Revision as of 02:08, 19 October 2016 view sourceCasliber (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators200,919 edits →Dinesh D'Souza: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:18, 20 October 2016 view source L235 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators27,359 edits →Dinesh D'Souza: declinedNext edit → | ||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
<noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}} | <noinclude>{{ArbComOpenTasks|acotstyle=float:right}}</noinclude>{{NOINDEX}} | ||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=45%</noinclude>}} | {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Header<noinclude>|width=45%</noinclude>}} | ||
== ] == | |||
'''Initiated by ''' ] (]) '''at''' 22:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Involved parties === | |||
<!-- Please change "userlinks" to "admin" if the party is an administrator --> | |||
*{{userlinks|TheTimesAreAChanging}}, ''filing party'' | |||
*{{userlinks|Oneshotofwhiskey}} | |||
;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request | |||
* | |||
;Confirmation that other steps in ] have been tried | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
=== Statement by TheTimesAreAChanging === | |||
] openly boasts that he is ] to build a neutral encyclopedia. In his own words, he is an activist intending to expose ; this mentality has unsurprisingly caused him to challenge basic tenets of ]. For example, Oneshotofwhiskey replaced the previously accepted photo of D'Souza with his and accused D'Souza of promoting in the lead. Discussion on the talk page has yielded in favor of labeling D'Souza a "convicted felon" or "conspiracy theorist"—in fact, despite Oneshotofwhiskey's suggestions to the contrary, he is essentially alone in advocating those changes. (An has recently been opened on the "conspiracy theorist" question, with one vote in favor of including the label.) Nor am I alone in challenging Oneshotofwhiskey's - language. Although he has since dropped the mugshot angle, Oneshotofwhiskey has continued to attack ] with a tenacity and complete disregard for sources or standards that is really quite shocking. Compare the old, accepted section with the Oneshotofwhiskey complete with a brand-new "Marriage scandal" subsection. Is there ''any other'' BLP written in this manner? Of course not; Oneshotofwhiskey is simply making a mockery of Misplaced Pages policy. Oneshotofwhiskey has mass deleted over 2,000 bytes of previously accepted material from reliable sources like ] eight times now (, , , , , , , ), claiming it is to include Dershowitz's attributed opinion because (needless to say, that is not a proper application of the policy), and adding Oneshotofwhiskey continues to rant about how D'Souza is , and frequently makes claims that fail verification, as when he attributed the following text to : Since Oneshotofwhiskey believes ] I feel I have no choice but to seek your assistance.] (]) 22:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by Oneshotofwhiskey === | |||
I wouldn't read too much into my statements on the talk. In these political talk pages, they devolve into political debate. Pay attention to my edits. I have MORE than compromised with this editor. If you review this editor's history, he engages in personal attacks as a habit and he currently has confessed to editwarring and violating 3RR on this page. | |||
My edits fall well within ] and are respected by consensus on the talk page. Wish this editor would do the same.] (]) 22:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
:Also, here is the current arbitration still underway for this user. In it he has blatantly violated 3RR and has admitted to such. He's essentially confessed to knowingly-editwarring, he's just basically saying he feels justified in doing so. In his defense, in attempt to stop his partisan conservative-POV vandalizing of the page, I may have inadvertently violated the 3RR rule myself. I only mention that since I do not believe that I am above the rules and I readily accept the consequences for my actions, intentional or otherwise. Thank you for taking the time to arbitrate this if necessary. But I don't think this is rocket science. Seems simple enough.] (]) 22:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by very uninvolved Ks0stm === | |||
Seems better suited to ] than arbitration as currently framed. ] <sup>(]•]•]•])</sup> 22:22, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by ] === | |||
This is a dispute involving American politics in the twenty-first century and is within the scope of ]. Disruptive editing can be dealt with by ]. I see no need for new arbitration. | |||
] (]) 23:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by Ryk72 === | |||
Concur with Robert McClenon & Ks0stm. Suggest this be <s>copied "as is" to AE &</s> ''declined'' here. - ] <sup>]</sup> 00:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
=== Statement by {Non-party} === | |||
Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information. | |||
<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * --> | |||
=== Clerk notes === | |||
:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).'' | |||
* | |||
=== ]: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/6/0> === | |||
{{anchor|1=]: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter}}<small>Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)</small> | |||
*'''Decline''' This just needs a bit of Administrator TLC and some DR beyond a single talkpage, not 4 weeks of Arbitration. -- ] <small>]</small> 04:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' as Amanda says this request just needs to be handled by an admin and it appears that {{u|Oshwah}} has started to do so. I'll note though, that AE won't be able to help with Oneshotofwhiskey, or TheTimesAreAChanging for that matter, as they hadn't been ] (they both have now). <b>]</b> (] • ] • ]) 06:32, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' AE can solve this issue. {{Ping|Callanecc}} I made Oneshotofwhiskey aware . --] | ] 14:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' Can be handled elsewhere. ] ] 15:00, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline'''. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;" class="texhtml"> ''']'''</span> ] 16:48, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' and divert to ANI. ] (]) 18:11, 18 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
*'''Decline''' and divert to ANI. ] (] '''·''' ]) 02:08, 19 October 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:18, 20 October 2016
Shortcut
Requests for arbitration
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 | 1 December 2024 |
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
|