Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case
Requests for arbitration
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mathsci and Echigo Mole | 10 June 2012 | {{{votes}}} |
| 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.
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
|
Mathsci and Echigo Mole
Initiated by Keystone Crow (talk) at 04:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Keystone Crow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- Mathsci (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Echigo Mole (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Jclemens (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- MastCell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- TrevelyanL85A2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Nyttend (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- Collect (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Trödel (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Diff. 1
- Diff. 2
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
- User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum/Archives/2012/February#Reginald_of_Durham
- User_talk:Trödel/Archive_13#Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations.2FEchigo_mole
- Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mathsci/Archive#26_May_2012
- User_talk:Jclemens#Your_conduct
- Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Response_to_wikihounding
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration_enforcement_action_appeal_by_TrevelyanL85A2
Statement by {Party 1}
Unfortunately this issue seems to now need attention from ArbCom. There's been some discussion at AE about requesting arbitration, so it's time someone went ahead. The question is not how Mathsci should treat sockpuppets, but rather his behaviour toward editors who want him to stop reverting anyone who restores edits made by suspected socks. The threads above show this has been a conflict since February, and last month it led to a new conflict between Mathsci and Jclemens about Mathsci's response when his own partially-declared alternate account Aixoise was reported at SPI. An RFC likely cannot resolve this, because in the threads above Mathsci has accused three admins (Trödel, Nyttend and Jclemens) of acting in bad faith, and at AE TrevelyanL85A2 accuses MastCell of breaching WP:INVOLVED by overruling Jclemens following a private request from Mathsci. Mathsci is also calling for Nyttend to be desysopped. [1] He's threatened Nyttend with arbitration, so he cannot now object to a case being opened.
As in the Aixoisie SPI, ArbCom would do best to consider this request on its merits, and whether the community can expect to solve so divisive a dispute among three admins.
Statement by {Party 2}
Statement by {Party 3}
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).