Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions
→Statement by SarekOfVulcan: used article template, expanded response |
→Statement by Jehochman: suggesting checkuser |
||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
=== Statement by Jehochman === |
=== Statement by Jehochman === |
||
I've been watching {{user|194x144x90x118}} for a while. Something appears to be not right. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 13:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC) |
I've been watching {{user|194x144x90x118}} for a while. Something appears to be not right. Their [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SheffieldSteel&diff=prev&oldid=285297848 second edit ever] is way too knowledgeable (and snarky) for them to be a new user. I suggest checkuser. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 13:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
=== Statement by {Party 3} === |
=== Statement by {Party 3} === |
||
Revision as of 13:31, 30 June 2009
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| DreamHost | 30 June 2009 | {{{votes}}} |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
| Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amendment request: Palestine-Israel articles (AE referral) | Motion | (orig. case) | 17 August 2024 |
| Arbitration enforcement referral: Nableezy, et al | none | (orig. case) | 7 November 2024 |
| Clarification request: Referrals from Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard to the full Committee | none | none | 7 November 2024 |
No arbitrator motions are currently open.
Requests for arbitration
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 Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. Guidance on participation and word limits Unlike many venues on Wikipedia, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.
General guidance
|
DreamHost
Initiated by SarekOfVulcan (talk) at 03:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Involved parties
- SarekOfVulcan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), filing party
- Scjessey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Judas278 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- 194x144x90x118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- SarekOfVulcan requested a 3O on the autoarchive timing
- Scjessey filed a RfC on the "Incidents" section
- Judas278 requested informal mediation, which is ongoing but not very productive
Statement by SarekOfVulcan
The article on web hosting company DreamHost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is hopelessly deadlocked between satisfied customers SarekOfVulcan and Scjessey, and ex-customer Judas278 and non-customer 194x144x90x118. Judas and 194x treat any positive information about the company as advertising or a conflict of interest on Sarek and Scjessey's parts. This has resulted in the article being fully protected for most of the past two months, first by SarekOfVulcan and almost immediately after expiration by PhilKnight, the informal mediator. Suggestions for new edits are met with claims of advertisement. Information such as the names of the founders of the company and that they met in college is challenged as controversial and BLP-violating. Civility has occasionally (or frequently) gone out the window on various people's parts. Reducing the archive period from 90 days to 45 days was decried as abusive and disruptive, even though it reduced the talk page from 285K to 80K. There were allegations that Sarek misused his admin bit by removing a sentence and then fully protecting the article.
It is currently undergoing an AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DreamHost (2nd nomination) that seems quite likely to end as keep.
I have not filed an RFC/U, because there isn't just one editor with issues here, and I think it's fairer to subject all involved parties to scrutiny.
- Please note 194x's response to my notification: "Beautiful man, you're a goner."--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Response to arbitrator Risker
- Actually, I don't think this is a content dispute, because the disputes have been spread over every part of the article and talk page. It seems clear to me that it's a user conduct issue -- I'm just not sure whose conduct is the problem.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Statement by Jehochman
I've been watching 194x144x90x118 (talk · contribs) for a while. Something appears to be not right. Their second edit ever is way too knowledgeable (and snarky) for them to be a new user. I suggest checkuser. Jehochman Talk 13:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Statement by {Party 3}
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.
Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (1/1/0/0)
- Accept to consider the conduct of everyone involved in this matter. Kirill [talk] [pf] 03:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Decline There is an AFD outstanding, and an informal mediation that is said to be ongoing. Wait for the AFD to close, and then attempt to use formal mediation. You may also want to try the new Wikipedia:Content noticeboard out. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Awaiting further submissions. I would like to see the AfD to close as well before determining next steps. John Vandenberg's suggestions for alternatives are good. I'm of the impression, however, that this is a content dispute that still has some opportunity for resolution. Risker (talk) 13:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)