Wikipedia Arbitration
About arbitration Talk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appeals Report
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics (Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss + Contact Members Procedures Elections Talk History Clerks + Talk Clerk procedures
Audit Talk Statistics Talk Reports (pre-2016)
Track related changes
v t e

This is an archive of the results of all cases completed by the Arbitration Committee. Cases are presented chronologically by closing date (the most recent are at the top), and at the bottom, cases are presented in an alphabetical list.

2024

3 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Venezuelan politics#Final decision closed 25 May 2024 (AN notice)
  • WMrapids is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • WMrapids is topic banned from Venezuelan politics, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • NoonIcarus and WMrapids are prohibited from interacting with or commenting on each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the ordinary exceptions. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac closed 7 May 2024 (AN notice)

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management#Final decision closed 13 April 2024 (AN notice)
  • The Arbitration Committee requests that a new VRT queue be established to accept reports of undisclosed conflict-of-interest or paid editing, where reporting such editing on-wiki is in conflict with WP:OUTING. The queue membership is to be decided by the Arbitration Committee and is open to any functionary and to any administrator by request to the Committee and who passes a functionary-like appointment process (including signing the ANPDP). Following the creation of the queue, the existing checkuser-only paid-en-wp queue will be archived, and access will be restricted to checkusers indefinitely. Functionaries and administrators working this queue may, at their discretion, refer a ticket to the Arbitration Committee for review; an example of a situation where a ticket should be referred to the committee is when there is a credible report involving an administrator.
  • For posting non-public information about another editor—after a previous post by Fram in the same thread was removed and oversighted—Fram is admonished against posting previously undisclosed information about other editors on Wikipedia ("outing") which is a violation of the harassment policy. Concerns about policy violations based on private evidence must be sent to the appropriate off-wiki venue. Any further violations of this policy may result in an Arbitration Committee block or ban.
  • For his failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, specifically as pertains to conflict of interest editing and conflict of interest disclosure, Nihonjoe's administrator and bureaucrat user rights are removed. Nihonjoe may regain these user rights via a successful request for adminship and a successful request for bureaucratship, respectively.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac suspended for 3 months 6 February 2024
  • The "Mzajac" request for arbitration is accepted. Given Mzajac (talk · contribs)'s absence from editing, the Mzajac case will be suspended for a period of three months and Mzajac will be temporarily desysopped.
    Should Mzajac return to active editing on the English Wikipedia during this time and request that this case be resumed, the Arbitration Committee shall unsuspend the case by motion and it will proceed through the normal arbitration process. Such a request may be made by email to arbcom-enwikimedia.org or at the clerks' noticeboard. Mzajac will remain temporarily desysopped for the duration of the case.
    If such a request is not made within three months of this motion or if Mzajac resigns his administrative tools, this case shall be automatically closed, and Mzajac shall remain desysopped. If tools are resigned or removed, in the circumstances described above, Mzajac may regain the administrative tools at any time only via a successful request for adminship.

2023

6 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Industrial agriculture#Final decision closed 17 December 2023 (AN notice)
  • Leyo and KoA are prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions). This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Leyo is admonished for battleground behavior, personal attacks, and use of administrator tools while INVOLVED. Leyo is INVOLVED in the topic area of genetically modified organisms, industrial agriculture, commercially produced agricultural chemicals, the effects of all three, and organizations or companies involved, broadly construed. Future instances of this kind of conduct may result in sanction, including removal of adminship, without warning, especially if it is INVOLVED tool use.
  • KoA is warned for edit warring and is reminded to engage in good faith when resolving their disputes.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute#Final decision closed 25 August 2023 (AN notice)
  • BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Laurel Lodged (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Laurel Lodged is indefinitely topic banned from maintaining categories. In addition to discussing categories and their maintenance, this includes – but is not limited to – directly adding or removing categories from pages, and moving or renaming categories.
  • Nederlandse Leeuw (talk · contribs) is warned about their behavior during conduct discussions.
  • Editors participating in XfD, especially those forums with a small number of regular participants, are reminded to be careful about forming a local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers at an XfD forum may also want to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW#Final decision closed 16 July 2023 (AN notice)
  • For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, AlisonW's administrative user rights are removed. She may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Scottywong#Final decision closed 7 July 2023 (AN notice)
  • For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, Scottywong's administrative user rights are removed. Scottywong may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • Scottywong (talk · contribs) and ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland#Final decision closed 20 May 2023 (AN notice)
  • The Arbitration Committee formally requests that the Wikimedia Foundation develop and promulgate a white paper on the best practices for researchers and authors when writing about Wikipedians. The Committee requests that the white paper convey to researchers the principles of our movement and give specific recommendation for researchers on how to study and write about Wikipedians and their personal information in a way that respects our principles. Upon completion, we request that the white paper be distributed through the Foundation's research networks including email newsletters, social media accounts, and web publications such as the Diff blog.
    This request will be sent by the Arbitration Committee to Maggie Dennis, Vice President of Community Resilience & Sustainability with the understanding that the task may be delegated as appropriate.
  • Remedy 5 of Antisemitism in Poland is superseded by the following restriction:
    All articles and edits in the topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland are subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction. When a source that is not an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution is removed from an article, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Administrators may enforce this restriction with page protections, topic bans, or blocks; enforcement decisions should consider not merely the severity of the violation but the general disciplinary record of the editor in violation.
  • François Robere is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • My very best wishes
    • is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • Based on their disruptive attempts to defend Piotrus and Volunteer Marek, My very best wishes is subject to a 1-way interaction ban with Piotrus and a 1-way interaction ban with Volunteer Marek, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Volunteer Marek
    • is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • is limited to 1 revert per page and may not revert a second time with-out a consensus for the revert, except for edits in his userspace or obvious vandalism. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • François Robere and Volunteer Marek are prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, posts and comments made by each other, subject to the normal exceptions. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • The Arbitration Committee assumes and makes indefinite the temporary interaction ban between Levivich and Volunteer Marek. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Piotrus is reminded that while off-wiki communication is allowed in most circumstances, he has previously used off-wiki communication disruptively. He is reminded to be cautious about how and when to use off-wiki contact in the future, and to avoid future conflict, he should prioritize on-wiki communication.
  • The Arbitration Committee affirms its January 2022 motion allowing editors to file for Arbitration enforcement at ARCA or Arbitration enforcement noticeboards. In recognition of the overlap of editor interest and activity between this topic area and Eastern Europe, the committee extends this provision to that topic area. It does so by adding the following text in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe:
    As an alternative to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, editors may make enforcement requests directly to the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
  • The Arbitration Committee separately rescinds the part of the January 2022 motion allowing transfer of a case from Arbitration Enforcement to ARCA, in recognition of the now-standard provision in Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Referrals from Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard to the full Committee. It does so by striking the following text in its entirety in item number 7:
    In addition to the usual processes, a consensus of administrators at AE may refer complex or intractable issues to the Arbitration Committee for resolution at ARCA, at which point the committee may resolve the request by motion or open a case to examine the issue.
    [archive / log]
  • When considering sanctions against editors in the Eastern Europe topic area, uninvolved administrators should consider past sanctions and the findings of fact and remedies issued in this case.
  • Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked for up to 1 year. Administrators placing blocks should take into account an editor's overall conduct and Arbitration history and seriously consider increasing the duration of blocks. Any block 3 months or longer should be reported for automatic review either (1) at ARCA or (2) to an arbitrator or clerk who will open a review at ARCA. The committee will consider presented evidence and statements before deciding by motion what, if any, actions are necessary, up to and including a site ban.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Armenia-Azerbaijan 3#Final decision closed 18 March 2023 (AN notice)
  • Abrvagl (talk · contribs)
    • is topic banned from pages about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and related ethnic conflicts, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • may make only 1 revert on any page in any given 24 hour period. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • is indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, ZaniGiovanni anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions). This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Dallavid (talk · contribs)
    • is topic banned from pages about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and related ethnic conflicts, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • may make only 1 revert on any page in any given 24 hour period. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Olympian (talk · contribs)
    • is topic banned from pages about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and related ethnic conflicts, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • may make only 1 revert on any page in any given 24 hour period. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • ZaniGiovanni (talk · contribs)
    • is topic banned from pages about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and related ethnic conflicts, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • may make only 1 revert on any page in any given 24 hour period. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
    • is indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, Abrvagl anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions). This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Golden (talk · contribs) and Grandmaster (talk · contribs) are placed on indefinite probation. If any party to this case is found to be edit warring within the area of dispute by an uninvolved administrator, the administrator should impose the following sanction: [Editor name] is indefinitely topic banned from all pages about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and related ethnic conflicts, broadly construed. Topic bans imposed via this remedy may only be appealed to the Arbitration Committee. For a topic ban imposed under this remedy, an editor may make their first appeal at any time; further appeals may be made every twelve months after an unsuccessful appeal.
  • When deciding on whether or not to issue an Arbitration Enforcement sanction, Administrators are encouraged to consider all behavior, including the seriousness of the violation and the possible recidivism of the editor in question. For instance, users who do not heed warnings or who engage in sustained, low-level misconduct should be sanctioned rather than re-warned. Where editor conduct frequently results in enforcement requests that are dismissed or closed with warnings, administrators are encouraged to impose robust restrictions on editors.

2022

7 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Stephen#Final decision closed 7 December 2022 (AN notice)
  • The administrative permissions of Stephen are restored.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block#Final decision closed 02 November 2022 (AN notice)
  • For breaches of Wikipedia's administrative norms, Lourdes is warned.
  • For conduct which fell short of the high standards of behavior expected of functionaries, the CheckUser permissions of TheresNoTime are removed. They may seek to regain them only through the usual appointment methods.
  • For conduct which fell short of the high standards of behavior expected of functionaries, the Oversight permissions of TheresNoTime are removed. They may seek to regain them only through the usual appointment methods.
  • For serious breaches of Wikipedia's administrative norms and of the CheckUser policy, TheresNoTime is admonished.
  • The Arbitration Committee wishes to express that Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Actions by parties to a proceeding does not apply to TheresNoTime given that a majority of active arbitrators had opposed desysopping them at the time they relinquished their adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct in deletion-related editing closed 2 August 2022 (AN notice)
  • 7&6=thirteen (talk · contribs) is topic banned from deletion discussions, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Johnpacklambert (talk · contribs) is banned from taking the following actions: (1) participating in deletion discussions, broadly construed; (2) proposing an article for deletion ("PRODing"), but not contesting a proposed deletion ("de-PRODing"); and (3) turning an article into a redirect. This sanction supersedes his March 2017 community topic ban. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Lugnuts (talk · contribs) is warned against making personal attacks, engaging in battleground behavior in deletion discussions, and other disruptive deletion behavior. If Lugnuts should engage in disruptive behavior related to deletion, broadly construed, an uninvolved administrator may block him (in accordance with the standard enforcement provision) or impose on him a topic ban for up to one year.
  • Lugnuts (talk · contribs) is banned from taking the following actions: (1) participating in deletion discussions, broadly construed; (2) contesting a proposed deletion ("de-PRODing"); and (3) creating articles that comprise less than 500 words, including converting redirects into articles. This remedy supersedes his December 2021 community topic ban. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Lugnuts (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) is topic banned from deletion discussions, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • The Arbitration Committee requests comment on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion.
    • The request for comment (RfC) will take place at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Requests for comment/AfD at scale and the discussion will be moderated by editor(s) appointed by the Arbitration Committee.
    • The moderator(s), with community feedback, will be responsible for developing the questions presented.
    • The moderator(s) will also be responsible for supervising the discussions, and ensuring comments remain relevant and focused. To maintain decorum, moderator(s) may collapse comments, move comments to the talk page, remove comments entirely, ban editors from the process, or take other reasonable actions necessary to maintain decorum.
    • The RfC will be announced at the articles for deletion talk page, the Arbitration Noticeboard, the administrators' noticeboard, and the Village pump (policy). Comments will be accepted for 30 days, and the request for comment will be advertised on the centralized discussion template.
    • The request for comment will be closed by a panel of three editors with experience closing discussions and who will be appointed by the Arbitration Committee prior to the start of the RfC. The closing panel should summarize the main points brought up in the discussion and evaluate what consensus, if any, exists within the community.
    • Any appeals of a moderator decision or of the panel close may only be made to the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Cyclones closed 27 May 2022 (AN notice)
  • MarioProtIV (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from closing, or reopening, any discussion outside their own user talk space. This restriction may be appealed after 12 months.
  • Chlod (talk · contribs) is warned about using off-wiki platforms in an attempt to win on-wiki disputes.
  • Elijahandskip (talk · contribs) is warned about using off-wiki platforms in an attempt to win on-wiki disputes.
  • LightandDark2000 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from pages about weather, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • MarioProtIV (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from pages about weather, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Leaders/moderators of off-wiki chat platforms (i.e. IRC, Discord, Telegram) should consider the following practices for their platform:
    • Advertised on-wiki, including at relevant Wiki Project pages and more general pages (e.g. WP:DISCORD).
    • Instructions and links on how to join are provided.
    • Users are asked to authenticate to their onwiki identity.
    • The rules and expectations are posted in a prominent place (e.g. a read-only channel). WP:HARASSMENT, WP:CANVASS & WP:OUTING are considered in those rules and expectations.
    • There is active moderation to enforce the rules and expectations. The moderation team is made up of trusted members and is sufficiently large for the size of the platform/channel.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Geschichte accepted and suspended 17 March 2022, closed automatically 31 July 2022 (motion)

  The "Geschichte" request for arbitration is accepted. This case will be opened but suspended for a period of three months.

  If Geschichte (talk · contribs) should return to active editing on the English Wikipedia during this time and request that this case be resumed, the Arbitration Committee shall unsuspend the case by motion and it will proceed through the normal arbitration process. Such a request may be made by email to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org or at the clerks' noticeboard. Geschichte is temporarily desysopped for the duration of the case.

  If such a request is not made within three months of this motion or if Geschichte resigns his administrative tools, this case shall be automatically closed, and Geschichte shall be permanently desysopped. If tools are resigned or removed, in the circumstances described above, Geschichte may regain the administrative tools at any time only via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing closed 3 March 2022 (AN notice)
  • Rp2006 (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality and further incivility.
  • Rp2006 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from edits related to living people associated with or of interest to scientific skepticism, broadly construed. This topic ban may be appealed after six months have elapsed and every six months thereafter.
  • A. C. Santacruz (talk · contribs) is reminded to remain collegial in editing and interacting with others.
  • Roxy the dog (talk · contribs) is warned to remain collegial in editing and interacting with others.
  • GSoW is advised that a presence on English Wikipedia, perhaps as its own WikiProject or as a task force of WikiProject Skepticism, will create more transparency and lessen some of the kinds of suspicion and conflict that preceded this case. It could also provide a place for the GSoW to get community feedback about its training which would increase its effectiveness.
  • Editors are reminded that discretionary sanctions for biographies of living people have been authorized since 2014. Editors named in this decision shall be considered aware of these discretionary sanctions under awareness criterion 1.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jonathunder accepted and suspended 26 February 2022, closed automatically 28 August 2022 (motion)

  The "Jonathunder" request for arbitration is accepted. This case will be opened but suspended for a period of six months.

  If Jonathunder (talk · contribs) should return to active editing on the English Wikipedia during this time and request that this case be resumed, the Arbitration Committee shall unsuspend the case by motion and it will proceed through the normal arbitration process. Such a request may be made by email to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org or at the clerks' noticeboard. Jonathunder is temporarily desysopped for the duration of the case.

  If such a request is not made within six months of this motion or if Jonathunder resigns his administrative tools, this case shall be automatically closed, and Jonathunder shall be permanently desysopped. If tools are resigned or removed, in the circumstances described above, Jonathunder may regain the administrative tools at any time only via a successful request for adminship.

2021

6 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian politics#Final decision closed 20 September 2021 (AN notice)
  • (i) The community-authorized general sanctions for post-1978 Iranian politics are hereby superseded and replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
    (ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.
    (iii) Notifications issued under Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from their date of issue, then expire.
    (iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the arbitration enforcement log.
    (v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.
    (vi) Administrators who have enforced the Post-1978 Iranian politics general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
  • Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to take appropriate actions (pursuant to the discretionary sanctions authorization) to facilitate consensus through moderation of any Requests for Comments (RfC). These actions may include, but are not limited to:
    • moratoriums up to one year on initiating RfCs on a particular dispute,
    • word and/or diff limits on all RfC participants,
    • bans on editors who have disrupted consensus-finding from participation in a particular RfC, and
    • sectioned commenting rules in RfCs.
  • BarcrMac (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Idealigic (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality and further incivility.
  • Mhhossein (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Stefka Bulgaria (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Vice regent (talk · contribs) is warned against a battleground mentality.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Carlossuarez46 closed 9 July 2021 (AN notice)

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/COVID-19#Final decision created and closed by motion 16 June 2021 (AN notice)
  • (i) The community COVID-19 general sanctions are hereby rescinded and are replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all articles related to, COVID-19, broadly construed.
    (ii) All sanctions in force when this remedy is enacted are endorsed and will become standard discretionary sanctions governed by the standard procedure from the moment of enactment.
    (iii) Notifications issued under COVID-19 general sanctions become alerts for twelve months from their date of issue, then expire.
    (iv) All existing and past sanctions and restrictions placed under COVID-19 general sanctions will be transcribed by the arbitration clerks in the arbitration enforcement log.
    (v) Any requests for enforcement that may be open when this remedy is enacted shall proceed, but any remedy that is enacted should be enacted as a discretionary sanction.
    (vi) Administrators who have enforced the COVID-19 general sanctions are thanked for their work and asked to continue providing administrative assistance enforcing discretionary sanctions and at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Carlossuarez46 suspended for 3 months 8 April 2021
  • The "Carlossuarez46" request for arbitration is accepted. Given that Carlossuarez46 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has retired from the English Wikipedia, this case will be opened but suspended for a period of three months, during which time Carlossuarez46 will be temporarily desysopped.
    If Carlossuarez46 should return to active editing on the English Wikipedia during this time and request that this case be resumed, the Arbitration Committee shall unsuspend the case by motion and it will proceed through the normal arbitration process. Such a request may be made by email to arbcom-enwikimedia.org or at the clerks' noticeboard.
    If such a request is not made within three months of this motion, this case shall be automatically closed, and Carlossuarez46 shall remain desysopped. Carlossuarez46 may regain the administrative tools at any time only via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RexxS#Final decision closed 26 March 2021 (AN notice)
  • RexxS (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) administrative privileges are revoked. He may apply to have them reinstated at any time via a new request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kurds and Kurdistan#Final decision closed 23 February 2021 (AN notice)
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.
  • GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • GPinkerton (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Thepharoah17 (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • عمرو بن كلثوم (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Paradise Chronicle is warned to avoid casting aspersions and repeating similar uncollegial conduct in the future.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender and sexuality#Final decision created and closed by motion 22 February 2021 (AN notice)
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Flyer22_and_WanderingWanda dismissed by motion 21 January 2021 (AN notice)

2020

8 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Horn of Africa#Final decision provisionally closed by motion 9 December 2020 (AN notice)
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes) for a trial period of three months and until further decision of this Committee. After March 1, 2021 (or sooner if there is good reason), any editor may ask that this request be reopened for the purpose of evaluating whether the discretionary sanctions have been effective and should be made permanent or if a full case should be accepted to consider different or additional remedies.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine#Final decision closed 03 June 2020 (AN notice)
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles. Any uninvolved administrator may apply sanctions as an arbitration enforcement action to users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
  • CFCF is reminded to avoid casting aspersions and similar conduct in the future.
  • Doc James is prohibited from making any edits relating to pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing in the article namespace.
  • QuackGuru is indefinitely topic-banned from articles relating to medicine, broadly construed.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Jytdog#Final decision closed 13 April 2020 (AN notice)
  • Jytdog (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. He may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Motorsports#Final decision closed 30 March 2020 (AN notice)
  • Mclarenfan17 (talk · contribs) and Tvx1 (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/RHaworth#Final decision closed 01 February 2020 (AN notice)
  • For his failure to meet the standards expected of an administrator, including repeated misuse of the deletion tool, RHaworth's administrative user rights are removed. RHaworth may regain administrative user rights at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • Administrators are reminded that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Alex Shih closed 12 February 2020 (AN notice)

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung#Final decision closed 29 February 2020 (AN notice)
  • For his failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, Kudpung's administrative user rights are removed. He may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • Kudpung is admonished for failing to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator. In future, he is urged to ensure that he remains civil in his interactions with both new and regular editors, and responds to feedback on his conduct objectively and with an assumption of good faith.
  • Arbitration is supposed to be the final step in the dispute resolution process. The community is reminded that attempting to have a community-wide discussion of problematic behavior early on can prevent unnecessary escalations.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Portals#Final decision closed 29 January 2020 (AN notice)
  • BrownHairedGirl is prohibited from editing in the Portal: namespace or engaging in discussions about portals anywhere on Wikipedia. She may appeal this restriction in six months.
  • BrownHairedGirl is indefinitely restricted from interacting with or commenting about Northamerica1000 anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the ordinary exceptions. This restriction may be appealed in six months.
  • For numerous violations of basic policies and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities as outlined in Wikipedia:Administrators#Accountability and Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator conduct, BrownHairedGirl is desysopped. She may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • The Arbitration Committee recommends that a well-publicized community discussion be held to establish a guideline for portals. The committee further recommends that this RfC be kept open for at least 30 days, be closed by a panel of 3 uninvolved administrators, and at a minimum address the following questions:
    • Topics: How broad or narrow should a topic area be for it to sustain a portal?
    • Page views: Should there be a minimum number of page views for a portal to be considered viable? How should those page views be measured?
    • WikiProjects: Should portals be required to be connected to an active WikiProject or other group of maintainers?
    • Updates: How often should a portal be updated?
    • Automation: Can automated tools be used in the creation or maintenance of portals?
    • Links to portals: How should portals be used? Should they be linked on all relevant Wikipedia articles, or should another method be used to ensure that portals are viewed and used?

2019

9 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4 closed 20 December 2019 (AN notice)

• Editors generally were both reminded and counselled about the context, expectations, and good practices that apply when editing this topic area
• The "area of conflict" was defined
• Area of conflict had the ARBPIA General Sanctions created and authorised, comprising:

• Discretionary Sanctions of the standard form
• the 500/30 rule prohibiting new editors from editing the area of conflict

• All article subjects within the area of conflict were placed under ARBPIA General Sanctions
• Related content was defined as content about the area of conflict located in articles about subjects not related to the area of conflict.
• All related content within the area of conflict was placed under ARBPIA General Sanctions
• Many existing remedies from prior cases were vacated, in some instances to be re-adopted in this decision for the sake of easy referencing

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland closed 22 September 2019 (AN notice)
  • Icewhiz (talk · contribs) and Volunteer Marek (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • Icewhiz is topic-banned from the history of Poland during World War II, including the Holocaust in Poland. This topic ban may be appealed after one year has elapsed.
  • Volunteer Marek is topic-banned from the history of Poland during World War II, including the Holocaust in Poland. This topic ban may be appealed after one year has elapsed.
  • The sourcing expectations applied to the article Collaboration in German-occupied Poland are expanded and adapted to cover all articles on the topic of Polish history during World War II (1933-45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Only high quality sources may be used, specifically peer-reviewed scholarly journals, academically focused books by reputable publishers, and/or articles published by reputable institutions. English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. Editors repeatedly failing to meet this standard may be topic-banned as an arbitration enforcement action.
  • The committee acknowledges the lengthy delay in preparing the proposed decision for this case. We apologize to the case participants and to other editors interested in the topic area, and thank them for their patience.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fram closed 21 September 2019 (AN notice)
  • The Committee decides that Fram's ban was not required, and therefore vacates it.
  • The behaviour shown in the case materials falls below the standards expected for an administrator. Accordingly, the committee takes over the decision to remove Fram's administrator tools. They may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • A Request for Comment will be opened under the Arbitration space, and managed by the Arbitration Clerks. This RfC will focus on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Canadian politics closed 6 July 2019 (AN notice)
  • Curly Turkey is prohibited from editing SNC-Lavalin affair and its talk page for a period of six months. This restriction may be appealed at WP:ARCA after three months.
  • Curly Turkey is warned that future violations of Wikipedia's conduct policies and guidelines, including WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:ASPERSIONS, may result in blocks or bans.
  • Curly Turkey, Darryl Kerrigan, Legacypac, Littleolive oil, PavelShk, Safrolic, and SWL36 are admonished for edit warring.
  • All editors are reminded to seek dispute resolution and to use appropriate resources, such as the dispute resolution noticeboard, for outside opinions and suggestions for resolving problems.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Reversion of office actions opened and resolved by motion 5 July 2019 (AN notice)
  • The community is advised that administrators and bureaucrats are normally expected not to act when they know they do not have all of the relevant facts, and that this is especially important with regard to office actions where those facts may be highly sensitive. As a general rule, wheel warring may be grounds for removal of administrative rights by the committee as well as by the WMF. Lack of sanctions under these exceptional circumstances should not set expectations around similar future actions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama closed 6 June 2019 (AN notice)
  • For misuse of administrative tools and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities as outlined in WP:ADMINACCT, Rama (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Enigmaman#Final decision closed 6 May 2019 (AN notice)
  • Enigmaman (talk · contribs) is desysopped for repeated misuse of administrative tools and the administrative logs, inadequate communication, and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities of administrators as outlined in WP:ADMINACCT. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Alex Shih#Motion to Suspend suspended 12 February 2019

  The "Alex Shih" request for arbitration is accepted. Given that Alex Shih (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has retired from the English Wikipedia, this case will be opened but suspended for a duration not to exceed one year, during which time Alex Shih will be temporarily desysopped.

  If Alex Shih should return to active editing on the English Wikipedia during this time and request that this case be resumed, the Arbitration Committee shall unsuspend the case by motion and proceed through the normal arbitration process. Such a request may be made by email to arbcom-enwikimedia.org or at the Clerks' noticeboard.

  If such a request is not made within one year of the "Alex Shih" case being opened and suspended, this case shall be automatically closed, and Alex Shih shall remain desysopped. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GiantSnowman#Final decision closed 10 February 2019 (AN notice)
  • GiantSnowman is admonished for overuse of the rollback and blocking functions, and reminded to "lead by example" and "strive to model appropriate standards of courtesy"; to "respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrative actions and to justify them when needed"; to not use admin tools in "cases in which they have been involved" including "conflicts with an editor" and "disputes on topics"; to "treat newcomers with kindness and patience"; and to apply these principles in all interactions with all editors. GiantSnowman is placed under review indefinitely; during the review, with the exception of obvious vandalism, he is subject to the following restrictions:
    1. He may not revert another editor's contribution without providing an explanation in the edit summary. This includes use of MediaWiki's rollback function, any tool or script that provides a similar function, and any manual revert without an edit summary. Default edit summaries, such as those provided by the undo function or Twinkle's rollback feature, are not sufficient for the purpose of this sanction
    2. He may not block an editor without first using at least three escalating messages and template warnings
    3. He may not consecutively block an editor; after one block he is advised to consult with another admin or bring the matter to the attention of the community
    4. He may not place a warning template on an editor's talk page without having first placed an appropriate self-composed message containing links to relevant policies and guidelines
    5. He may not place more than five consecutive warning templates or messages; after which he is advised to consult with another admin
    6. He may not use MassRollback.js

  Violations may be reported by any editor to WP:AE. GiantSnowman may appeal any or all of these sanctions, including the review itself, directly to the Arbitration Committee at any time.

2018

7 cases, 1 of which was dismissed

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder#Final decision closed 06 December 2018 (AN notice)
  • Fred Bauder is admonished for engaging in an edit war on his candidate's questions page. Future edit-warring or disruptive behavior may result in further sanctions.
  • For multiple self-unblocks, wheel-warring, and abuse of rollback, Fred Bauder is desysopped. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
  • Boing! said Zebedee is cautioned for blocking Fred Bauder while actively involved in an edit war with him at the time. He is further cautioned to avoid edit-warring, even in cases where the other editor is editing disruptively.
  • Editors should seek assistance from the Electoral Commission for issues that arise on pages related to the Arbitration Committee Elections that cannot be easily resolved (excluding, for example, obvious vandalism). The Arbitration Committee reaffirms that the Electoral Commission has been tasked with the independent oversight of the Arbitration Committee Elections.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort#Final decision closed 11 August 2018 (AN notice)
  • For engaging in harassment of other users, LargelyRecyclable (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia under any account.
  • Cinderella157 is topic banned from the history of Germany from 1932 to 1945, broadly construed. This topic ban may be appealed after six months have elapsed and every six months thereafter.
  • Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is reminded that project coordinators have no special roles in a content dispute, and that featured articles are not immune to sourcing problems.
  • Editors are reminded that consensus-building is key to the purpose and development of Wikipedia. The most reliable sources should be used instead of questionable sourcing whenever possible, especially when dealing with sensitive topics. Long-term disagreement over local consensus in a topic area should be resolved through soliciting comments from the wider community, instead of being re-litigated persistently at the local level.
  • While certain specific user-conduct issues have been identified in this decision, for the most part the underlying issue is a content dispute as to how, for example, the military records of World War II-era German military officers can be presented to the same extent as military records of officers from other periods, while placing their records and actions in the appropriate overall historical context. For better or worse, the Arbitration Committee is neither authorized nor qualified to resolve this content dispute, beyond enforcing general precepts such as those requiring reliable sourcing, due weighting, and avoidance of personal attacks. Nor does Wikipedia have any other editorial body authorized to dictate precisely how the articles should read outside the ordinary editing process. Knowledgeable editors who have not previously been involved in these disputes are urged to participate in helping to resolve them. Further instances of uncollegial behavior in this topic-area will not be tolerated and, if this occurs, may result in this Committee's accepting a request for clarification and amendment to consider imposition of further remedies, including topic-bans or discretionary sanctions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/BLP issues on British politics articles#Final decision closed 26 July 2018 (AN notice)
  • Philip Cross (talk · contribs) is warned to avoid editing topics with which he has a conflict of interest. Further, he is warned that his off-wiki behavior may lead to further sanctions to the extent it adversely impacts the English Wikipedia.
  • Philip Cross (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from edits relating to post-1978 British politics, broadly construed. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter. This sanction supersedes the community sanction applied in May 2018.
  • KalHolmann (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted from linking to or speculating about the off-wiki behavior or identity of other editors. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter. All appeals must be directed toward arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org.
  • The community is reminded that publicly posting details or speculation regarding an editor’s personal information or off-wiki behavior violates the policy on outing, unless the information has been disclosed on-wiki by the editor in question. Concerns regarding off-wiki behavior are best reported through an appropriate private channel rather than on community noticeboards.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan#Final decision dismissed 11 June 2018 (AN notice)

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others#Final decision closed 4 March 2018 (AN notice)
  • Subject to the usual exceptions, Joefromrandb (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted to one revert per page in any 24 hour period.
  • For persistent and serious violations of Wikipedia's expected standards of behaviour including edit warring, battleground conduct and incivility, Joefromrandb (talk · contribs) is banned from the English Wikipedia for a period of six months. If problematic behaviour continues after the ban expires, the Arbitration Committee may impose an indefinite site ban or other sanctions by motion in response to a report at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
  • Point 3 of this community restriction from ANI is rescinded.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions#Final decision closed 28 March 2018 (AN notice)
  • Any uninvolved administrator may apply infobox probation as a discretionary sanction. See the full decision for details of infobox probation.
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes.
  • Cassianto is indefinitely placed on infobox probation.
  • The Arbitration Committee recommends that well-publicized community discussions be held to address whether to adopt a policy or guideline addressing what factors should weigh in favor of or against including an infobox in a given article and how those factors should be weighted.
  • All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to not turn discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general.
  • For canvassing editors to this case, Volvlogia (talk · contribs) is admonished. They are warned that any further instances of canvassing related to arbitration processes will likely result in sanctions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors#Final decision closed 7 January 2018 (AN notice)
  • For conduct unbecoming an administrator, Salvidrim! (talk · contribs) is desysopped. They may regain administrator tools at any time via a successful RfA.
  • Salvidrim! is prohibited from reviewing articles for creation drafts, or moving AfC drafts created by other editors into mainspace. This restriction can be appealed in 12 months.
  • Salvidrim! is warned that further breaches of WP:COI will be grounds for sanctions including blocks, in accordance with community policies and guidelines.
  • Soetermans (talk · contribs) is prohibited from reviewing articles for creation drafts, or moving AfC drafts created by other editors into mainspace. This restriction can be appealed in 12 months.
  • Soetermans is warned that further breaches of WP:COI will be grounds for sanctions including blocks, in accordance with community policies and guidelines.

2017

4 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arthur Rubin#Final decision closed 16 October 2017 (AN notice)
  • Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs) is desysopped for repeatedly not meeting the community expectations and responsibilities of administrators as outlined in WP:ADMINACCT. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Magioladitis 2#Final decision closed 4 September 2017 (AN notice)
  • Magioladitis (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from making any edit which only introduces a cosmetic change (that is, where there is no substantive change made in the same edit). However, Magioladitis may make (without a substantive change in the same edit) or bundle (for example, as part of "general fixes") cosmetic changes from his bot account if the bot request for approval specifically allows this. This sanction supersedes remedy 7.1 of the original case.
  • Magioladitis is indefinitely prohibited from initiating or participating in any discussion concerning WP:COSMETICBOT, including discussions concerning its impact. Magioladitis may ask specific questions, at the bot noticeboard or bot request for approval, to clarify whether bot tasks he wishes to undertake, or is currently undertaking, are permitted under remedy 1.1 of this case. Once a question has been answered, and discussion closed, by an uninvolved BAG member or administrator, Magioladitis is not permitted to raise the same question again, except in a clarification request if required. This sanction supersedes the community sanction applied in June 2017.
  • Magioladitis is indefinitely prohibited from using AWB, or similar tool (such as WPCleaner), on the English Wikipedia. This prohibition does not apply to bots operated by Magioladitis undertaking approved tasks. For clarity, he may discuss AWB and similar tools (notwithstanding his other sanctions), but may not make edits using them (or a derivative) on the English Wikipedia. This sanction supersedes the community sanction applied in July 2017.
  • Magioladitis is reminded that accounts making automated edits (bots) must be approved by the bot approvals group before being used. He is indefinitely prohibited from making automated edits from his main (User:Magioladitis) account.
  • For consistent poor judgement and failure to follow Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, Magioladitis is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time through a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Magioladitis#Final decision closed 22 March 2017 (AN notice)
  • The community is encouraged to carefully review the lists of items in AWB's "general fixes" and the Checkwiki project's list of errors to determine whether these items are truly uncontroversial maintenance changes. A suggested approach would be classifying existing fixes as cosmetic or non-cosmetic and thereby identifying fixes that should be ineligible to be applied alone. The groups who currently invest their efforts in maintaining these lists are encouraged to improve their change management practices by soliciting broader community input into the value of adding proposed new items to the lists, and specifically to make their proposals accessible to members of the community who are not bot operators or whose interests are non-technical.
  • The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to clarify the nature of "cosmetic" edits and to reevaluate community consensus about the utility and scope of restrictions on such edits. Technical feedback may be provided at phab:T11790 or phab:T127173. The committee notes that an RfC on this topic is currently under development.
  • While the Arbitration Committee has no direct authority over the volunteer developers of open-source tools, we encourage the AWB developers to carefully consider feedback gathered in this case in order to use technical means to avoid problematic edits more effectively.
  • The Bot Approvals Group is encouraged to carefully review the proposed scope of any new bot request for approval to ensure that the scope and tasks are clearly defined and will resist scope creep.
  • Magioladitis is restricted from making any semi-automated edits which do not affect the rendered visual output of a page. This restriction does not apply to edits which address issues related to accessibility guidelines. Further, Magioladitis may seek consensus to perform a specific type of semi-automated edit that would normally fall under this restriction at the administrators' noticeboard. Any uninvolved administrator may close such a discussion with consensus to perform a specific type of semi-automated edit. All discussions should be logged on the case page, regardless of outcome.
  • Magioladitis is reminded that performing the same or similar series of edits in an automated fashion using a bot and in a semi-automated fashion on his main account is acceptable only as long as as long as no objections have been raised in either casethe edits are not contentious. Should Yobot be stopped or blocked for a series of edits, Magioladitis may not perform the same pattern of edits via semi-automated tools from his main account where this might reasonably be perceived as evading the block. In this circumstance, Magioladitis (like any other editor) should await discussion and consensus as to whether or not the edits are permissible and useful, and resume making such edits through any account only if and when the consensus is favorable.
  • Magioladitis is restricted from unblocking their own bot when it has been blocked by another administrator. After discussion with the blocking administrator and/or on the bot owners' noticeboard, the blocking administrator or an uninvolved administrator may unblock the bot.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/War of the Pacific#Final decision closed 22 March 2017 (AN notice)
  • Keysanger (talk · contribs) and MarshalN20 (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • Keysanger (talk · contribs) is warned not to cast aspersions on other editors, or to unnecessarily perpetuate on-wiki battles.
  • Where the dispute relates specifically to the interpretation of individual military history sources, the Committee recommends that these disputes in this topic area be formally raised at the Military History Wikiproject talkpage to ensure a wider audience and further expert input. Evident manipulation of sources, or disregard of a MILHIST consensus, should be considered disruptive editing and addressed via regular administrative action where appropriate.
  • Where any content dispute involves both Keysanger (talk · contribs) and MarshalN20 (talk · contribs), those editors must seek wider input by raising the matter at any one of: the Military History Wikiproject talkpage, WP:3O, or WP:RFC. Both editors must abide by any subsequent consensus that arises from this process. Disregard of consensus should be considered disruptive editing and addressed via regular administrative action where appropriate. Nothing in this remedy restricts the editing of the disputed topic area by other editors.

2016

5 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man#Final decision closed 13 October 2016 (AN notice)
  • The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)'s resignation as an administrator is to be considered under controversial circumstances, and so his administrator status may only be regained via a successful request for adminship.
  • The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) is prohibited from insulting and/or belittling other editors. If The Rambling Man finds himself tempted to engage in prohibited conduct, he is to disengage and either let the matter drop or refer it to another editor to resolve. If however, in the opinion of an uninvolved administrator, The Rambling Man does engage in prohibited conduct, he may be blocked for a duration consistent with the blocking policy. The first four blocks under this provision shall be arbitration enforcement actions and may only be reviewed or appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Should a fifth block prove necessary, the blocking administrator must notify the Arbitration Committee of the block via a Request for Clarification and Amendment so that the remedy may be reviewed. The enforcing administrator may also at their discretion fully protect The Rambling Man's talk page for the duration of the block.

    Nothing in this remedy prevents enforcement of policy by uninvolved administrators in the usual way.

  • The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) and George Ho (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • George Ho (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted from participating in selecting main page content. For clarity, this means he may not participate in:
    • • Any process in which the content of the main page is selected, including Did you know?, In the news, On this day, Today's featured article, Today's featured list, and Today's featured picture.
      • Any process in which possible problems with the content of the main page are reported, including WP:ERRORS and Talk:Main Page.
      • Any discussion about the above processes, regardless of venue.
    • He may edit articles linked from or eligible to be linked from the main page (e.g., the current featured article) and may participate in content review processes not directly connected to main page content selection (e.g., reviewing Featured article candidates). He may request reconsideration of this restriction twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.
  • The community is encouraged to review the selection process for the Did you know and In the news sections of the main page. The community is also reminded that they may issue topic bans without the involvement of the Arbitration Committee if consensus shows a user has repeatedly submitted poor content, performed poor reviews, or otherwise disrupted these processes.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy#Final decision closed 1 October 2016 (AN notice)
  • Michael Hardy is reminded that:
    • Administrators are expected to set an example with their behavior, including refraining from incivility and responding patiently to good-faith concerns about their conduct, even when those concerns are expressed suboptimally.
    • All administrators are expected to keep their knowledge of core policies reasonably up to date.
    • Further misconduct using the administrative tools will result in sanctions.
  • MjolnirPants is reminded to use tactics that are consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and the 4th Pillar when dealing with other users they are in dispute with.
  • The Arbitration Committee is reminded to carefully consider the appropriate scope of future case requests. The committee should limit "scope creep" and focus on specific items that are within the scope of the duties and responsibilities outlined in Arbitration Policy.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others#Final decision closed 4 June 2016 (AN notice)
  • Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
  • DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
  • DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
  • For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
  • Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
  • The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wikicology#Final decision closed 13 May 2016 (AN notice)
  • Wikicology is indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit in any non-talk namespace related to biomedical or public health content, or any other topic within the scope of WP:MEDRS, broadly construed.
  • Wikicology is indefinitely topic-banned from uploading any images or other non-text media to the English Wikipedia. In addition, he is indefinitely topic-banned from using on the English Wikipedia any image or other media he has uploaded to any other project, including Commons.
  • Wikicology is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. He may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.
  • The community is encouraged to make use of the material presented in the Evidence and Analysis of Evidence sections to organize a systematic clean-up effort for Wikicology's past problematic contributions.
  • The Committee will, on a best-effort basis, inform representatives of WMF-affiliated projects with which Wikicology has been involved of the outcome of this case.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kevin Gorman#Final decision closed 18 January 2016 (AN notice)
  • Kevin Gorman desysopped

2015

19 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88#Final decision closed 29 December 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1) Catflap08 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to Nichiren Buddhism and its adherents, broadly construed. Appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 2.1) Subject to the usual exceptions, Catflap08 is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 24-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except Catflap08's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.
  • 3) Hijiri88 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to Nichiren Buddhism and its adherents, broadly construed. Appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 4) Hijiri88 is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to Japanese culture. Appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 5) Subject to the usual exceptions, Hijiri88 is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 24-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except Hijiri88's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.
  • 6.1) TH1980 (talk · contribs) and Hijiri88 are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2#Final decision closed 25 December 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.
  • 3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.
  • 6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Genetically modified organisms#Final decision closed 12 December 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1) Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed.
  • 2) Editors are prohibited from making more than one revert per page per day on any page relating to genetically modified organisms, agricultural biotechnology, and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed and subject to the usual exemptions.
  • 3) Jytdog and DrChrissy are placed indefinitely under a two-way interaction ban.
  • 7) DrChrissy is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified plants and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 8) Jytdog is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly interpreted; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 9) Jytdog is admonished for their poor civility in relation to the locus of this case.
  • 11) SageRad is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.
  • 12) Wuerzele is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to genetically modified organisms and agricultural chemicals, broadly construed; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Neelix#Final decision closed 14 November 2015 (AN notice)
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Editor conduct in e-cigs articles#Final decision closed 17 November 2015 (AN notice)
  • General Sanctions for the Electronic Cigarette topic area are rescinded. In its place, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for the Electronic Cigarette topic area, broadly construed.
  • Discretionary Sanctions are explicitly extended for the Electronic Cigarettes topic area. Specifically, single purpose accounts may be topic banned or blocked (indefinite or otherwise), if in the view of an uninvolved administrator, they are being disruptive in the topic area.
  • Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to monitor the articles covered by discretionary sanctions in this case to ensure compliance. To assist in this, administrators are reminded that:
    • Accounts with a clear shared agenda may be blocked if they violate the sockpuppetry policy or other applicable policy;
    • Accounts whose primary purpose is disruption or making personal attacks may be blocked indefinitely;
    • Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning. The Arbitration Committee thanks those administrators who have been helping to enforce the community general sanctions, and thanks, once again, in advance those who help enforce the remedies adopted in this case.
  • QuackGuru (talk · contribs) is warned that continuing to engage in a pattern of disruption to Wikipedia will result in further sanctions.
  • CFCF (talk · contribs) is restricted to one revert per article per every 72 hour period in the Electronic Cigarette topic area, broadly construed.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3#Final decision closed 22 November 2015 (AN notice)
  • All anonymous IP editors and accounts with less than 500 edits and 30 days tenure are prohibited from editing any page that could be reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This prohibition may be enforced by reverts, page protections, blocks, the use of Pending Changes, and appropriate edit filters.
  • Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to monitor the articles covered by discretionary sanctions in the original Palestine-Israel case to ensure compliance. To assist in this, administrators are reminded that:

• Accounts with a clear shared agenda may be blocked if they violate the sockpuppetry policy or other applicable policy;
• Accounts whose primary purpose is disruption, violating the policy on biographies of living persons, or making personal attacks may be blocked indefinitely;
• There are special provisions in place to deal with editors who violate the BLP policy;
• Administrators may act on clear BLP violations with page protections, blocks, or warnings even if they have edited the article themselves or are otherwise involved;
• Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement#Final decision closed 24 August 2015 (AN notice)
  • The Arbitration Committee delegates the drafters of this case to amend and clarify the text of the policy at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions and the text on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement to bring them in line with the clarifications contained in this decision.
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kww and The Rambling Man#Final decision closed 3 August 2015 (AN notice)
  • Kww (talk · contribs)'s administrator permissions are revoked. He may regain the tools at any time through a successful request for adminship
  • Kww (talk · contribs)'s edit filter manager permission is revoked. He may only regain them as follows: If he is desysopped as a result of this case, and is later successful at regaining the administrator tools through a successful request for adminship, this restriction will automatically expire. If he is not desysopped as a result of this case, he may appeal this remedy after 12 months to the Arbitration Committee.
  • The community is encouraged to establish a policy or guideline for the use of edit filters, and a process by which existing and proposed edit filters may be judged against these.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lightbreather#Final decision closed 17 July 2015 (AN notice)
  • Lightbreather (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is site-banned. They may request reconsideration of the ban no earlier than one year after it is enacted.
  • Lightbreather (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic-banned from the Gun control topic, broadly construed.
  • Lightbreather (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is restricted to editing from one account. They must obtain the Committee's prior approval if they wish to edit from a different account. They are prohibited from making edits without logging in.
  • Subject to the usual exceptions, Lightbreather is prohibited from making any more than one revert to any page, except Lightbreather's own user space, in any 24-hour period.
  • Lightbreather (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is restricted to editing articles, their talk pages, and Lightbreather's user and user talk pages. Further, they may not edit articles in topics from which they are banned. They may post elsewhere only to respond to unambiguous criticism of them in dispute resolution fora. The default interaction-ban exceptions remain in place but improper use of them by Lightbreather is sanctionable as an i-ban evasion. Should Lightbreather wish to initiate action against any user for whatever reason they may do so only by email to the Arbitration Committee.
  • All interactions bans affecting Lightbreather are taken over by the Arbitration Committee and placed under the committee's direct jurisdiction. The default i-ban exceptions remain in place but improper use of them by Lightbreather is sanctionable as an i-ban evasion. For consistency and ease of administration, the i-bans may be enforced by any uninvolved administrator as an arbitration enforcement action but any resultant appeals may be made only to the committee and only by email. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph applies to the following interaction bans:
    1. Mike Searson (one-way)
    2. Hell in a Bucket (two-way)
    3. Eric Corbett (two-way)
    4. Sitush (one-way)
    5. Scalhotrod (two-way)
  • The community is invited to create and maintain a page containing practical advice and guidance on dealing with serious harassment.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on improved trust and safety policies for the site.[1], [2] and the community is urged to offer what assistance it can.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Technical 13#Motion closed 26 June 2015 (AN notice)
  • Technical 13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s indefinite block is converted to an indefinite ban imposed by the Arbitration Committee. Technical 13 may appeal this ban at any time to the Arbitration Committee if he wishes to return to editing.
  • Technical 13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is limited to one account, and may not edit through any account other than "Technical 13". He is explicitly denied the right to any sort of clean start.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision closed 19 June 2015 (AN notice)
  • Remedy 1 of the American Politics case is rescinded. In its place, the following is adopted: standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people.
  • Ubikwit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned from any page relating to or making any edit about post-1932 politics of the United States, and closely related people, in any namespace. This ban may be appealed no earlier than 18 months after its adoption.
  • MONGO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for adding to the hostility in the topic area.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet investigation block#Final decision closed 09 June 2015 (AN notice)
  • The CheckUser permissions of Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are revoked. He may seek to regain them only by the usual appointment methods.
  • The oversight permissions of Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are revoked. He may seek to regain them only by the usual appointment methods.
  • Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time through a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others#Final decision closed 03 June 2015 (AN notice)
  • OccultZone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned indefinitely from English Wikipedia. They may appeal the ban after twelve months, and every six months thereafter.
  • OccultZone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is also topic banned from making edits related to a) sexual assault or b) crime on the Indian Subcontinent, both broadly construed.
  • OccultZone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely limited to operating a single account.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Collect and others#Final decision closed 09 May 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1. Collect (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned from any page relating to or making any edit about US politics or US political figures, in any namespace. This ban may be appealed no earlier than 18 months after its adoption.
  • 2. Collect (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely limited to one revert per article in any 24 hour period. This restriction excepts the reversal of unambiguous vandalism.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity_and_Sexuality#Final_decision closed 7 March 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1) Esoglou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • 2) Roscelese (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to the following restrictions. She is:
    • indefinitely restricted to making no more than one revert per page per day (except for indisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page;
    • indefinitely prohibited from making rollback-type reverts that fail to provide an explanation for the revert;
    • indefinitely prohibited from engaging in conduct which, in the opinion of any uninvolved administrator, casts aspersions, or personalises disputes.

    These restrictions may be appealed to the committee twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. Should Roscelese breach any of these restrictions, she may be blocked for per the standard Enforcement provision below.

  • 3) Padresfan94 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • 4.1) Dominus Vobisdu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is subject to an indefinite editing restriction from the date of enactment of this remedy. Dominus Vobisdu is limited to one revert per page per day (except for indisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. Should Dominus Vobisdu exceed this limit or fail to discuss a content reversion, they may be blocked for per the standard Enforcement provision below. This restriction may be appealed to the committee twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • 4.2) Dominus Vobisdu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for edit warring, and is strongly reminded to use discussion and dispute resolution rather than engage in future edit wars.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes/Review#Final decision closed 4 March 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1.1) Remedy 1.1 of the original Infoboxes case is rescinded. In its place, the following is adopted: Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted from adding an infobox to any article.
  • 2.1) Remedy 1 of the 2005 Pigsonthewing case is rescinded. The following is enacted as a restriction of this review: If Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) behaves disruptively in any discussion; any uninvolved administrator may ban Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from further participation in that discussion. Any such restriction must be logged on the main case page of this review.
  • 3) Notwithstanding remedy 1.1 of this review, Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) may include an infobox in articles he has himself created within the prior fortnight.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Toddst1 closed after suspension by motion 3 March 2015
  • The "Toddst1" request for arbitration is accepted, but a formal case will not be opened unless and until Toddst1 returns to active status as an administrator. If Toddst1 resigns his administrative tools or is desysopped for inactivity the case will be closed with no further action. Toddst1 is instructed not to use his admin tools in any way while the case is pending; doing so will be grounds for summary desysopping.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Wifione#Final decision closed 13 Feburary 2015 (AN notice)
  • 1) Wifione (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic-banned from editing any pages relating to or making any edit about:
    1. any Indian commercial organisation founded after 1915;
    2. any Indian educational institution founded after 1915;
    3. biographies of any living or recently deceased person associated with (i) or (ii)
    and is restricted to one account.
  • 2.1) Wifione (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) may only regain administrative tools via a successful request for adminship.
  • 3) Wifione (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate closed 29 January 2015 (AN notice)

• 1.1)

(i) The community Gamergate general sanctions are hereby rescinded and are replaced by standard discretionary sanctions, which are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed.

• 1.2)

• 2.1) Any editor subject to a topic-ban in this decision is indefinitely prohibited from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, (a) Gamergate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.
• 4.1) NorthBySouthBaranof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 5.1) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 5.3) Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• 6.2) TaraInDC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.
• 7.2) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 7.3) Tarc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee.
• 8.2) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 8.3) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 48-hour period. This applies for all pages on the English Wikipedia, except The Devil's Advocate's own user space. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.
• 8.4) Subject to the usual exceptions, The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely prohibited from editing any administrative or conduct noticeboard (including, not not limited to; AN, AN/I, AN/EW, and AE), except for threads regarding situations that he was directly involved in when they were started. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee only after 12 months have elapsed from the closing of this case.
• 8.5) The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is strongly warned that should future misconduct occur in any topic area, he may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion of the Arbitration Committee. Further, the committee strongly suggests that The Devil's Advocate refrains from editing contentious topic areas in the future.
• 9) TheRedPenOfDoom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.
• 10.1) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Tutelary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Tutelary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 12) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic bans preventing ArmyLine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), DungeonSiegeAddict510 (talk · contribs), and Xander756 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from editing under the Gamergate general sanctions. The topic bans for these three editors are converted to indefinite restrictions per the standard topic ban.
• 13) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Titanium Dragon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) from editing under BLP enforcement. This ban is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban. Titanium Dragon is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 14.1) Loganmac (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 15) Willhesucceed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely restricted per the standard topic ban.
• 18) The Arbitration Committee urges that knowledgeable and non-conflicted users not previously involved in editing GamerGate-related articles, especially GamerGate-related biographies of living people, should carefully review them for adherence to Wikipedia policies and address any perceived or discovered deficiencies. This is not a finding that the articles are or are not satisfactory in their present form, but an urging that independent members of the community examine the matter in light of the case.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Acupuncture motion passed 12 January 2015
  • The Arbitration Committee authorizes standard discretionary sanctions for any edit about, and for all pages relating to Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

2014

11 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Historicity of Jesus closed 30 December 2014 (AN notice)
  • 6) Fearofreprisal (talk · contribs) is warned to not engage in personal attacks or cast aspersions of bias and intent against other editors.
  • 7) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Fearofreprisal (talk · contribs) from editing Historicity of Jesus.[3] It is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban affecting the Historicity of Jesus, broadly construed, and enforcement of the ban should be discussed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Fearofreprisal is cautioned that if they disrupt and breach restrictions, they may be subject to increasingly severe sanctions. They may appeal this ban to the Committee in no less than twelve months time.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Landmark Worldwide closed 29 December 2014 (AN notice)
  • 1.1) The committee cautions the parties involved that standard discretionary sanctions may be authorised by the committee in future – for any edit about, and for all pages relating to, Landmark Worldwide – and by motion after application at a later time.
  • 2) Parties to the case are reminded to base their arguments in reliable, independent sources and to discuss changes rather than revert on sight.
  • 6) The Arbitration Committee urges that editors having no prior editing history on Landmark Worldwide and no strong views on the underlying controversy review and edit this article, helping to ensure that our policies governing neutral point of view and reliable sources are followed.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda closed 16 December 2014 (AN notice)
  • 1.1) For his violations of the standards of conduct expected of administrators, DangerousPanda (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Interactions at GGTF closed 1 December 2014 (AN notice)
  • Editors topic banned by the Committee under this remedy are prohibited on the English Wikipedia from: (i) editing the pages of the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) discussing the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) participating in any process broadly construed to do with these topics. An uninvolved admin may remove any comments that breach this remedy, and impose blocks as necessary. The Committee's standard provisions on enforcement of arbitration provisions and appeals and modifications of arbitration enforcements apply.
  • Carolmooredc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic banned from the Gender gap topic.
  • For her actions discussed in this case, Carolmooredc is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. She may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Eric Corbett (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic banned from the Gender gap topic.
  • Eric Corbett agrees to a restriction prohibiting him from shouting at, swearing at, insulting and/or belittling other editors. The restriction comes into immediate effect on the passing of this motion.

    If Eric Corbett finds himself tempted to engage in prohibited conduct, he is to disengage and either let the matter drop or refer it to another editor to resolve.

    If however, in the opinion of an uninvolved administrator, Eric Corbett does engage in prohibited conduct, he may be blocked. The first two such blocks shall be of 72 hours duration, increasing thereafter for each subsequent breach to one week, one month, and three months. Any blocks under this provision are arbitration enforcement actions and may only be reviewed or appealed at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Should a fifth block (three months) prove necessary, the blocking administrator must notify the Arbitration Committee of the block via a Request for Clarification and Amendment so that the remedy may be reviewed.

    The enforcing administrator may also at their discretion fully protect Eric Corbett's talk page for the duration of the block.

    Nothing in this remedy prevents enforcement of policy by uninvolved administrators in the usual way.

  • Neotarf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic banned from the Gender gap topic. Neotarf is also warned that complaints about usernames should be made through appropriate channels and that further accusations, as well as unnecessary antagonism, may result in sanctions.
  • For their actions discussed in this case, and in particular for adopting a consistently hostile attitude to other contributors, Neotarf is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. They may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
  • Sitush (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is warned not to create articles regarding editors he is in dispute with.
  • Sitush and Carolmooredc are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • SPECIFICO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s actions regarding Carolmooredc have led to a 1-way interaction ban imposed by the community following a noticeboard discussion. [4]
  • Two kinds of pork (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely topic banned from the Gender gap topic.
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for pages relating to the Gender gap task force. The availability of sanctions is not intended to prevent free and candid discussion on these pages, but sanctions should be imposed if an editor severely or persistently disrupts the discussion.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC closed 5 November 2014 (AN notice)
  • The WMF has introduced a new staff user account policy, prohibiting the use of the same account for both work and non-work purposes. With effect from 15 September 2014, staff are required to segregate their work and non-work activities into separate work and non-work accounts, with the work accounts containing the identifier '(WMF)' in the account name.
  • Eloquence (talk · contribs) has resigned as an administrator on the English Wikipedia. While this does not prevent him holding staff administrative rights on a designated work account, it does mean that as he resigned the tools while an arbitration case was pending, he may only regain administrative rights on his personal non-work account via a successful request for adminship.
  • The WMF has announced a number of initiatives aimed at improving working practices. This includes a new software implementation protocol which provides for incremental roll-outs of upgrades and new features.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy closed 12 October 2014 (AN notice)
  • For actions discussed within this case, as well as past history of disruption for which he has been sanctioned, Tarc (talk · contribs) is subject to an indefinite editing restriction. Tarc may not edit any administrative noticeboards, nor User talk:Jimbo Wales, aside from the normal exceptions.
  • Tarc (talk · contribs) is prohibited from reinstating edits or comments that were made or apparently made by a banned user and were reverted for that reason by another editor, regardless of any exception to the applicable policy that might otherwise apply. He is also admonished for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, particularly since he continued even after the disruption was apparent. Tarc is warned that he is likely to be blocked for a long time and/or banned from the project, without further warning, if he does this sort of thing again.
  • Smallbones (talk · contribs) is warned to refrain from edit warring and needlessly inflammatory rhetoric in the future. Further instances of similar misconduct may result in serious sanctions.
  • Hell in a Bucket (talk · contribs) is warned to refrain from edit warring and needlessly inflammatory rhetoric in the future. Further instances of similar misconduct may result in serious sanctions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics (AN notice)

1) In addition to any sanctions stemming directly from this decision, any new areas of conflict which involve contemporary American political and social issues may be placed under standard discretionary sanctions by the Committee without the need for a full case. Requests for new sanctions may be made at WP:ARCA. In evaluating such a request, the Committee will consider factors such as the length and severity of editor-behavior issues in the topic area, whether other remedies have proved inadequate to address the issues, and relevant community input

2) Arzel (talk · contribs) is limited to one revert of any specific edit every seven days, excepting unambiguous vandalism. If he should violate this sanction he may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator. This restriction may not be appealed for one year, and appeals will be limited to one every six months thereafter.

3) Arzel (talk · contribs) is warned that continuing to personalize or politicize content disputes is disruptive to the project, and continuing behavior of this nature may lead to further sanctions, up to and including a ban from the project.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gun control closed 30 April 2014 (AN notice)
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for any edit about, and for all pages relating to, gun control;
  • AndyTheGrump (talk · contribs) reminded that further edit-warring as well as incivility will likely result in serious sanctions;
  • Gaijin42 (talk · contribs), Justanonymous (talk · contribs), and ROG5728 (talk · contribs) are topic-banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, gun control;
  • Goethean (talk · contribs) reminded that further incivility as well as unnecessary antagonism may result in sanctions;
  • North8000 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely site-banned from the English Language Wikipedia; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed. The twelve-month period of the ban under this remedy is reset if new infringements of the sock puppetry policy occur. In addition, North8000 (talk · contribs) is also indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, gun control. The topic ban that North8000 was subject to due to the Tea Party case remains in force.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Austrian_economics closed 22 April 2014 (AN notice)
  • Pages related to the Austrian school of economics and the Ludwig von Mises Institute, broadly construed, are placed under discretionary sanctions. This sanction supersedes the existing community sanctions.
  • Steeletrap (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from editing articles and other pages relating to the Austrian school of economics, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, or persons associated with them, either living or deceased. Steeletrap may request the lifting or modification of this topic-ban not less than one year from the close of this case.
  • SPECIFICO (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from editing articles and other pages relating to the Ludwig von Mises Institute or persons associated with it, either living or deceased. This topic-ban does not extend to articles concerning Austrian economics but not related to the Ludwig von Mises Institute; however, should SPECIFICO edit problematically in the broader area, the topic-ban may be broadened if necessary through the discretionary sanctions. SPECIFICO may request the lifting or modification of this topic-ban not less than one year from the close of this case.
  • Carolmooredc (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from editing articles and other pages relating to the Austrian school of economics, the Ludwig von Mises Institute, or persons associated with them, either living or deceased. Carolmooredc may request the lifting or modification of this topic-ban not less than one year from the close of this case.
  • Editors who have not previously been involved in editing the articles at issue in this case are urged to review these articles to ensure that they are in compliance with the applicable policies and best practices, including neutrality and the policies governing biographical content.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kafziel closed 27 January 2014 (AN notice)
  • For conduct unbecoming an administrator by failing to respond appropriately, respectfully and civilly to good faith enquiries about his administrative actions, Kafziel (talk · contribs) is desysopped and may regain the tools via a request for adminship. The user may not seek advanced positions in an alternative account unless he links such account to his Kafziel account.
  • For his battlefield mentality in areas relating to Articles for Creation, Hasteur (talk · contribs) is admonished.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Nightscream closed 18 January 2014 (AN notice)
  • For repeatedly violating the policy on administrator involvement, Nightscream's administrative privileges are revoked. Should he wish to regain administrator status in the future, he may file a new request for adminship.

2013

12 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ottoman Empire–Turkey naming dispute closed 23 December 2013 (AN Notice)
  • RoslynSKP (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from changing 'Turkey' or 'Turkish' to 'Ottoman' on any article.
  • RoslynSKP (talk · contribs)'s topic ban from "editing any article relating to Turkish military history in and predating World War I" is suspended and will be unsuspended (and the prohibition will take effect) if any uninvolved administrator blocks RoslynSKP for misconduct relating to Turkish military history. If the block is reversed or repealed by any of the usual community channels of appeal, the topic ban will lapse back into suspension.
  • RoslynSKP is prohibited from making any more than one revert on any one page in any 72-hour period.
  • For a period of one year, RoslynSKP is prohibited from adding maintenance tags, such as ((POV)), to any article or section of an article without first raising her concern on the talkpage and obtaining the agreement of at least one other editor that the tag is appropriate.
  • Jim Sweeney (talk · contribs) is reminded to avoid edit warring, and to use dispute resolution to assist in resolving disputes.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3 closed 4 November 2013 (AN Notice)
  • Ignocrates (talk · contribs) and John Carter (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with each other (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • John Carter (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to Ebionites, broadly construed.
  • John Carter (talk · contribs) requested removal of his administrator rights on 1 November 2013, while these arbitration proceedings were in progress (log of removal). John Carter may regain these rights only through a new request for adminship.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute closed 11 October 2013 (AN Notice)
  • Hitmonchan (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
  • IFreedom1212 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
  • Tarc (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
  • Josh Gorand (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
  • Baseball Bugs (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed. He is also topic banned from all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed.
  • David Gerard (talk · contribs) is admonished for acting in a manner incompatible with the community's expectations of administrators (see #David Gerard's use of tools).
  • David Gerard (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (ii) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
  • The standard discretionary sanctions adopted in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology for (among other things) "all articles dealing with transgender issues" remain in force. For the avoidance of doubt, these discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender, including but not limited to Chelsea/Bradley Manning. Any sanctions imposed should be logged at the Sexology case, not this one.
  • All editors, especially those whose behavior was subject to a finding in this case, are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions on Wikipedia, and to avoid commentary that demeans any other person, intentionally or not.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Infoboxes closed 11 September 2013 (AN Notice)
  • Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from adding, or discussing the addition or removal of, infoboxes.
  • Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) is admonished to behave with the level of professionalism expected of an administrator.
  • Gerda Arendt (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted from: adding or deleting infoboxes; restoring an infobox that has been deleted; or making more than two comments in discussing the inclusion or exclusion of an infobox on a given article. They may participate in wider policy discussions regarding infoboxes with no restriction, and include infoboxes in new articles which they create.
  • Gerda Arendt (talk · contribs) is admonished for treating Wikipedia as if it were a battleground and advised to better conduct themselves.
  • Smerus (talk · contribs) is reminded to conduct himself in a civil manner.
  • All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to avoid turning discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general.
  • The Arbitration Committee recommends that a well-publicized community discussion be held to address whether to adopt a policy or guideline addressing what factors should weigh in favor of or against including an infobox in a given article.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement closed 5 September 2013 (AN notice)
  • Pages related to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed, are placed under discretionary sanctions. This sanction supersedes the existing community sanctions.
  • Goethean (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • North8000 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • Malke 2010 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • Xenophrenic (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • Xenophrenic (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, Collect (talk · contribs) anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
  • Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • The current community sanctions are lifted.
  • Ubikwit (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • Collect (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This topic ban will expire after six months from the date this case is closed on.
  • Phoenix and Winslow (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to the Tea Party movement, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case.
  • Snowded (talk · contribs) and Phoenix and Winslow (talk · contribs) are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, each other anywhere on Wikipedia (subject to the ordinary exceptions).

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds closed 14 August 2013 (AN notice)
  • For conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for bringing the project into disrepute, Ironholds is desysopped and may regain the tools via a request for adminship.
  • For his history of incivility, which includes logging out to engage in vandalism and to make personal attacks on other editors on other Wikimedia projects, Ironholds is strongly admonished.
  • For numerous violations of Wikipedia's norms and policies, Kiefer.Wolfowitz is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. He may request reconsideration of the ban twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics closed 26 July 2013 (AN notice)
  • Apostle12 is indefinitely prohibited from editing any page relating to "race and politics", broadly construed.
  • Apostle12 is directed to inform the Arbitration Committee if he returns to editing the English Wikipedia using any account.
  • Apostle12 (and all of his accounts, if he has created one or more others at that time) may be indefinitely blocked by any uninvolved administrator if he violates these prohibitions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Argentine History closed - Decided 23 June 2013 (AN notice)

• Cambalachero is banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces.
• MarshalN20 is banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces.
• Lecen is reminded to conduct himself in accordance with Wikipedia's behavioral guidelines.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology closed - Decided 25 April 2013 (AN notice)

• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all articles dealing with transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g., hebephilia).
• Jokestress and James Cantor are banned from interacting with each other, commenting on and/or commenting about each other including their professional lives, works and on-wiki activities. This applies to all namespaces, but excludes dispute resolution that explicitly relates to both parties.
• Jokestress is indefinitely banned from the topic of human sexuality, including biographical articles.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SchuminWeb closed - Decided 27 March 2013 (AN notice)

• SchuminWeb's administrative permissions are removed after a three month suspension of the case, which is therefore closed.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )#Final decision closed - Decided 13 March 2013 (AN notice)

• Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) is strongly admonished for creating multiple copyright violations throughout Wikipedia and failing to adhere to the project's expected standards and policies with regards to non-free content. He is warned that continued violations of this nature are likely to result in an indefinite block from editing.
• The Committee acknowledges that Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )'s community-placed topic ban on article creations was a valid and apparently successful attempt to curb his text-based copyright violations, and further recognizes that this sanction has been violated a number of times. This topic ban will remain in place and is assumed under the Arbitration Committee's authority. After at least six months have elapsed, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) may appeal to the Committee to have the topic ban lifted in full; in order for appeals of this remedy to be considered, he shall be required to submit evidence of substantial work on his part towards resolving the Contributor Copyright Investigations filed against him, most particularly the one focused on his text contributions.
• Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) is indefinitely prohibited from uploading images or other media files to the English Wikipedia. The Arbitration Committee notes that media files can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, a project which is outside the jurisdiction of this Committee. Should Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) upload a copyright-violating image to the Wikimedia Commons and subsequently make use of that image on the English Wikipedia in any namespace, he may be subject to Arbitration Enforcement as if the image were uploaded directly to the English Wikipedia in violation of this remedy. This shall apply retroactively to all images currently uploaded by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) to the Wikimedia Commons at the time this remedy is enacted, but shall not apply retroactively to any uses on the English Wikipedia in existence at the time this case closes.
• Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) is prohibited from linking as a reference any external site to which he has contributed. He may provide such links on the talk pages of articles, so they may be reviewed by other editors for acceptance according to applicable Wikipedia guidelines and policies; if accepted, another editor may add these links as desired.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram#Final decision closed - Decided 12 March 2013 (AN notice)

• Doncram is placed under a general probation indefinitely. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions if, despite being warned, Doncram repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any normal editorial process or any expected standards of behavior and decorum. These sanctions may include blocks, page or topic bans, instructions to refrain from a particular behavior, or any other sanction that the administrator deems appropriate. Sanctions imposed under this remedy may be appealed as if they were discretionary sanctions. Doncram may not appeal this restriction for one year and is limited to an appeal once every six months thereafter.
• Doncram is indefinitely restricted from creating new pages, except for redirects, in article space. He may create new content pages in his user space, at Articles for Creation, in a sandbox area within a WikiProject's area, or in similar areas outside of article space. Such pages may only be moved to article space by other users after review. This restriction may be appealed to the Committee after one year.
• For edit warring with Doncram, SarekOfVulcan is strongly admonished to behave with the level of professionalism expected of an administrator.
• SarekOfVulcan and Doncram are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with each other (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
• The question of how substantive the content of a stub must be before it can legitimately be introduced to the mainspace as a stand-alone article cannot be decided by the Arbitration Committee. If the project is to avoid the stub guideline becoming a recurring problem in the future, we suggest to the community that this question may need to be decided through a deliberate attempt at conducting focussed, structured discussions in the usual way.

2012

11 cases.

No cases were closed in December.

No cases were closed in November.

No cases were closed in October.

No cases were closed in September.

No cases were closed in August.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ#Final decision closed - Decided 21 July 2012 (AN notice)

• Fæ is admonished for making personal attacks and making ad hominem attacks on others based on perceived affiliation.
• Fæ is hereby limited to one account, and expressly denied the option of a fresh WP:CLEANSTART. Should Fæ wish to change the name of the one account he is allowed to use, he must receive prior permission from the Arbitration Committee before editing under any other username. Fæ must provide a list of all accounts they have controlled to the Committee, with any objections to making the accounts publicly listed. The Committee will then advise Fæ of whether they will need to list the objected to account(s) publicly.
• As Fæ likely would have had his administrator status revoked as a result of this case, his resignation of tools is considered as "under controversial circumstances", and they cannot get the tools back without first standing for a fresh request for adminship. Should they run for RfA again, they must publicly link to the statement on their user page announcing the accounts they have used previously.
• For numerous violations of Wikipedia's norms and policies, Fæ is indefinitely banned from the English Language Wikipedia. He may request reconsideration of the ban six months after the enactment of this remedy, and every six months thereafter.
• For creating a page on an external webpage designed to harass another user, Michaeldsuarez is banned indefinitely from the English language Wikipedia. They may appeal this ban one year after its enactment.
• Delicious carbuncle is severely admonished for posting another editor's non-disclosed private information on an external website and warned that should they do so again, they will face sanctions, up to and including an indefinite site ban from Wikipedia.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Falun Gong 2#Final decision closed - Decided 21 July 2012 (AN notice)

• Homunculus is banned from editing and/or discussing topics related to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed, across all namespaces, for a period of one year.
• Ohconfucius is indefinitely banned from editing and/or discussing topics related to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed, across all namespaces.
• At the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, editors may be placed on mandated external review for all articles relating to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed. Editors on mandated external review must observe the following restrictions on editing within the designated subject area:
  1. Any major edit (defined as any edit that goes beyond simple and uncontroversial spelling, grammatical, and/or stylistic corrections to article content) must be proposed on the article's talk page. This proposal must be discussed by interested editors until a consensus to make the edit is formed.
  2. Once consensus has been reached in support of the edit, the proposal must be reviewed by an uninvolved editor for neutrality and verifiability of the information presented.
  3. When approval is received from the uninvolved editor, the editor subject to mandated external review may make the edit to the article. Violations of these restrictions may be reported to Arbitration Enforcement.
• Upon the expiry of the applicable ban, Homunculus is subject to mandated external review as outlined in remedy 4, with respect to articles relating to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed.
• Should the applicable ban be lifted, Ohconfucius is subject to mandated external review as outlined in remedy 4, with respect to articles relating to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed.
• Colipon is subject to mandated external review as outlined in remedy 4, with respect to articles relating to the Falun Gong movement and/or the persecution thereof, broadly construed.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth#Final decision closed - Decided 18 July 2012 (AN notice)

• JHunterJ is advised to respond calmly and courteously to queries regarding Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions.
• Deacon of Pndapetzim is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved, and for reversing another administrator's legitimate administrative action without first entering into discussion.
• Kwamikagami is desysopped for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision. He may regain the admin toolkit through a fresh request for adminship.
• Gnangarra is admonished for use of administrative tools while involved in an editing dispute, and for reinstating a reverted administrative action without clear discussion leading to a consensus decision.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay#Final decision - Decided 14 June 2012 (AN notice)

• User:GoodDay is indefinitely prohibited from making any edits concerning diacritics, or participating in any discussions about the same, anywhere on the English Wikipedia. This includes converting any diacritical mark to its basic glyph on any article or other page, broadly construed, and any edit that adds an unaccented variation of a name or other word as an alternate form to one with diacritics.
• GoodDay is strongly warned that, in the event of additional violations of Wikipedia's conduct policies (especially of the nature recorded in this decision as findings of fact), substantial sanctions, up to a ban from the project, may be imposed without further warning by the Arbitration Committee.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rich Farmbrough#Final decision - Decided 15 May 2012 (AN notice)

• Rich Farmbrough (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using any automation whatsoever on Wikipedia. For the purposes of this remedy, any edits that reasonably appear to be automated shall be assumed to be so.
• Rich Farmbrough's administrator status is revoked. At any time after the closing of this case, Rich Farmbrough may request that his administrator status be restored by filing a request for adminship.
• Elen of the Roads (talk · contribs) is reminded that an administrator who is a party to an arbitration case should not block another editor (or their bot) who is a party to the same case.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence/Review#Final decision - Decided 14 May 2012 (AN notice)

• Mathsci (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in battlefield conduct
• Ferahgo the Assassin (talk · contribs) and Captain Occam (talk · contribs) are site-banned from Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year. After one year has elapsed, a request may be made for the ban to be lifted. Any such request must address all the circumstances which lead to this ban being imposed and demonstrate an understanding of and intention to refrain from similar actions in the future.
• SightWatcher (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from editing and/or discussing the topic of Race and Intelligence on any page of Wikipedia, including user talk pages, or from participating in any discussion concerning the conduct of editors who have worked in the topic. This editor may however within reason participate in dispute resolution and noticeboard discussions if their own conduct has been mentioned.
• TrevelyanL85A2 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely banned from editing and/or discussing the topic of Race and Intelligence on any page of Wikipedia, including user talk pages, or from participating in any discussion concerning the conduct of editors who have worked in the topic. This editor may however within reason participate in dispute resolution and noticeboard discussions if their own conduct has been mentioned.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation#Final decision – Decided 23 March 2012 (AN notice)

• All parties are reminded to avoid personalizing disputes concerning the Manual of Style, the article titles policy ('WP:TITLE'), and similar policy and guideline pages, and to work collegiately towards a workable consensus. In particular, a rapid cycle of editing these pages to reflect one's viewpoint, then discussing the changes is disruptive and should be avoided. Instead, parties are encouraged to establish consensus on the talk page first, and then make the changes.
• Pmanderson is indefinitely prohibited from engaging in discussions and edits relating to the Manual of Style or policy about article titles.
• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages related to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, broadly construed.
• Born2cycle is warned that his contributions to discussion must reflect a better receptiveness to compromise and a higher tolerance for the views of other editors.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/TimidGuy ban appeal#Final decision – Decided 27 February 2012 (AN notice)

• Jimbo Wales' ban of TimidGuy is vacated.
• TimidGuy is advised to adhere closely to the reliable sources (medicine) guideline in any edit he makes within the Transcendental Meditation topic.
• For conduct unbecoming an administrator, Will Beback is desysopped and may only regain the tools via a new Request for Adminship.
• Will Beback is indefinitely topic banned from pages related to new religious movements, broadly construed.
• Will Beback is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia. After six months, he may appeal his ban to the Arbitration Committee.
• The community is encouraged to open a Request for comment on the "Conflicts of Interest" guideline with a view to reconciling some of the apparent contradictions discussed in the applicable finding of fact.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Final decision – Decided 15 February 2012 (AN notice)

• Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
• Thumperward (talk · contribs) is admonished for conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for failing to adequately explain his actions when requested by the community and Arbitration Committee.
• John (talk · contribs) is admonished for reversing another administrator's actions while said actions were under review through community discussion.
• Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from any page whose prefix begins with Wikipedia talk:Requests for Adminship. This remedy explicitly does not prevent him from !voting on RFA's; however, should his contributions to a specific request for adminship become disruptive, any uninvolved admin may ban him from further participation in that specific RFA. Further, Malleus Fatuorm is admonished for repeatedly personalizing disputes and engaging in uncivil conduct, personal attacks, and disruptive conduct.
• Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
• All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
• The imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies by the community is done on an ad hoc basis in the absence of clear documented standards. The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for such discussions. As a related but distinct issue, the community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.
• Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to the Administrators' noticeboard, or to Arbitration Enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3#Final decision – Decided 15 February 2012 (AN notice)

• The existing community sanctions on Betacommand were a valid response by the community to prior problems with Betacommand's editing, and that Betacommand was required to abide by those sanctions if he wished to continue editing. However, given that interpretation and implementation of those sanctions has led to ongoing disputes, the community sanctions are superseded by the more straightforward remedies provided for in this decision.
• Betacommand is banned from Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year.
• After one year has elapsed from the date of his ban, Betacommand may request that the ban be lifted. As part of any such request, Betacommand shall be required to submit a plan outlining his intended editing activity and demonstrating his understanding of and intention to refrain from the actions which resulted in his ban. The Committee shall present this plan to the community for review and comment prior to any modification of Betacommand's ban.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images#Final decision – Decided 6 February 2012 (AN notice)

• User:Ludwigs2 is banned from the English Wikipedia for one year.
• Ludwigs2 is prohibited from contributing to any discussion concerning Muhammad. This topic-ban shall be effective indefinitely.
• Tarc is admonished to behave with appropriate professionalism in his contributions to discussions about disputed article content.
• FormerIP is admonished to behave with appropriate professionalism in his contributions to discussions about disputed article content.
• Hans Adler is reminded to engage in discussions about disputed article content with an appropriate degree of civility.
• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages relating to Muhammad, broadly interpreted.
• The participants in the dispute about depictions of Muhammad are reminded that editors who engage extensively in an intractable dispute can become frustrated, and that it is important to be aware that as editors we are limited in our ability to contribute constructively to a deadlocked disagreement. Our exasperation with a dispute can make us unprofessional or unreceptive to compromise. We therefore encourage the disputants of this case to consider if their participation in the coming community discussion of depictions of Muhammad would be useful, and we remind them that if they disrupt the community discussion they may be banned from the discussion or otherwise sanctioned under the discretionary sanctions provision of this case.

2011

16 cases.

No cases were closed in December.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abortion, decided on 28 November 2011
  • All articles related to the subject of Abortion:
    • shall be semi-protected until November 28, 2014;
    • shall not be moved absent a demonstrable community consensus;
    • are authorized to be placed on Standard discretionary sanctions;
  • Editors are reminded to remain neutral while editing;
  • Structured discussion is to take place on names of articles currently located at Opposition to the legalization of abortion and Support for the legalization of abortion, with a binding vote taken one month after the opening of the discussion;
  • User:Orangemarlin is instructed to contact the Arbitration Committee before returning to edit affected articles;
  • User:Michael C Price, User:Anythingyouwant, User:Haymaker, User:Geremia, User:DMSBel are all indefinitely topic-banned; User:Michael C Price and User:Haymaker may appeal their topic bans in one year;
  • User:Gandydancer and User:NYyankees51 are reminded to maintain tones appropriate for collaboration in a sensitive topic area.

• 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/Racepacket, decided on 19 June 2011
  • Racepacket (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for one year
  • Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is admonished for blocking editors with whom he has had recent editorial disputes
  • LauraHale (talk · contribs) and Racepacket are prohibited from interacting with one another
  • Hawkeye7 is prohibited from taking administrative action "with regards to, or at the behest of LauraHale".

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration Enforcement sanction handling, decided on 5 May 2011
  • Users Dreadstar, Sandstein, and Ludwigs2 are encouraged to read and reflect on the remedies applicable to them.
  • All administrators who intend to enforce or undo an action linked to an arbitration remedy are advised to read the principles and remedies of the case.

• 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/Rodhullandemu, closed by motion on 6 April 2011

• 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.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kehrli 2, decided on 16 March 2011
  • Kehrli (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from metrology-related articles, broadly defined, including talk pages and discussions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem, decided on 24 March 2011
  • Standard discretionary sanctions are enacted for all articles related to Monty Hall problem (broadly interpreted)
  • Glkanter is banned from Wikipedia for one year, and is further subject to an indefinite topic ban on subjects related to the Monty Hall Problem.
  • Nijdam is topic banned from the subject of the Monty Hall problem for a period of one year.
  • Rick Block is restricted to 1RR on the Monty Hall article for a period of one year.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question, decided on 16 February 2011.

• 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.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Longevity, decided on 17 February 2011.

• 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.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II#Final decision – Decided 10 January 2011 (AN notice)

• 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.

2010

14 cases.

No cases were closed in December.

No cases were closed in November.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change Decided 14 October 2010 (AN notice)

• A specially-tailored version of discretionary sanctions is authorized for the entire topic area of climate change. Enforcement requests are to be submitted to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, which is to replace Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement.
• Experienced administrators, and especially checkusers, are requested to closely monitor new accounts that edit inappropriately in the topic area.
• Within seven days of this remedy passing, all parties must either delete evidence sub-pages or request deletion of them.
• The following editors are banned from the topic area of climate change, and may not appeal this ban until at least six months after the closure of this case (and no more often than every three months thereafter);

• The following users have accepted binding voluntary topic bans;
  • Scjessey [5]
  • KimDabelsteinPetersen [6]
• The following administrators are explicitly restricted from applying discretionary sanctions as authorized in this case, as is any other administrator fitting the description of an involved administrator;
  • Stephan Schulz
  • Lar

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Stevertigo 2 Decided 23 October 2010

• Stevertigo (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for one year. If Stevertigo wishes to return to editing Wikipedia, he must first work with the Arbitration Committee to an establish a set of probation criteria. He may do this no earlier than six months after the closure of the case, and no more than every six months thereafter.
• Stevertigo is required to cite a published source for any material he adds to an article. Should he fail to do so, any editor may remove the material without prejudice. Should he cite a source that is subsequently determined not to support the material added, he may be blocked for a period of up to one week for each infraction.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence Decided 23 August 2010 (AN notice)

• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for "race and intelligence" and all closely related articles.
• The following editors are topic-banned from race and intelligence articles, broadly construed:
  • Mathsci (by consent)
  • David.Kane
  • Captain Occam
  • Mikemikev
• Mikemikev, who was indefinitely blocked as a result of an ANI discussion during the case proceedings, is site-banned for 12 months. Until his ArbCom ban expires, he may only appeal his block to the Arbitration Committee, via the Ban Appeals Subcommittee. After 12 months, he may choose to appeal the ban to either the Arbitration Committee or to the community.

No cases were closed in July.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Transcendental Meditation movement Decided 6 June 2010 (AN notice)

• All editors who are party to this case are instructed to read the principles, to review their own past conduct in the light of them, and if necessary to modify their future conduct to ensure full compliance with them.
• Editors are reminded that when editing in controversial subject areas it is all the more important to comply with Wikipedia policies. In addition, editors who find it difficult to edit a particular article or topic from a neutral point of view and to adhere to other Wikipedia policies are counselled that they may sometimes need or wish to step away temporarily from that article or subject area, and to find other related but less controversial topics in which to edit.
• Any uninvolved administrator may, in his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor editing Transcendental meditation or other articles concerning Transcendental meditation and related biographies of living people, broadly defined, if, after a warning, that editor repeatedly or seriously violates the behavioural standards or editorial processes of Wikipedia in connection with these articles.
• Uninvolved administrators are invited to monitor the articles in the area of conflict to enforce compliance by editors with, in particular, the principles outlined in this case. Enforcing administrators are instructed to focus on fresh and clear-cut matters arising after the closure of this case rather than on revisiting historical allegations.
• From time to time, the conduct of editors within the topic may be re-appraised by any member of the Arbitration Committee and, by motion of the Arbitration Committee, further remedies may be summarily applied to specific editors who have failed to conduct themselves in an appropriate manner.
• User:Fladrif is (i) strongly admonished for incivility, personal attacks, and assumptions of bad faith; and (ii) subject to an editing restriction for one year. Should he make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After three blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month.
• Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Alastair Haines 2 Decided 8 May 2010 (AN notice)

• User:Alastair Haines is banned from editing Wikipedia for a period of one year, and thereafter pending further direction of the Arbitration Committee under remedy 2.
• Should Alastair Haines wish to return to editing Wikipedia after one year, he shall first communicate with the Arbitration Committee and provide a satisfactory assurance that he will refrain from making any further legal threats against other editors or against the Wikimedia Foundation. Should Alastair Haines, after being permitted to return, again make a legal threat or a statement that may reasonably be construed as a legal threat, he may be blocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator.
• To assist Alastair Haines in disengaging from Wikipedia, the case pages relating to this arbitration and all related pages have been courtesy blanked. As appropriate, other pages reflecting controversies to which Alastair Haines was a party may also be courtesy-blanked, particularly where the discussion is no longer relevant to ongoing editing issues. In addition, if Alastair Haines so requests, his username (and hence the username associated with his edits in page histories) may be changed to another appropriate username other than his real name. Editors who have been in conflict with Alastair Haines are strongly urged to make no further reference to him on-wiki following his departure.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gibraltar Decided 11 May 2010 (AN notice)

• Any uninvolved administrator may, in his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor editing Gibraltar or other articles concerning the history, people, or political status of Gibraltar if, after a warning, that editor repeatedly or seriously violates the behavioral standards or editorial processes of Wikipedia in connection with these articles.
• Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard) or the Arbitration Committee.
• Gibnews (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from editing the Gibraltar article and other articles concerning the history, people, and political status of Gibraltar, broadly construed, for one year. Should Gibnews return to editing relating to Gibraltar following this period, he is reminded to edit in accordance with the principles discussed in this decision and will be subject to the discretionary sanctions remedy should he fail to do so.
• Gibnews is strongly warned that nationally or ethnically offensive comments are prohibited on Wikipedia and that substantial sanctions, up to a ban from the site, will be imposed without further warning in the event of further violations.
• Justin A Kuntz (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from editing Gibraltar and other articles concerning the history, people, and political status of Gibraltar, broadly construed, for three months. Should Justin A Kuntz return to editing relating to Gibraltar following this period, he is reminded to edit in accordance with the principles discussed in this decision and will be subject to the discretionary sanctions remedy should he fail to do so.
• Ecemaml (talk · contribs) is admonished for having, at times, assumed bad faith and edited tendentiously concerning the history and political status of Gibraltar.
• Editors are reminded that when editing in subject areas of bitter and long-standing real-world conflict, it is all the more important to comply with Wikipedia policies such as assuming good faith of all editors including those on the other side of the real-world dispute, writing with a neutral point of view, remaining civil and avoiding personal attacks, utilizing reliable sources for contentious or disputed assertions, and resorting to dispute resolution where necessary.
• Any editor who is closely associated with a particular source or website relating to the subject of Gibraltar or any other article is reminded to avoid editing that could be seen as an actual or apparent attempt to promote that source or website or to give it undue weight over other sources or website in an article's references or links. To avoid even the appearance of impropriety, it may be best in these circumstances to mention the existence of the source or website on the talkpage, and allow the decision whether to include it in the article to made by others.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Russavia-Biophys Decided 23 May 2010 (AN notice)

• Russavia (talk · contribs) is prohibited from commenting on or unnecessarily interacting with editors from the EEML case, except in the case of necessary dispute resolution.
• Vlad fedorov (talk · contribs), Ellol (talk · contribs), and YMB29 (talk · contribs) are banned from editing articles about the Soviet Union and former Soviet Republics, and all related articles, broadly construed, for a period of no less than 6 months. At the end of 6 months, they may each apply to have their ban reviewed by the Arbitration Committee.
• Biophys (talk · contribs) is banned from editing articles about the Soviet Union and former Soviet Republics, and all related articles, broadly construed, for a period of no less than 1 year. At the end of 1 year, Biophy may apply to have the ban reviewed by the Arbitration Committee.
• Consecutive to that topic ban, Biophys is restricted to 1 revert per week per article in the topic area for 1 year.
• Russavia is admonished for posting personal information or communications of other editors.
• Vlad fedorov is admonished for posting personal information of other editors.
• Editors wishing to edit in the areas dealt with in this case are advised to edit carefully, to adopt Wikipedia's communal approaches (including appropriate conduct, dispute resolution, neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability) in their editing, and to amend behaviors that are deemed to be of concern by administrators. An editor unable or unwilling to do so may wish to restrict their editing to other topics, in order to avoid sanctions.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asgardian#Final decision Decided 10 April 2010 (AN notice)

• User:Asgardian is banned from Wikipedia for one year.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Nobody Held in abeyance 19 March 2010

• This case will not be opened unless and until A Nobody (talk · contribs) returns to Wikipedia. If A Nobody does so under any account or I.P., he/she is required to notify the Committee.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Durova and Shoemaker's Holiday Decided 14 March 2010

• User:Durova and User:Shoemaker's Holiday are restricted from commenting upon one another, and may be temporarily banned upon doing so.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight#Final decision Decided 9 March 2010 (AN notice)

• User:ChildofMidnight is banned from Wikipedia for one year.

• User:ChildofMidnight is restricted to editing main (article) space, the talk pages of articles he has edited, Template talk:Did you know, and his own talk and user talk pages only. In all cases he is forbidden from discussing the behavior of other editors, real or perceived, outside of his own user talk page. ChildofMidnight may apply to the Committee for exemptions to this restriction for the purposes of good faith dispute resolution on a case-by-case basis. This remedy is concurrent (and cumulative) with any extant topic bans, and consecutive to any editing ban.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/MZMcBride 2#Final Decision Decided 11 February 2010 (AN Notice)

• As User:MZMcBride resigned his adminship while a request for arbitration was pending against him, he may regain adminship only through a new request for adminship or by application to this Committee. To the extent MZMcBride requests that he be allowed to regain adminship by simple request to a bureaucrat, his request is denied, in large measure because his conduct would likely have led to a significant sanction against him had he not resigned;
• MZMcBride is admonished for failing to learn from the lessons of the past and for creating avoidable drama;
• MZMcBride is admonished for facilitating vandalism by a banned user.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement#Final Decision Decided 13 February 2010 (AN Notice)

• No specific enforcements in final decision.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf#Final decision Decided 25 January 2010 ([7] AN notice)

• User:Tothwolf is subject to an editing restriction for six months. Should Tothwolf make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, Tothwolf may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.

• User:JBsupreme is warned to refrain from incivility and personal attacks.

• User:Miami33139 and and User:JBsupreme are reminded to observe deletion best practices when nominating articles for deletion, including the consideration of alternatives to deletion such as merging articles or curing problems through editing.

• The parties in particular, and other editors generally, are reminded to observe at all times Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on dealing with harassed editors and on handling conflicts of interest.

• Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After five blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf#Log of blocks and bans.

2009

30 cases.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan#Final_decision Decided 13 December 2009 (AN notice)

• User:Arab Cowboy is prohibited from making changes to any article about a person with respect to their ethnicity or nationality for one year and is placed on a 1 revert per week restriction for one year.
• User:Supreme Deliciousness is prohibited from making changes to any article about a person with respect to their ethnicity or nationality for one year and is placed on a 1 revert per week restriction for one year.
• Asmahan is placed under article probation for six months.
• Any article within the scope of this case, where an extended dispute related to the national or ethnic identity of an individual is occuring may be placed under article probation by an uninvolved administrator for up to six months.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Socionics#Final decision Decided 12 December 2009 (AN Notice)

• Editors of articles related to the topic of socionics are reminded to be civil and seek consensus whenever possible. Editors are encouraged to seek dispute resolution assistance as needed.
• Rmcnew (talk · contribs) and Tcaudilllg (talk · contribs) are indefinitely topic banned from all Socionics-related topics, pages, and discussions, broadly construed.
• Rmcnew (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of six months.
• Tcaudilllg (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of twelve months.
• Users not previously involved in Socionics and Socionics-related articles are asked to give attention to any remaining issues with the articles, including the reliability of sources used. Users should carefully review the articles for adherence to Wikipedia policies and address any perceived or discovered deficiencies. This is not a finding that the articles are or are not satisfactory in their present form, but an urging that independent members of the community examine the matter in light of the case. Participation from uninvolved editors fluent in the Russian language would be especially helpful.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ottava Rima restrictions Decided 20 December, 2009 (AN notice)

• User:Ottava Rima is banned from Wikipedia for a period of 1 year.
• User:Moreschi is admonished for posting editor-specific information that directly leads to the private identity of pseudonymous editors.
• The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for the imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies. The community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list Decided 22 December, 2009 (AN notice)

• User:Piotrus resigned the administrator tools during the case proceedings and may only seek to regain adminship by a new request for adminship or by request to the Arbitration Committee.
• User:Piotrus is banned for three months. At the conclusion of his ban, a one year topic ban on articles about Eastern Europe, their talk pages, and any related process discussion, widely construed, shall take effect.
• User:Digwuren is banned for one year. He is directed to edit Wikipedia from only a single user account, and advise the Arbitration Committee of the name of the account that he will use. Should he not advise the committee by the end of the one year ban, he will remain indefinitely banned until a single account is chosen.
• User:Digwuren is placed on a one year topic ban on articles about Eastern Europe, their talk pages, and any related process discussion, widely construed. This shall take effect following the expiration of both above mentioned bans.
• The following users are topic banned from articles about Eastern Europe, their associated talk pages, and any process discussion about same, widely construed, for one year:

• User:Biruitorul, User:Dc76, User:Martintg, User:Miacek, User:Radeksz, User:Vecrumba, User:Tymek

• User:Jacurek is topic banned from articles about Eastern Europe, their associated talk pages, and any process discussion about same, widely construed, for six months.
• User:Tymek is strongly admonished for having shared his account password. He is directed to keep his account for his own exclusive use, and not to allow any other person to use it under any circumstance.
• The editors sanctioned above (Piotrus, Digwuren, Martintg, Tymek, Jacurek, Radeksz, Dc76, Vecrumba, Biruitorul, Miacek) are prohibited from commenting on or unnecessarily interacting with Russavia on any page of Wikipedia, except for purposes of legitimate and necessary dispute resolution.
• All the participants to the mailing list are strongly admonished against coordinating on-wiki behavior off-wiki and directed to keep discussion of editing and dispute resolution strictly on wiki and in public. All editors are reminded that the editorial process and dispute resolution must take place on Wikipedia itself, using the article talk pages and project space for this purpose. No discussion held off-wiki can lead to a valid consensus, the basis of our editorial process. Off-wiki coordination is likely to lead to echo chambers where there is a false appearance of neutrality and consensus.

No cases were closed in November.

• Three cases, one dismissed without action.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light#Final decision Decided 20 October 2009 (AN Notice)

• All editors are reminded to be civil at all times and seek consensus where possible, and encouraged pursue dispute resolution when necessary.
• Brews ohare (talk · contribs) is warned for his conduct in this dispute, and placed under a general probation for one year, under which any uninvolved administrator may impose sanctions if Brews ohare fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia or general editing and behavioral guidelines, policies, and expectations, despite warnings.
• David Tombe (talk · contribs) is also warned for his conduct in this dispute and during the course of the arbitration case, and is placed under the same general probation but for an indefinite duration. David Tombe may not appeal his probation for one year, and is limited to one appeal every six months thereafter.
• Both Brews ohare and David Tombe are banned from all physics-related pages and topics, broadly construed, for twelve months.
• Violations of the topic bans or general sanctions may be enforced by blocks of up to a week in length for repeated violations, to increase to one year after the third block. All blocks and other sanctions applied should be logged on the case page here.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Lapsed_Pacifist_2#Final decision Decided 12 October 2009 (AN notice)

• Lapsed Pacifist (talk · contribs) strongly admonished for edit warring and topic-banned from articles related to the Corrib gas project, broadly defined. He is also subject to an editing restriction for one year, namely 1RR and requirement to discuss content reversions.
• While GainLine (talk · contribs) is admonished for vandalising BLPs and sockpuppetry, he is also commended for desisting from early problematic behaviours and encouraged to pursue appropriate dispute resolution methods, and seek administrator intervention when required.
• All articles related to Corrib gas controversy and the Shell to Sea campaign are placed under probation. All fall under 1RR, and a stricter rather than laxer interpretation of addition of and removal unsourced content.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Noloop#Final decision Decided 4 October 2009 (AN notice)

• The case is dismissed due to the absence of Noloop (talk · contribs) and the indefinite block of WebHamster (talk · contribs). If future problems arise a new user conduct request for comment on the editor concerned should be opened. Requests for the Arbitration Committee to reopen this case would also be considered.

• Two cases
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William M. Connolley#Final decision Decided 13 September 2009

• The cold fusion article, and parts of any other articles substantially about cold fusion, are placed under discretionary sanctions.
• Abd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for a period of three months from Wikipedia, and for a period of one year from the cold fusion article. These bans are to run concurrently. Additionally, Abd is prohibited from participating in discussions about disputes in which he is not one of the originating parties, including but not limited to article talk pages, user talk pages, administrator noticeboards, and any formal or informal dispute resolution, however not including votes or comments at polls. Abd is also admonished for edit-warring on Arbitration case pages, engaging in personal attacks, and failing to support allegations of misconduct.
• William M. Connolley (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)'s administrator rights are revoked. He may apply for their reinstatement at any time via Requests for Adminship or appeal to the Committee. William M. Connolley is also admonished for edit warring on Arbitration case pages.
• Mathsci (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is reminded not to edit war and to avoid personal attacks.
• The community is urged to engage in a policy discussion and clarify under what circumstances, if any, an administrator may issue topic or page bans without seeking consensus for them, and how such bans may be appealed. This discussion should come to a consensus within one month of this notice.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/194x144x90x118#Final_decision Decided 10 September 2009

• 194x144x90x118 (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
• All editors of the DreamHost article are reminded to abide by Wikipedia's policies of neutral point of view, using reliable and verifiable sources; to engage in civil discussion on the talk page to resolve editorial disputes; and to use the relevant noticeboards and dispute resolution processes to seek external opinions on coverage of matters where the current editors may lack objectivity.

No cases were closed in August.

• Three cases
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ADHD#Final_decision Decided 14 July 2009

• Scuro (talk · contribs) and Jmh649 (talk · contribs) are placed on 1RR with regard to ADHD articles for a period of six months
• Scuro (talk · contribs) is placed under mentorship for a period of one year.
• Literaturegeek (talk · contribs) is advised to refrain from edit warring.
• All involved editors are reminded to be civil and seek assistance in resolving editoral disagreements.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black Decided 1 July 2009 (AN notice).

• A Man In Black (talk · contribs)'s (AMiB) administrative privileges are revoked. AMiB is topic-banned from the Article Rescue Squadron. AMiB is placed on a standard editing restriction for one year. Ikip (talk · contribs) is warned.

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse Decided 1 July 2009 (AN notice)

• Within 15 days of this decision, Mattisse shall, in conjunction with one or more mentors or advisers, submit to this Committee for approval a plan to govern and guide her future editing with the continued assistance of those mentors or advisers. The plan shall seek to preserve Mattisse's valuable and rewarding contributions to Wikipedia while avoiding future disputes and the types of interactions that have been hurtful for herself and others. As a starting point in developing the plan, Mattisse and her mentors or advisors should consider the suggestions made by various users on the workshop page of this case, including but not limited to Mattisse's taking wikibreaks at times of stress, avoiding or limiting Mattisse's participation on certain pages, Mattisse's refraining from making any comments regarding the motivations or good faith of other users, and Mattisse's disengaging from interactions that become stressful or negative. The plan should also address how any lapses by Mattisse from the standards of behavior described in the plan shall be addressed. (Note: As reflected in the findings, Mattisse prepared a plan as required by this paragraph while the proposed decision was pending. See next paragraph.)
• User:Mattisse/Plan (version as of 24 June) is enacted as a baseline. Amendments to the plan may occur by consensus of the mentors, whereby the changes become provisional. At the discretion of the mentors, or if there are significant objections by the community, the provisional changes will be reviewed by the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment.
• Should Mattisse fail to submit a satisfactory plan under remedy 1 within 15 days of this decision, she shall not edit Wikipedia until she does so, except with permission of this Committee. (Note: As reflected in the findings, Mattisse prepared a plan, as required by remedy 1, while the proposed decision was pending. See preceding paragraphs.)

• Five cases
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Seeyou Decided 26 June 2009 (AN notice)

• Seeyou (talk · contribs) banned from editing Wikipedia for one year.

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles Decided 21 June 2009 (AN notice)

• Stevertigo (talk · contribs), Sceptre (talk · contribs), ChildofMidnight (talk · contribs), Scjessey (talk · contribs) and Grundle2600 (talk · contribs) are admonished for their edit-warring. Furthermore, they shall be subject to an editing restriction for one year. They are limited to one revert per page per week (except for undisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
• Scjessey (talk · contribs) and ChildofMidnight (talk · contribs) are topic-banned from Obama-related articles for six months, including talk pages.
• ChildofMidnight (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Scjessey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are not to interact with each other, including replying or reverting of each other’s actions. ChildofMidnight (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Wikidemon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are not to interact with each other, including replying or reverting of each other’s actions.
• Wikidemon (talk · contribs) admonished for his part in the edit warring.
• Grsz11 (talk · contribs) and Tarc (talk · contribs) reminded to be civil when dealing with hot-button and controversial situations.
• Baseball Bugs (talk · contribs) reminded to be more civil when dealing with users and to not use talk pages as a forum.
• The probation on articles relating to Barack Obama will be reviewed by a group of involved and non-involved editors and administrators to see how effective it has been. The process will last two weeks. After the two weeks elapse, the working group will provide their findings to us and the community, and will outline how the article probation will run in the future.
• The Arbitration Committee, in recognizing the traffic and difficulty of handling the Barack Obama talk page, as well as per talk page guidelines, finds the removal of soapboxing and off-topic discussion acceptable and encourages its continuation.
• All involved editors in the Obama articles, parties or not, are encouraged to try to collaborate and work constructively instead of accusing others of misconduct.
• All editor and administrators are reminded that lengthy and liberal use of semi-protection for managing all articles relating directly to Barack Obama and their talk pages is within policy. The use of page protection is subject to review and discretion by administrators based on comments from the Community.

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking Decided 14 June 2009 (AN notice).

• All mass date delinking is restricted for six months
• Date delinking bots will perform in a manner approved by the Bot Approvals Group.
• Lightmouse (talk · contribs) is: banned for 1 year; topic banned indefinitely; prohibited indefinitely from using automation, from using any account but "Lightmouse"
• Tony1 (talk · contribs) indefinitely topic banned, placed on a 12 month editing restriction
• Greg L (talk · contribs) indefinitely topic banned, placed on a 12 month editing restriction
• Ohconfucius (talk · contribs) is: topic banned indefinitely; prohibited indefinitely from using automation; prohibited indefinitely from using any account but "Ohconfucius"; placed on a 12 month editing restriction
• The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) admonished for not pursuing appropriate dispute resolution methods.
• Kotniski (talk · contribs) reminded to pursue appropriate dispute resolution methods, topic banned for 3 months
• Placed on a 12 month editing restriction: Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), 2008Olympian (talk · contribs), Colonies Chris (talk · contribs), SkyWalker (talk · contribs), HJensen (talk · contribs), Dudesleeper (talk · contribs), John (talk · contribs), Tennis expert (talk · contribs), and G-Man (talk · contribs)
• Pmanderson (talk · contribs) is topic banned for 12 months.
• Locke Cole (talk · contribs) is topic banned indefinitely, banned for 6 months, and placed on a 12 month editing restriction
• Kendrick7 (talk · contribs) is topic banned for 12 months
• Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs) admonished for threatening to use his administrator tools to advance his position in a dispute.

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty Decided 11 June 2009 (AN notice)

• Tenmei (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty for a period of six months. He is permitted to comment on the talkpage, so long as he does so in a civil fashion. He is instructed not to interact with or comment with regard to Teeninvestor (talk · contribs) or Caspian blue (talk · contribs) on any page of Wikipedia (except in the course of legitimate dispute resolution initiated by others, if necessary).
• Tenmei shall be assigned one or more volunteer mentors, who will be asked to assist him in understanding and following policy and community practice to a sufficient level that additional sanctions will not be necessary.
• Parties are instructed to carefully review the principles and findings contained in this decision. Each of the parties is strongly urged to conform his or her future behavior to the principles set forth in this decision. Each of the parties is warned for engaging in the problematic user conduct described above, and is instructed to avoid any further instances of such conduct.
• Should the preceding remedies fail to improve the situation described in this decision, after a reasonable time, an application may be made to reopen the case and impose other remedies as may be necessary.

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia 2 Decided 11 June 2009 (AN notice)

• All editors on Macedonia-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions and Geopolitical ethnic and religious conflicts noticeboard (WP:ECCN), especially since there are significant problems in reaching consensus.
• All articles related to Macedonia (defined as any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to Macedonia, Macedonia nationalism, Greece related articles that mention Macedonia, and other articles in which how Macedonia will be referred to is an issue) fall under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned. Editors enforcing a case where a binding Stalemate resolution has been found are exempt from 1RR.
• The following users have been banned from Wikipedia : Avg (talk · contribs)^{one year}, ΚΕΚΡΩΨ (talk · contribs)^{one year}, and Reaper7 (talk · contribs)^{six months} .
• The following users have been topic-banned from Macedonia-related articles and their talk pages, as defined in All related articles under 1RR: Avg (talk · contribs)^indefinitely, ΚΕΚΡΩΨ (talk · contribs)^indefinitely, Reaper7 (talk · contribs)^{one year} and, SQRT5P1D2 (talk · contribs)^{one year}.
• The Committee takes note that ChrisO (talk · contribs) has resigned his administrator status while this case was pending, but also notes that he is desysopped as a result of the above case. ChrisO may obtain the tools back via the usual means or by request to the Arbitration Committee.
• Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) is strongly admonished for displaying a long pattern of incivil, rude, offensive, and insulting behavior towards other editors and failure to address the community's concerns in this regard. Because of this Future Perfect at Sunrise is subject to an editing restriction for one year, and is desysopped for three months as a consequence of poor user conduct and misuse of administrative tools. After three months, his administrator access will be automatically restored.
• Single-purpose accounts are strongly advised to edit in accordance with WP:SPA and other Wikipedia policies. Diversifying one's topics of interest is also encouraged.
• Abuse filter 119, as currently configured, logs all changes involving the word "Macedonia" but does not block any edits. The community is strongly advised to consider adding a new abuse filter criterion; any instances of changing the word "Macedonia" to "FYROM" (the five-letter acronym, not the full phrase) shall be prevented.
• Within seven days of the closure of this case, a discussion is to be opened to consider the preferred current and historical names for the four entities known as Macedonia. The discussion will end one month after it is opened.

• Five cases
• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology Decided 28 May 2009 (AN notice)
  • Banned : John254 (talk · contribs) (Community Ban), Justallofthem (talk · contribs)
  • Topic-banned : CSI LA (talk · contribs), Grrrilla (talk · contribs), Makoshack (talk · contribs), Proximodiz (talk · contribs), Su-Jada (talk · contribs), TaborG (talk · contribs), Jack Russell Terrier (talk · contribs), Jpierreg (talk · contribs), Maureen D (talk · contribs), OngoingHow (talk · contribs), Seelltey (talk · contribs), Tturrisi (talk · contribs), Voxpopulis (talk · contribs), AndroidCat (talk · contribs), Antaeus Feldspar (talk · contribs), Anynobody (talk · contribs), Derflipper (talk · contribs), Fahrenheit451 (talk · contribs), Misou (talk · contribs), Orsini (talk · contribs), Shrampes (talk · contribs), Shutterbug (talk · contribs), Steve Dufour (talk · contribs), Tilman (talk · contribs), The Legendary Shadow! (talk · contribs), Touretzky (talk · contribs)
  • To contact the Committee : Arnielerma*, Karin Spaink*, StephenAKent*, Timbowles*, Tory Christman*, Hkhenson*, Rick Alan Ross (talk · contribs)
  • Jossi (talk · contribs) gave up his status as an administrator in the face of controversy concerning his administrator actions during an arbitration case, he may not be automatically re-granted adminship. However, he is free to seek readminship, should he choose to do so, at any time by a request for adminship at Requests for adminship.
  • ChrisO (talk · contribs) is to abide to a binding voluntary restriction that within the Scientology topic (i) he limits his edits to directly improving articles to meet GA and FA criteria, using reliable sources; (ii) he makes no edits of whatever nature to biographies of living people; and (iii) he refrains from sysop action of whatever nature.
  • Jayen466 (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from articles about Rick Ross, broadly defined.
  • Discretionary topic-ban by any uninvolved administrator is also in place.
  • All IP addresses owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and its associates, broadly interpreted, are to be blocked as if they were open proxies.
• Requests for arbitration/Ryulong Decided 24 May 2009 (AN notice)
  • Parties: Synergy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Mythdon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Hersfold (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  • For misuse of his administrative tools, failure to address the community's concerns, and inappropriate off-wiki behavior, Ryulong is desysopped.
  • Ryulong is admonished for his behaviour off-wiki and directed to refrain from seeking Mythdon's identity off-wiki, identifying personal information of Wikipedia users, and from disclosing that information to others. In addition, for contacting administrators in private to seek either blocks on users he is in dispute with, or the performance of other administrative actions.
  • Mythdon is restricted and placed under mentorship for a period of 1 year.
  • Mythdon is admonished for their harassing behavior on and off-wiki and directed to refrain from contacting Ryulong off-wiki and seeking Ryulong's identity on and off-wiki.
  • Mythdon is strongly urged to take his concerns about the verifiability of the articles to a wider venue and consult his views with others. He is then advised to report the views of others to WikiProject Tokusatsu for discussions; He is further urged to enhance his level of communication with editors.
  • All participants of WikiProject Tokusatsu are advised to work on producing a genuine guideline for the articles falling under the scope of the WikiProject Tokusatsu. They are urged to work in collaboration with Mythdon while seeking outside advice and help.
• Requests for arbitration/Abd and JzG Decided 18 May 2009 (AN notice)
  • Parties: JzG (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Abd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  • JzG is admonished not to use his administrative tools in any situation in which he is involved nor to use them to further his position in a dispute.
  • Abd is urged to avoid prolonging disputes by using unproductive methods and advised to clearly and succinctly document previous and current attempts at dispute resolution before escalating to the next stage.
  • Abd is also advised to heed good-faith feedback when handling disputes and to incorporate that feedback.
• Requests for arbitration/Aitias Decided 18 May 2009 (AN notice]
  • Parties: Aitias (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Majorly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  • Aitias' adminship suspended from his return to editing until the conclusion of the case. Aitias is admonished for inappropriate and unnecessarily sarcastic comments and is banned from Requests for rollback and its talk page for six months.
• West Bank - Judea and Samaria Decided 12 May 2009 (AN notice, correction)
  • Parties: Canadian Monkey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), G-Dett (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Jayjg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), MeteorMaker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Nickhh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Nishidani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), NoCal100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Pedrito (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  • This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.
  • Canadian Monkey, G-Dett, Jayjg, MeteorMaker, Nickhh, Nishidani, NoCal100, and Pedrito are banned from editing any Arab-Israeli conflict-related article/talk page or discussing on the dispute anywhere else on the project.
  • Jayjg is also stripped of his status as a functionary and any and all associated privileged access, including the CheckUser and Oversight tools and the checkuser-l, oversight-l, and functionaries-en mailing lists.
  • The editors may request that their restrictions be lifted after 6 months (but no more often than every 6 months).
  • The community is asked to obtain consensus on the preferred current and historical names of the region that is the source of conflict in this case

• Two cases
• Prem Rawat 2 Decided 20 April 2009 (AN notice)
  • Parties: *Durova (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Francis Schonken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Will Beback (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), Rumiton (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Momento (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Jayen466 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  • This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Momento (talk · contribs) and Rumiton (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Prem Rawat or any related article (including talk pages) for one year. The Prem Rawat article and all related articles are subject to revert limitations for one year. Several users are admonished for their conduct in the case and all parties and other interested editors are encouraged to restart mediation in relation to Prem Rawat. Also, should Jossi (talk · contribs) return to Wikipedia to edit Prem Rawat articles, he is required to contact the Arbitration Committee beforehand. These remedies are in addition to, and do not replace, the remedies passed in RFAR/Prem Rawat.