Revision as of 21:19, 5 February 2012 view sourceArcticocean (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators46,324 edits →Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (0/5/0/0): decline← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:02, 5 February 2012 view source Salvio giuliano (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators49,151 edits →Reliable Sources Noticeboard closures: rm. case as declinedNext edit → | ||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<br clear="all"/> | <br clear="all"/> | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header}} | {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header}} | ||
== Reliable Sources Noticeboard closures == | |||
'''Initiated by ''' ] (]) '''at''' 03:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
=== Involved parties === | |||
<!-- use {{admin|username}} if the party is an administrator --> | |||
*{{userlinks|Granateple}}, ''filing party'' | |||
*{{userlinks|Fifelfoo}} | |||
*{{userlinks|HandThatFeeds}} | |||
*{{admin|Wgfinley}} | |||
<!-- The editor filing the case should be included as a party for purposes of notifications. --> | |||
;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request | |||
<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. --> | |||
*Diff. 1 | |||
*Diff. 2 | |||
*Diff. 3 | |||
;Confirmation that other steps in ] have been tried | |||
<!-- Identify prior attempts at dispute resolution here, with links/diffs to the page where the resolution took place. If prior dispute resolution has not been attempted, the reasons for this should be explained in the request for arbitration --> | |||
*Link 1 | |||
*Link 2 | |||
=== Statement by {Granateple} === | |||
:A non-admin recently (26 January 2012) closed an discussion on Reliable sources/Noticeboard (RS/N). The editor in question brought the closure before the Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents (ANI) for review, but the Admin folks didn’t want to review the closure. | |||
:When the incident grew, the same editor filled in a request for Arbitration Enforcement, an automatic machinery took over, granted it (User:WGFinley), and suddenly did I become a member of the Transcendental Meditation Movement. I am a newcomer to Misplaced Pages, with a scientific outlook, so this was a pleasant surprise. | |||
:When I posted my inauguration speech as a newly appointed TM master at ANI at 17:04 1 February 2012, the thread lasted less than three hours. The case was closed (this time by another non-admin). | |||
:These two incidents are contained in only two threads. I have no diffs, and nothing to complain about expect for these two incidents. '''It is not a content dispute'''. Misplaced Pages depend on free and open discussion. A discussion between several editors was halted and closed, and this '''act''' has not been reviewed. One part of the closure summary read: “User Granateple is reminded that contributing too much to a discussion damages the quality of that discussion”. As a newcomer to Misplaced Pages, I am surprised if this is how Misplaced Pages works. | |||
:The first thread is called “Is Hindawi a RS publisher for this content?” (the original discussion) and is found on . The second thread is called “Please review my closure of an RS/N discussion (restored from archive)”. It contain many tales, told and untold. It is now archived at ANI (number 738). | |||
:User:Fifelfoo did the RS/N closure. User:HandThatFeeds did the ANI closure. HandThatFeeds mentioned ArbCom for me, and this user is very sure (for some reason) that you will dismiss my RFAR.] (]) 04:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by Fifelfoo === | |||
This is a resolved dispute. | |||
*The community has rather clearly indicated its satisfaction with the closure: | |||
:* | |||
:* and | |||
:* | |||
:* and | |||
:* | |||
:* | |||
*Granateple's conduct issues have been resolved through an appropriate warning of pre-existing discretionary sanctions: | |||
:* | |||
As such, there is nothing for Arbcom to do here. ] (]) 05:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
*In the rationale for discretionary sanctions, one purpose stated is to stop poorly conducted disputes from sanctioned areas overrunning external noticeboards. The rationale for my closure was noted pretty clearly in the closure, and with diffs, (), prior to at least four of the comments regarding it above. ] (]) 21:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by HandThatFeeds === | |||
I am only "involved" in that I advised the user that his complaint was already resolved. Unfortunately, he seems determined to ]. I did advise the user that ArbCom was the final arbiter of Misplaced Pages decisions, but recommended ]. I closed the ANI discussion after Granateple posted a long, sarcastic screed accusing me of Machiavellian machinations. — <b>]</span>:<sup>]</sup></b> 12:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by Wgfinley === | |||
As a piece of machinery (AKA ]) I'm not certain I'm qualified to respond to this request, I'll do my best. The filing party was of discretionary sanctions as outlined in ] resulting from an . The warning was largely due to ] at the in regard to "open access journals" and their use in TM articles. After the warning the filing party at AN/I. This filing is pretty much a blatant ] violation and aimed at to rise up against ] and completely obscure any valid point he/she might have had about a premature RS Noticeboard closing. --] (]) 04:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
===Statement by Olive=== | |||
Granateple has left Misplaced Pages . I don't blame him. Last night I watched Sue Gardner talk about editor retention and how the first year is where editors are lost in part because of treatment on Misplaced Pages. Granateple had been editing for about 4-5 months. English (he says he is Norwegian) is almost certainly not his first language. He showed up on a NB to comment on a source. His comments were in favour of the source, but there were many comments that weren't. His style is more wordy than many probably a result of using a second language , but he was polite and serious about the discussion. The NB was closed in less than a day and a half by Fiflefoo based on some pretty massive misassumptions. Granateple had a right to feel frustrated given the blame laid at his door. Filfelfoo closed the discussion in large part based on the fact that Granateple was an involved editor. He isn't .Granatepele has never edited a TM article. He was accused of tag teaming, based I assume on the so called involved editor status. In total Fifelfoo's closing comments written in the tone of an arbitration which DGG later commented on , and had little basis in reality. An/I . | |||
I don't think Grataeple knew where to turn next, and his postings on AN/I indicate that. | |||
I'll note that Wgfinley said Granateple was a single purpose account. He isn't. Granateple was warned per the TM arbitration. This was a NB and Granteple has never edited a TM article and was an uninvolved editor. If this is the standard then every editor who comes to a NB where questions have a risen from any one of the 80 or so TM articles should be warned. | |||
I don't think this is an arbitration situation, but I think editors have to be much more careful about the evidence they post about other editors. Right now Misplaced Pages does not deal very well with misassumption, and falsehood. The process is upside down, decide an editor is guilty and dig up evidence to prove that. Carelessness, in comments against other editors, is rampant on Misplaced Pages perhaps because reading through a long thread is unpleasant and time consuming. What we have to remember seems to me is that once an editor has been labelled even correctly , its almost impossible to get past that . There are those willing always to poison the well, those who encourage it, and those who will look the other way and let it happen. Granateple in commenting on this NB has now been warned and labelled. How does a new editor or any editor undo that? (] (]) 20:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC)) | |||
=== Clerk notes === | |||
:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).'' | |||
=== Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (0/5/0/0) === | |||
*'''Decline''' You were merely notified about the existence of the discretionary sanctions. While this was a formal notification/warning, they ''are'' things that any editor moving about in a topic area under them needs to be aware of. While an appeal of an actual sanction could be heard by this committee (though normally it is the last appeal option) there is nothing to "appeal" here. These discretionary sanctions exist, now you know about them, and can choose your actions accordingly; for the record, the TM sanctions apply no matter which "side" you are on. ] 05:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
**Also, we do not normally review closures of ordinary discussions. Basically, everything here is skipping half a dozen steps in process and jumping right to the endgame. ] 05:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
* Agree with Courcelles. Suggest carefully reviewing ], and trying to resolve the dispute using the earlier stages of the dispute resolution process. ] (]) 14:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
* '''Decline''' for the same reasons that have been outlined above, ] <sup>]</sup> 15:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' per the above. ] (]) 18:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
* '''Decline.''' This dispute does not warrant arbitration. ] ]] 21:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:02, 5 February 2012
Arbitration Committee proceedings- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.
Open casesCase name | Links | Evidence due | Prop. Dec. due |
---|---|---|---|
Palestine-Israel articles 5 | (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) | 21 Dec 2024 | 11 Jan 2025 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requestsCurrently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
Arbitrator motionsMotion name | Date posted |
---|---|
Arbitrator workflow motions | 10 January 2025 |
Requests for arbitration
Shortcuts
About this page Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority). Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests. Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide to case requests. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace. To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
Guidance on participation and word limits Unlike many venues on Misplaced Pages, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.
General guidance
|