The Arbitration Committee opened two cases this week, and closed four cases. One requested case was not accepted, following the desysopping of an involved administrator.
Not accepted
Closed cases
- Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram: A case involving the actions of Certified.Gangsta and Ideogram, both of whom Durova and others alleged to have been involved in edit-warring on Taiwan-related articles. Ideogram, who had also been accused of improper behaviour on the community noticeboard, denied the allegations. Certified.Gangsta presented evidence, in which he alleged that Ideogram has engaged in canvassing, wikistalking, and orchestrating an anti-Certified.Gangsta campaign. He also denies Durova's allegiations. As a result of the case, both parties were placed on revert parole, and Ideogram was admonished to "fully adhere to all Wikipedia policies".
- Betacommand: A case involving the actions of Betacommand. Some of Betacommand's blocks were questioned, and his bot-related actions led to his removal from the bot approvals group. Betacommand noted that he makes numerous username-related blocks, and that most of his blocks were appropriate. Whether Betacommand used his administrative account for bot-related activity, whether he is unique in doing so, and whether such an action should be allowed or not, were also questioned. As a result of the case, Betacommand was desysopped.
- Freedom skies: A case involving the actions of Freedom skies. JFD and others alleged that he has edit warred to push his point of view. He denied the allegations. As a result of the case, Freedom Skies was placed on revert parole for one year, and limited to one account.
New cases
Evidence phase
- TingMing: A case involving the actions of TingMing (talk · contribs). Ideogram (talk · contribs) alleges that he has engaged in "controversial edits", edit warring, incivility, and possibly sockpuppetry. TinMing denies the allegations, and alleges incivility on the part of Ideogram.
- Zeq-Zero0000: A case involving the actions of Zeq (talk · contribs) and Zero0000 (talk · contribs). Zero alleges that Zeq has engaged in POV-pushing, while Zeq alleges that Zero has misused administrative tools in blocking him, the case in particular involving the question of whether probations, article bans, etc. can be enforced by involved admins.
Motion to close
- Falun Gong: A case regarding the conduct of various editors on the Falun Gong article. Olaf Stephanos and Asdfg12345 allege that Samuel Luo has edit-warred in removing pro-Falun Gong material from the article, while Luo, Tomananda and others allege that Stephanos, Asdfg and others have edit-warred (including page blanking) in removing anti-Falun Gong material. If passed, Falun Gong would be placed on article probation, Mcconn placed on revert parole, and Samual Luo and Tomananda banned from editing the articles or their talk pages.
Discuss this story