Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae/Workshop

This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. The Arbitrators, parties to the case, and other editors may draft proposals and post them to this page for review and comments. Proposals may include proposed general principles, findings of fact, remedies, and enforcement provisions&mdash;the same format as is used in Arbitration Committee decisions. The bottom of the page may be used for overall analysis of the /Evidence and for general discussion of the case.

Any user may edit this workshop page. Please sign all suggestions and comments. Arbitrators will place proposed items they believe should be part of the final decision on the /Proposed decision page, which only Arbitrators may edit, for voting.

Check user request
1) A check user be made on User:Asgardian, given that there is evidence of sock puppetry using ip addresses, and there is also evidence of deliberate disruption.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I've added evidence today to support this request, I hope I have placed it in the right section. Hiding Talk 14:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Template
2)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
3)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
1)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
2)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
3)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
4)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Questions to the parties
=Proposed final decision=

Edit summaries
1) Editors are generally expected to provide appropriate edit summaries for their edits; failing to provide edit summaries for potentially contentious edits, or providing misleading edit summaries, is considered incivil and bad wikiquette. When reverting, users are expected to give their reasons in the edit summaries.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * From Arbitration policy/Past decisions. Relevant due to Asgardian's use of edit summaries, evidence to follow. Hiding Talk 13:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit wars
2) Edit wars or revert wars are usually considered harmful, because they cause ill-will between users and negatively destabilize articles. Editors are encouraged to explore alternate methods of dispute resolution, such as negotiation, surveys, requests for comment, mediation, or arbitration. When disagreements arise, users are expected to adhere to the three-revert rule and discuss their differences rationally rather than reverting ad nauseam. "Slow revert wars," where an editor persistently reverts an article but technically adheres to the three-revert rule are also strongly discouraged and are unlikely to constitute working properly with others.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Again, copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to the edit warring as shown in the arbitration request. Hiding Talk 13:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has now been added to show edit warring. Hiding Talk 14:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Legal threats
3) It is best for all concerned that those who are in a legal dispute with the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia, or any of its affiliates, sister projects, or partners not participate in editing until all legal disputes have been resolved. Therefore, users may not make legal threats and continue to edit, and this policy may be enforced by blocking.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to the evidence as shown in the arbitration request.
 * Evidence has now been added to show a legal threat. Hiding Talk 14:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of the minor edit checkbox
4) Marking reversions and major edits requiring consensus as being minor is misleading, incivil, bad wikiquette and potentially disruptive.
 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * From Help:Minor edit, which states A minor edit is a version that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. User:Asgardian has repeatedly misused the minor edit button, despite being advised on its correct use. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and part of that process involves editors being open and opening their edits to scrutiny.  Given the fact that editors can choose to hide minor edits from their watchlist, marking edits as minor can be perceived as an attempt to disguise their content or hide them from view. Per Help:Minor edit: When the status of a page is disputed, and particularly if an "edit war" is brewing, then it is better not to mark any edit as minor. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Civility
5) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably in their dealings with other users and to observe the principles of assuming good faith, civility, and the writers' rules of engagement. If disputes arise, users are expected to use dispute resolution procedures instead of making personal attacks. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to the edits of both parties shown in the arbitration request. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has been added to show incivility on the parts of both users. Hiding Talk 14:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Consensus
6) As put forward in Dispute resolution, Wikipedia works by building consensus. This is done through the use of polite discussion, in an attempt to develop a consensus regarding proper application of Policies and guidelines such as Neutral point of view. Surveys and the Request for comment process are designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to Asgardian's ignoring consensus as shown in the arbitration request. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Ownership
7) a) Wikipedia pages do not have owners or custodians who control edits to them. Instead, they are "owned" by the community at large, which comes to a consensus version by means of discussion, negotiation, and/or voting. (b) This is a crucial part of Wikipedia as an open-content encylopedia. See Ownership of articles and Be bold in updating pages


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Evidence will be provided as to how ownership impacts. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence now provided. Hiding Talk 16:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks
9) Personal attacks are expressly prohibited because they make Wikipedia a hostile environment for editors, and thereby damage Wikipedia both as an encyclopedia (by losing valued contributors) and as a wiki community (by discouraging reasoned discussion). Wikipedia editors should conduct their relationship with other editors with courtesy, and must avoid responding in kind when personally attacked.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to Asgardian's ignoring consensus as shown in the arbitration request. Not sure what I meant there, possibly a cut and paste error. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has been presented to show the relevance of this principle. Hiding Talk 14:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Banning policy
10) Wikipedia users who demonstrate over a period of time that they are unable or unwilling to conform to Wikipedia policy may be banned.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this is relevant due to the length of time these issues have been festering. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Provocation
11) When another user is having trouble due to editing conflicts or a dispute with another user it is inappropriate to provoke them as it is predictable that the situation will escalate. Provocation of a new or inexperienced user by an experienced and sophisticated user is especially inappropriate. Wikipedia editors must avoid responding in kind when personally attacked.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Copied from Arbitration policy/Past decisions, this applies on both sides as seen in the arbitration request. Hiding Talk 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has been added to demonstrate the relevance of this principle. I think it is supported most especially by the section on the talk page at Blood Brothers (comics). Hiding Talk 14:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Battleground
12) Wikipedia is not a battleground. Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, or nurture hatred or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I think evidence will show that there are grudges held on both sides here, and that there has been attempts on both sides to nurture hatred or fear, and that in part editors have turned discussions into personal battles. Hiding Talk 13:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has been added to demonstrate the relevance of this principle. I think it is supported most especially by the section on the talk page at Blood Brothers (comics). Hiding Talk 14:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary usage
1) User:Asgardian has been notified of the correct usage of edit summaries a number of times.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Will be supported by evidence of notices placed on User:Asgardian's talk page. Hiding Talk 13:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Asgardian has made good contributions to Wikipedia
2) User:Asgardian has added useful material to Wikipedia and performed useful clean up on articles.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I think this needs to be recognised, I've not been involved in arb-com cases for a long while but from memory these details usually get overlooked. Hiding Talk 13:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Tenebrae has made good contributions to Wikipedia
3) User:Tenebrae has added useful material to Wikipedia and performed useful clean up on articles.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I think this needs to be recognised, I've not been involved in arb-com cases for a long while but from memory these details usually get overlooked. Hiding Talk 13:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Disruption has been caused to Wikipedia
4) User:Asgardian's actions have been disruptive to Wikipedia


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I don't want to get into whether disruption is User:Asgardian's intent, but I think the fact that pages have been protected due to User:Asgardian's edit warring has disrupted Wikipedia. I think there are also issues regarding the amount of time other people have invested in coaching the user, which has at times frustrated users and therefore led to disruption. Hiding Talk 13:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence has been added to demonstrate this fact through the protection logs of a number of pages. Hiding Talk 14:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've expanded this evidence further. Hiding Talk 14:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks
4) Both User:Asgardian and User:Tenebrae have made personal attacks against each other on Wikipedia.
 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Evidence has been added to demonstrate the relevance of this fact. I think it is supported most especially by the section on the talk page at Blood Brothers (comics). Hiding Talk 14:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppetry
5) User:Asgardian has edited using ip addresses to avoid breaching the 3RR and to make his own preferences appear more widely supported.
 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * As demonstrated in evidence of disruption presented by myself today. Hiding Talk 14:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Template
6) {text of proposed finding of fact}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
7) {text of proposed finding of fact}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
8) {text of proposed finding of fact}


 * 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.

User:Asgardian on revert and civility parole for one year
1) User Asgardian is subject to a comprehensive editing restriction for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. If he exceeds this limit, fails to discuss a content reversion, or makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be blocked. A record of all bans shall be kept at Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * This would deal with the edit warring and the incivility. Hiding Talk 10:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note, I've copied this from another case, I don't know if the language is appropriate or not. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Tenebrae on revert parole for six months
2) User Tenebrae is subject to a limited editing restriction for six months. He is limited to one revert per page per week (excepting obvious vandalism), and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. If he exceeds this limit, and is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. If he fails to do so he may be blocked. A record of all blocks shall be kept at Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * This would cover Tenebrae's part in edit warring, which has not been as extensive as Asgardian's. Note, I've copied this from another case, I don't know if the language is appropriate or not. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User Tenebrae on civility parole for one year
3) User Tenebrae is subject to a second, editing restriction, this time for one year. If the user makes any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be blocked. A record of all blocks shall be kept at Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * This would cover the incivility aspect of Tenebrae's edits. Note, I've copied this from another case, I don't know if the language is appropriate or not. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Asgardian banned for disruption
4) User:Asgardian has been found to be acting in a manner which deliberately disrupts Wikipedia, and is banned for one year.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * I'm working on some evidence which may show Asgardian is deliberately disrupting Wikipedia. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Evidence presented. Hiding Talk 14:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Asgardian is placed on Probation
5) User:Asgardian is placed on Probation. He may be banned from any article which he disrupts by edit warring. A record of all bans shall be kept at Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Again copied from another case. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

USer:Tenebrae
6) User:Tenebrae is placed on Probation. He may be banned from any article which he disrupts by edit warring. A record of all bans shall be kept at Requests for arbitration/Asgardian-Tenebrae.


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Again copied from another case. Hiding Talk 11:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Template
7) {text of proposed remedy}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
8) {text of proposed remedy}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
9) {text of proposed remedy}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
2) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
3) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
4) {text of proposed enforcement}


 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template
5) {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

Ownership and collaboration and possible gaming on the part of Asgardian

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:
 * Regarding these diffs,, , , and , I think they build to a point where it appears that User:Asgardian has at best a flawed understanding of Wikipedia.  Wikipedia is by its nature a collaborative effort.  Each editor has to accept that their text can be rewritten, disregarded, removed or changed at any given moment, and that there preferred version of Wikipedia is subservient to the consensus version.  We also have to bear in mind that our edits matter little in the grander scheme, that were we not to perform them, someone would eventually. I think Asgardian fails to understand that, as communicated in the above edits; Think about who has done the vast majority of the research and writing across the Sinister/Supreme articles, and then had to rewrite the submitted PH's that were full of spelling errors, POV etc.  And no...they aren't my articles, but you definitely need help in terms of writing and how to craft an article. Check out the Edit history and see what a mess the articles were before I decided to help out. Mistakes Inc.., Go check out the Living Tribunal and see how I kept a modification but simply molded it to the Wiki way. By the by, take a look at what Odin, or Thanos or the Squadron Supreme article was like before I jumped on board. I think the comment Further to this, it would appear that once again all the "good editing" that I have been doing has been conveniently ignored, which even extends to rewriting substandard articles lacking information or reeking of fan-fuelled POV (eg. Blacklash and Infinity Gauntlet). is particularly revealing: Asgardian believes he is due special treatment based on his edits, that his behaviour should be overlooked because he has rewritten articles.  This should not be a factor, other people are more than capable of rewriting the articles, and are more committed to engaging with other editors and building a consensus.  Point of fact, given the statement that the user has openly tested Wikipedia's behavioural limits,  I can't help but wonder if we aren't involved in the same experiment on a wider scale; Asgardian is simply experimenting in how far a constructive user can go in disruptiveness before sanctions apply.  Whether this is for personal amusement or for a paper I can't know.  I can't even know if it is true, but if it is, it is gaming the system, and is a rather petty project to base a piece of research on.  Perhaps Wikipedia could one day fund research into the psychology of those who actively disrupt Wikipedia for the purposes of research. Hiding Talk 16:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

Template

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others:

General discussion

 * Comment by Arbitrators:


 * Comment by parties:


 * Comment by others: