Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Cases/2018
| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
|
|
| Track related changes |
This is an archive of the results of all cases completed by the Arbitration Committee in 2018.
- More recently-closed cases on top
 | |
| 2024 | ||
| 2023 | ||
| 2022 | ||
| 2021 | ||
| 2020 | ||
| 2019 | ||
| 2018 | ||
| 2017 | ||
| 2016 | ||
| 2015 | ||
| 2014 | ||
| 2013 | ||
| 2012 | ||
| 2011 | ||
| 2010 | ||
| 2009 | ||
| 2008 | ||
| 2007 | ||
| 2006 | ||
| 2005 | ||
| 2004 | ||
2018
[edit]7 cases, 1 of which was dismissed
December
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fred Bauder#Final decision closed 06 December 2018 (AN notice)
- Fred Bauder is admonished for engaging in an edit war on his candidate's questions page. Future edit-warring or disruptive behavior may result in further sanctions.
- For multiple self-unblocks, wheel-warring, and abuse of rollback, Fred Bauder is desysopped. He may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
- Boing! said Zebedee is cautioned for blocking Fred Bauder while actively involved in an edit war with him at the time. He is further cautioned to avoid edit-warring, even in cases where the other editor is editing disruptively.
- Editors should seek assistance from the Electoral Commission for issues that arise on pages related to the Arbitration Committee Elections that cannot be easily resolved (excluding, for example, obvious vandalism). The Arbitration Committee reaffirms that the Electoral Commission has been tasked with the independent oversight of the Arbitration Committee Elections.
November
[edit]October
[edit]September
[edit]August
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/German war effort#Final decision closed 11 August 2018 (AN notice)
- For engaging in harassment of other users, LargelyRecyclable (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is indefinitely banned from the English Wikipedia under any account.
- Cinderella157 is topic banned from the history of Germany from 1932 to 1945, broadly construed. This topic ban may be appealed after six months have elapsed and every six months thereafter.
- Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is reminded that project coordinators have no special roles in a content dispute, and that featured articles are not immune to sourcing problems.
- Editors are reminded that consensus-building is key to the purpose and development of Wikipedia. The most reliable sources should be used instead of questionable sourcing whenever possible, especially when dealing with sensitive topics. Long-term disagreement over local consensus in a topic area should be resolved through soliciting comments from the wider community, instead of being re-litigated persistently at the local level.
- While certain specific user-conduct issues have been identified in this decision, for the most part the underlying issue is a content dispute as to how, for example, the military records of World War II-era German military officers can be presented to the same extent as military records of officers from other periods, while placing their records and actions in the appropriate overall historical context. For better or worse, the Arbitration Committee is neither authorized nor qualified to resolve this content dispute, beyond enforcing general precepts such as those requiring reliable sourcing, due weighting, and avoidance of personal attacks. Nor does Wikipedia have any other editorial body authorized to dictate precisely how the articles should read outside the ordinary editing process. Knowledgeable editors who have not previously been involved in these disputes are urged to participate in helping to resolve them. Further instances of uncollegial behavior in this topic-area will not be tolerated and, if this occurs, may result in this Committee's accepting a request for clarification and amendment to consider imposition of further remedies, including topic-bans or discretionary sanctions.
July
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/BLP issues on British politics articles#Final decision closed 26 July 2018 (AN notice)
- Philip Cross (talk · contribs) is warned to avoid editing topics with which he has a conflict of interest. Further, he is warned that his off-wiki behavior may lead to further sanctions to the extent it adversely impacts the English Wikipedia.
- Philip Cross (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from edits relating to post-1978 British politics, broadly construed. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter. This sanction supersedes the community sanction applied in May 2018.
- KalHolmann (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted from linking to or speculating about the off-wiki behavior or identity of other editors. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter. All appeals must be directed toward arbcom-l
lists.wikimedia.org. - The community is reminded that publicly posting details or speculation regarding an editor’s personal information or off-wiki behavior violates the policy on outing, unless the information has been disclosed on-wiki by the editor in question. Concerns regarding off-wiki behavior are best reported through an appropriate private channel rather than on community noticeboards.
June
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Andrevan#Final decision dismissed 11 June 2018 (AN notice)
May
[edit]April
[edit]March
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others#Final decision closed 4 March 2018 (AN notice)
- Subject to the usual exceptions, Joefromrandb (talk · contribs) is indefinitely restricted to one revert per page in any 24 hour period.
- For persistent and serious violations of Wikipedia's expected standards of behaviour including edit warring, battleground conduct and incivility, Joefromrandb (talk · contribs) is banned from the English Wikipedia for a period of six months. If problematic behaviour continues after the ban expires, the Arbitration Committee may impose an indefinite site ban or other sanctions by motion in response to a report at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
- Point 3 of this community restriction from ANI is rescinded.
- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility in infobox discussions#Final decision closed 28 March 2018 (AN notice)
- Any uninvolved administrator may apply infobox probation as a discretionary sanction. See the full decision for details of infobox probation.
- Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes.
- Cassianto is indefinitely placed on infobox probation.
- The Arbitration Committee recommends that well-publicized community discussions be held to address whether to adopt a policy or guideline addressing what factors should weigh in favor of or against including an infobox in a given article and how those factors should be weighted.
- All editors are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions about infoboxes, and to not turn discussions about a single article's infobox into a discussion about infoboxes in general.
- For canvassing editors to this case, Volvlogia (talk · contribs) is admonished. They are warned that any further instances of canvassing related to arbitration processes will likely result in sanctions.
February
[edit]January
[edit]- Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors#Final decision closed 7 January 2018 (AN notice)
- For conduct unbecoming an administrator, Salvidrim! (talk · contribs) is desysopped. They may regain administrator tools at any time via a successful RfA.
- Salvidrim! is prohibited from reviewing articles for creation drafts, or moving AfC drafts created by other editors into mainspace. This restriction can be appealed in 12 months.
- Salvidrim! is warned that further breaches of WP:COI will be grounds for sanctions including blocks, in accordance with community policies and guidelines.
- Soetermans (talk · contribs) is prohibited from reviewing articles for creation drafts, or moving AfC drafts created by other editors into mainspace. This restriction can be appealed in 12 months.
- Soetermans is warned that further breaches of WP:COI will be grounds for sanctions including blocks, in accordance with community policies and guidelines.