all proposed

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop place proposals which are ready for voting here.

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

• Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
• Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
• Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if she/he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, 1 Arbitrator is recused and 1 is inactive, so 7 votes are a majority.

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Place those on /Workshop.

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Principles of Instantnood 2

1) The principles at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 2#Principles are adopted by reference.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Finding of fact Instantnood 2

1) The finding of fact at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 2#Findings of fact are adopted by reference.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Continued edit warring by Instantnood

2) Instantnood (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has continued to edit war regarding naming issues and has been blocked over 5 times, see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence#Evidence presented by Phroziac and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence#Evidence presented by User:SchmuckyTheCat.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Continued edit warring by Huaiwei

3) Huaiwei (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has continued to edit war regarding naming issues in and has been blocked over 5 times, see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence#Evidence presented by Wgfinley.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

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.

Restrictions on Instantnood

1) Instantnood (talk · contribs) is restricted to proposing only one page move, poll of editors, or policy change relating to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) per week. Should he violate these restrictions he may be briefly blocked, up to a year in the event of repeat offenses. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Restrictions on Huaiwei

2) Huaiwei (talk · contribs) is restricted to proposing only one page move, poll of editors, or policy change relating to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) per week. Should he violate these restrictions he may be briefly blocked, up to a year in the event of repeat offenses. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Instantnood placed on Probation

3) Instantnood (talk · contribs) is placed on Wikipedia:Probation indefinitely. Any administrator, in the exercise of judgement for reasonable cause may ban them from any article or talk page which they disrupt by inappropriate editing. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Instantnood placed on general probation

4) Instantnood (talk · contribs) is placed on general probation indefinitely. Any three administrators may, for good cause, ban him from the site. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Huaiwei placed on Probation

5) Huaiwei (talk · contribs) is placed on Wikipedia:Probation indefinitely. Any administrator, in the exercise of judgement for reasonable cause may ban them from any article or talk page which they disrupt by inappropriate editing. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Huaiwei placed on general probation

6) Huaiwei (talk · contribs) is placed on general probation indefinitely. Any three administrators may, for good cause, ban him from the site. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Procedure for banning in Probation

1) Should a Wikipedia administrator feel it necessary that those placed on Probation in this matter be banned from an article where they are engaged in edit warring, removal of sourced material, POV reorganizations of the article or any other activity which the user considers disruptive they shall place a template ((User article ban|Username|BanEndDate|~~~~)) at the top of the talk page of the article and notify the blocked user on their talk page. The template shall include the ending date of the ban (one year from this decision) and a link to Wikipedia:Probation. The template may be removed by any one at the end of the ban. See Wikipedia:Probation. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Enforcement by block

2) Should any user edit an article from which they have been banned under the remedies in this decision they may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3#Log of blocks and bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:34, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. James F. (talk) 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Raul654 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

Implementation notes

Clerks and arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

• All six proposed remedies passed 8-0 and shall be copied to the final decision when the case is closed.
• Both enforcement proposals passed 8-0 and shall be copied to the final decision when the case is closed.

Notes last updated: --Tony Sidaway 14:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

• Instantnood (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has requested that his statement be considered before this case is closed, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Instantnood_3. Fred Bauder 19:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. I've seen his comment. He could have submitted evidence by email if he wanted. Enough of this procrastination. Close. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Close. Charles Matthews 22:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Close ➥the Epopt 00:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Close Fred Bauder 17:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]