The Arbitration Committee opened three cases this week, leaving six currently open.

• Giovanni33: A case involving the accusation of sockpuppetry by Giovanni33. Giovanni33 has not yet commented in the case, but Rafaelsfingers, who has been labeled as a sockpuppet of Giovanni33 by some, has denied the charges.

• Footnoted quotes: A case involving the use of quotes in footnotes; some users allege that Richard Arthur Norton has been using these quotes excessively, and against consensus. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), however, has argued for the quotes, and noted that he's "flexible" regarding specific uses of the quotes.

• CAMERA lobbying: A case involving alleged lobbying by pro-Israel group Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) on Middle East-related articles. Gni was banned indefinitely by the community in the wake of these allegations; Gni denied allegations that he was Gilead Ini, a senior member of CAMERA. Zeq was community-banned for one year, and Dajudem was banned from Arab-Israeli topics for one year.

• Homeopathy: A dispute involving a number of editors over the Homeopathy article. Remedies with the support of two arbitrators include banning DanaUllman for one year, the creation of a "Sourcing Adjudication Board" regarding the inappropriate use of citations, and emphasizing the Committee's ability to issue subsequent sanctions in the case, based on reports of "inappropriate conduct" as judged by the Sourcing Adjudication Board. Two versions of another sanction each have the support of one arbitrator, allowing administrators to impose sanctions on editors in the dispute.

• Tango: A case involving a controversial block of MONGO by Tango under this finding. A remedy suspending Tango's use of the blocking tool for six months has the support of six arbitrators, and remedies suspending Tango's adminship, both for one month and indefinitely, have lesser degrees of support.

• Prem Rawat: A case involving the actions of editors on Prem Rawat and related articles. If closed, all remedies would currently fail, due to lack of quorum, though the case is unlikely to close at this point. These remedies place Rawat-related articles on article probation and reminding editors with a possible or perceived conflict of interest to comply with Wikipedia policies on NPOV and conflict of interest. The motion to close was made at a time when the remedies passed, and is currently opposed by two arbitrators.