Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Appeal of VeryVerily/Workshop

This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for suggestions by Arbitrators and other users and for comment by arbitrators, the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies. Anyone who edits should sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they have confidence in on /Proposed decision.

Template
1)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
1)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

=Proposed final decision=

Template
1) {text of proposed principle}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Reverts should be discussed
1) It is unhealthy to revert, especially more than once, without discussion of the reverts, either on the talk page of the article concerned, or on the talk page of the user whose edit was reverted. (See Revert.) Johnleemk | Talk 15:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Gaming the 3RR
2) It is inappropriate for editors to "game" the three-revert rule by hewing to the letter but not spirit of the rule (e.g. reverting four times in 24 hours and one minute). (See Three-revert rule.) Johnleemk | Talk 15:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Adequate sourcing of information
3) In order for information to be included in Wikipedia it must have been published in a reliable source. That source should be cited routinely and must be should a question arise, see Citing sources.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Neutral point of view
4) Neutral point of view requires fair representation of all significant viewpoints regarding a subject.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Tendentious editors may be banned
5) Editors who disrupt the editing of articles by aggressively editing in a point of view way may be banned from the affected articles and in extreme cases from the site.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez reverts excessively without discussion
1) Ruy Lopez has reverted excessively on Khmer Rouge without attempting to actively engage in a dialogue regarding the article content (as evidenced by the lack of talk page comments except immediately prior to a bunch of reverts). Johnleemk | Talk 15:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez pushes his POV
2) Ruy Lopez has repeatedly attempted to push a particular POV on Khmer Rouge by removing external links and categories from the article that he disagrees with, despite inadequate explanation on Talk:Khmer Rouge.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez holds a left-wing ideology
3) Ruy Lopez takes a left-wing political stance and has repeatedly attempted to edit Wikipedia articles to reflect this.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez believes Wikipedia reflects the ideology of its owners
4) Ruy Lopez has stated that he believes Wikipedia and its articles reflect the libertarian ideology of Jimbo Wales, and that editors such as 172 have been harrassed because of this. (See User:Ruy Lopez/NPOV and categories.)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez inadequately clarified Samuel Thornton's credibility
5) Despite repeated requests to explain his citation of Samuel Thornton as a credible source backing up the assertion that the United States backed a coup in Cambodia, Ruy Lopez has not explained why Thornton is to be trusted more than any other source. (See Talk:Khmer_Rouge.)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Proposed remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Template
1) {text of proposed remedy}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Revert limitation on Ruy Lopez
1) Ruy Lopez is limited to one revert per page per day for six months.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:
 * Way too lenient for doing this for over a year. CJK 00:06, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez required to discuss reverts
2) Ruy Lopez is required to discuss all reverts on the relevant talk page, with the goal of finding mutually acceptable compromises.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:
 * This was what he was told to do last time around... should not he be punished for that instead of told the same thing? CJK 00:04, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez placed on probation
3) Ruy Lopez is placed on Probation. Any administrator, in the exercise of their judgement for reasonable cause may ban him from any article or talk page which he disrupts by inappropriate editing. Such bans may include all articles which deal with certain areas, such as Communism. Ruy Lopez must be notified on his talk page of any ban and the ban and the basis for it logged at Requests_for_arbitration/Ruy_Lopez.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Sockpuppets
4) Ruy Lopez is to use one account. Edits by other accounts reasonably believed to be Ruy Lopez shall be considered Ruy Lopez for the purposes of this decision.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:
 * See this for a list of suspected Ruy Lopez-style sockpuppets. CJK 21:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment by others:

Ruy Lopez banned from editing Khmer Rouge related articles
5) Ruy Lopez is banned from editing articles related to the Khmer Rouge. He may continue editing talk pages, and if he builds a consensus with proper citation his proposed changes shall be acted upon. If he refuses to abide by this, he shall be banned for a week, increasing to a month and beyond for repeated violations.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Sanctions on VeryVerily lifted
1) The ArbCom apologizes to VeryVerily for their grossly inaccurate remedy instated in Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, VeryVerily and lifts all sanctions immediately.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Analysis of evidence
Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

General discussion

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others: