Lokshin that would ban Sarah777 from Wikipedia for one year and place
MarkThomas on civility parole.
Jeffrey O. Gustafson: A case brought by
John254 alleging incivility and other misconduct by administrator Jeffrey O. Gustafson. Arbitrator UninvitedCompany has proposed that Mr. Gustafson's administrator privileges be suspended for 30 days, while arbitrator Kirill Lokshin has proposed desysopping him.
Zacheus-jkb: A case involving the actions of
-jkb- and
Zacheus, who have been involved in disputes in other forums that were imported to the English Wikipedia. In a proposed decision, the Arbitration Committee would admonish both editors for their previous misconduct against each other but note that the problematic conduct seems to have stopped, and warn the parties not to resume practices such as posting identifying information about other editors or making personal attacks.
Armenia-Azerbaijan 2: A case alleging misconduct by various editors, some of whom were previously placed on revert parole in
an earlier case, on articles relating to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, and related matters. A proposed decision drafted by arbitrator
Fred Bauder would place those editors already subject to the revert parole on
probation as well, and would impose identical remedies on any other editors who are identified as editing these articles aggressively and uncivilly.
COFS: A case initiated by
Durova based on a discussion at the community sanctions noticeboard. The case involves allegations of tendentious editing by various editors, sockpuppetry, conflicts of interest, and other user conduct issues on
Scientology related articles. The proposed decision submitted by UninvitedCompany would ban
COFS for 30 days for POV editing and require him to change his username and disclose any duties he may have to the Church of Scientology before resuming editing.
Pigsonthewing 2: A case initiated by
Moreschi concerning the conduct of
Pigsonthewing, including a series of conflicts between this user and other editors involving the use of
microformats on Wikipedia and other matters. A proposed decision submitted by UninvitedCompany would find that "Pigsonthewing disregards the Wikipedia way of doing things and is unable or unwilling to improve his pattern of participation" and would ban Pigsonthewing from editing Wikipedia for one year.
Attachment Therapy: A case initiated by
Shotwell, who alleges that other editors have engaged in POV pushing and tendentious editing on
attachment therapy and related articles. During the case, checkuser indicated that
DPeterson had created at least four sockpuppets that were used to edit-war on these articles and create the appearance of consensus. A proposed decision by Kirill Lokshin would ban DPeterson for one year and would remind the other parties to exercise care while editing articles as to which they may have a
conflict of interest.
Motion to close
Piotrus: This case involves
Piotrus and other editors on Central and Eastern Europe-related articles. In the case, multiple parties have accused one another of edit-warring, incivility, unethical behavior, and biased editing. Under the currently proposed decision, an amnesty would be granted for prior editing problems on these articles, and the parties would be reminded of the need to edit courteously and co-operatively in the future. Two arbitrators have opposed closing the case pending consideration of additional remedies.
The
Arbitration Committee accepted one new case during the past week. No cases were closed this week.
New case
Allegations of apartheid: This new case concerns the conduct of various editors in connection with a group of articles whose titles include the words "Allegations of apartheid". It has been alleged that these articles were created in violation of
Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, after several deletion debates concerning
Allegations of Israeli apartheid resulted in that article being kept. Issues have also been raised concerning comments made in deletion discussions and reviews. Several users who have created and edited the "Allegations of apartheid" articles have strongly denied any inappropriate conduct.
Catalonia: A case brought by
Physchim62 involving alleged edit warring, possible sockpuppetry, and other misconduct by various editors on
Catalonia,
Valencian Community, and related articles.
Great Irish Famine: A case initiated by
SirFozzie, involving allegations including misuse of sources and harassment relating to
Great Irish Famine and other Ireland/Northern Ireland articles. Arbitrators are voting on arbitrator
Mackensen's proposals to place the Great Irish Famine article under the "mentorship" of three to five administrators and restrict
Sarah777's editing, as well as proposals by arbitrator
Kirill Lokshin that would ban Sarah777 from Wikipedia for one year and place
MarkThomas on civility parole.
Jeffrey O. Gustafson: A case brought by
John254 alleging incivility and other misconduct by administrator Jeffrey O. Gustafson. Arbitrator UninvitedCompany has proposed that Mr. Gustafson's administrator privileges be suspended for 30 days, while arbitrator Kirill Lokshin has proposed desysopping him.
Zacheus-jkb: A case involving the actions of
-jkb- and
Zacheus, who have been involved in disputes in other forums that were imported to the English Wikipedia. In a proposed decision, the Arbitration Committee would admonish both editors for their previous misconduct against each other but note that the problematic conduct seems to have stopped, and warn the parties not to resume practices such as posting identifying information about other editors or making personal attacks.
Armenia-Azerbaijan 2: A case alleging misconduct by various editors, some of whom were previously placed on revert parole in
an earlier case, on articles relating to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, and related matters. A proposed decision drafted by arbitrator
Fred Bauder would place those editors already subject to the revert parole on
probation as well, and would impose identical remedies on any other editors who are identified as editing these articles aggressively and uncivilly.
COFS: A case initiated by
Durova based on a discussion at the community sanctions noticeboard. The case involves allegations of tendentious editing by various editors, sockpuppetry, conflicts of interest, and other user conduct issues on
Scientology related articles. The proposed decision submitted by UninvitedCompany would ban
COFS for 30 days for POV editing and require him to change his username and disclose any duties he may have to the Church of Scientology before resuming editing.
Pigsonthewing 2: A case initiated by
Moreschi concerning the conduct of
Pigsonthewing, including a series of conflicts between this user and other editors involving the use of
microformats on Wikipedia and other matters. A proposed decision submitted by UninvitedCompany would find that "Pigsonthewing disregards the Wikipedia way of doing things and is unable or unwilling to improve his pattern of participation" and would ban Pigsonthewing from editing Wikipedia for one year.
Attachment Therapy: A case initiated by
Shotwell, who alleges that other editors have engaged in POV pushing and tendentious editing on
attachment therapy and related articles. During the case, checkuser indicated that
DPeterson had created at least four sockpuppets that were used to edit-war on these articles and create the appearance of consensus. A proposed decision by Kirill Lokshin would ban DPeterson for one year and would remind the other parties to exercise care while editing articles as to which they may have a
conflict of interest.
Motion to close
Piotrus: This case involves
Piotrus and other editors on Central and Eastern Europe-related articles. In the case, multiple parties have accused one another of edit-warring, incivility, unethical behavior, and biased editing. Under the currently proposed decision, an amnesty would be granted for prior editing problems on these articles, and the parties would be reminded of the need to edit courteously and co-operatively in the future. Two arbitrators have opposed closing the case pending consideration of additional remedies.
Discuss this story