2011
16 cases.
No cases were closed in December.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku Islands, decided on 5 October 2011
- User:Tenmei is indefinitely topic banned from the subject of Senkaku Islands, widely construed. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace.
- Tenmei is advised that his unusual style of communication has not been conducive to resolving this dispute. Accordingly, Tenmei is urged to develop a different style of communication, which is more similar to that used by experienced Wikipedia editors. Until this happens, Tenmei is advised not to engage in topics which are the subject of a dispute.
- Tenmei is banned for one year.
- User:Bobthefish2 is topic banned from the subject of Senkaku Islands, widely construed, for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and user space.
- User:STSC is warned to avoid any sexualisation of discussions, especially during disputes.
- The parties are reminded that attempts to use Wikipedia as a battleground may result in the summary imposition of additional sanctions, up to and including a ban from the project.
- The topic covered by the article currently located at Senkaku Islands, interpreted broadly, is placed under standard discretionary sanctions. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
- An uninvolved administrator may, after a warning given a month prior, place any set of pages relating to a territorial dispute of islands in East Asia, broadly interpreted, under standard discretionary sanctions for six months if the editing community is unable to reach consensus on the proper names to be used to refer to the disputed islands.
While a territorial dispute is subject to discretionary sanctions due to this remedy, any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in these topical areas, after an initial warning.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manipulation of BLPs, decided on 5 September 2011
- Editors who edit biographies of living persons and other articles referring to living persons are reminded that all editing of these articles must comply with the biographies of living persons policy and with the principles set forth in this decision.
- Administrators and other experienced editors are urged to take a proactive approach in addressing violations and alleged violations of the BLP policy, and to watchlist the BLP noticeboard and participate in discussing and resolving issues raised on that noticeboard. Methods of resolving issues on the noticeboard include correcting clear violations of the BLP policy, working to bring about well-focused, knowledgeable participation in discussion of more borderline cases, and ensuring the final resolution of all BLP disputes complies with the BLP policy and takes account of the competing considerations that may apply to a given dispute.
- To the extent that parties to this case have been engaged in protracted disputes and quarrels with other parties, the feuding parties are urged to avoid any unnecessary interactions with each other, except to the extent necessary for legitimate purposes such as dispute resolution.
- If disputes concerning editing of biographical articles by parties to this case persist after the case is closed, appropriate dispute resolution methods should be pursued. To the extent possible, such dispute resolution should be led and addressed by editors who have not previously been involved in the disputes, to maximize objectivity and bring a fresh perspective to the issues.
- While the Committee hopes that the guidance provided in this decision and the Cirt-Jayen 466 decision will be sufficient to avoid any further protracted disputes between these parties, if a specific serious dispute persists and other means of dispute resolution do not resolve them, a new and specifically focused request for arbitration may be filed not less than 30 days from the date of this decision. Whether to accept any such case will be evaluated using the same criteria as for other cases, but if accepted, the Committee will seek to resolve the case on a prioritized basis.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cirt and Jayen466, decided on 9 September 2011
- Cirt is topic-banned indefinitely from making any edits to articles related to new religious movements, their adherents, and any related biographies of living people, broadly construed.
- Cirt is further restricted on biographies of living people if the articles are substantially about, or Cirt's edits introduce material relating to: politics, religion, or social controversy. Cirt is permitted to edit articles incidentally related to such topics provided the articles, and Cirt's edits, are not biographical in nature. The Committee may extend this restriction if BLP-related problems continue, and Cirt may request relaxation of this restriction after one year from this date if there are no further problems.
- Cirt is desysopped for admitted violations of the neutral point of view and biographies of living people policies. He may reapply for adminship through requests for adminship at any time.
- Jayen466 is reminded to strictly adhere to dispute resolution processes in any future disputes.
- Cirt and Jayen466 are subject to an interaction restriction wherein they may not communicate with each other, nor comment on each other, or each other's actions or edits, directly or indirectly, anywhere on Wikipedia. Comments on the same page are permissible provided the previously mentioned restrictions are upheld. Neither party may respond directly to any violations of this or any other remedy, but shall report any violations via email directly to the Arbitration Committee.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/MickMacNee, decided on 4 August 2011
- User:MickMacNee is banned from Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year. After this minimum time has elapsed, MickMacNee will remain banned indefinitely, until such time as he demonstrates to the Committee that he is no longer a threat to the collaborative nature of the project.
- User:Δ is admonished for engaging in hostile and uncollegial conduct, and warned that the Committee may impose additional sanctions by motion if such conduct reoccurs.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tree shaping, decided on 15 July 2011
- The topic covered by the article currently located at Tree shaping, interpreted broadly, is placed under discretionary sanctions.
- User:Blackash is topic banned from all discussion on the correct name for the tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre topic for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace, but only covers discussion of what name should be given to the practice, and what title should be used for any articles on the subject.
- User:Sydney Bluegum is topic banned from the subject of tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre widely construed for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace.
- User:Slowart is topic banned from all discussion on the correct name for the tree shaping/arborsculpture/pooktre topic for one year. The topic ban includes talk pages, wikipedia space and userspace, but only covers discussion of what name should be given to the practice, and what title should be used for any articles on the subject.
- The community is urged to open up a discussion, by way of request for comment, on the article currently located at Tree shaping to determine the consensus name and scope for the subject matter, whether it should stand alone or whether it is best upmerged to a parent article. To gain a broad consensus, naming and scope proposals should be adequately laid out and outside comments invited to gain a community-based consensus. This should be resolved within two months of the closing of this case. Parties that are otherwise topic banned are allowed to outlay proposals and background rationale at the commencement of the discussion, and to answer specific queries addressed to them or their proposals. This concession is made due to their experience and familiarity with the area.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Henri Coanda, decided on 5 April 2011
- Lsorin (talk · contribs) is prohibited from editing or commenting on articles about the Coandă-1910 aircraft, its inventor Henri Coandă, or the history of the jet engine. This topic-ban shall be effective indefinitely, but Lsorin may request that it be terminated or modified after at least six months have elapsed. In considering any such request, the Committee will give significant weight to whether Lsorin has established an ability to edit collaboratively and in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines in other topic-areas of the project.
- The topic-ban imposed in this decision applies to all pages in all namespaces. However, the topic-ban does not preclude Lsorin from (1) responding to good-faith, reasonable inquiries from other editors on his user talkpage seeking information about the Coandă-1910, as long as Lsorin does not misuse this permission; (2) participating in the arbitration enforcement discussion of any allegation that he violated the topic-ban; or (3) posting an authorized request for the lifting or modification of the topic-ban after the specified time period has elapsed.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Noleander, decided on 18 April 2011
- Noleander (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from making any edit relating to Judaism, the Jewish people, Jewish history or culture, or individual Jewish persons identified as such, broadly but reasonably construed, in any namespace.
Any disputes concerning the scope of the topic-ban may be raised on the Arbitration Enforcement page for prompt resolution. Unnecessary "wikilawyering" about the precise scope of the topic-ban is unwelcome and may be cause for further sanctions.
This topic-ban shall be effective indefinitely, but Noleander may request that it be terminated or modified after at least one year has elapsed. In considering any such request, the Committee will give significant weight to whether Noleander has established an ability to edit collaboratively and in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines in other topic-areas of the project. Any perceptibly biased or prejudiced editing concerning any other group would weigh against lifting of the topic-ban and could also result in further sanctions.
- The attention of editors and administrators is drawn to the "Editors reminded and discretionary sanctions (amended)" clause of Race and intelligence that was recently adopted, as its terms are applicable to other disputes similar to those arising in this current case. For ease of reference, the amended remedy states:
- Both experienced and new editors contributing to articles relating to the area of conflict (namely, the intersection of race/ethnicity and human abilities and behaviour, broadly construed) are reminded that this is a highly contentious subject and are cautioned that to avoid disruption they must adhere strictly to fundamental Wikipedia policies, including but not limited to: maintaining a neutral point of view; avoiding undue weight; carefully citing disputed statements to reliable sources; and avoiding edit-warring and incivility.
- Standard discretionary sanctions are enacted for all articles related to the Shakespeare authorship question;
- User:NinaGreen is banned for one year and indefinitely topic-banned from Shakespeare authorship question, William Shakespeare, and Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford;
- The community ban of User:Smatprt is confirmed/endorsed.
- Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all articles related to longevity, broadly interpreted.
- Ryoung122 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from editing, commenting on, or otherwise participating in any Wikipedia process related to articles about longevity, broadly interpreted.
- John J. Bulten (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
- WikiProject World's Oldest People is urged to seek experienced Wikipedia editors who will act as mentors to the project and assist members in improving their editing and their understanding of Wikipedia policies and community norms.
- Within seven days of the conclusion of this case, all parties must either delete evidence sub-pages in their user space or request deletion of them.
- User:Communicat is prohibited from editing or commenting on articles about World War II or the Aftermath of World War II. This topic-ban shall be effective indefinitely, but Communicat may request that it be terminated or modified after at least six months have elapsed. In considering any such request, the Committee will give significant weight to whether Communicat has established an ability to edit collaboratively and in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines in other topic-areas of the project.
- Communicat is placed under a behavioral editing restriction for a period of one year. Should he make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, any personal attacks, or any assumptions of bad faith, he may be blocked as provided in the enforcement provision below.
