Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/DotSix/Proposed decision

Temporary injunction Proposed
1)As at 08:22, August 17, 2005 (UTC) DotSix continues to vandalise multiple pages. He edited Epistemology  and has reverted to his edit eight times, , , , , ,  in a period of about 30 hours, before being blocked by.

2) He has subsequently used two other IP addresses to revert the same material,.

The point being that this is DotSix's typical daily behaviour. Another instance was his he has repeatedly removed other users' comments from Talk:Truth:.

3) I am requesting that the ArbCom issue a temporary injunction preventing DotSix from editing outside of this RFAR and his talk page. Banno 08:22, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

4) He has spent the last 2 days deleting large passages of this Arb Comm page and deleting other people's sections of the Evidence page in violation of the rules at the top of the page.

5) Nearly all of the pages that Party 1 edits (and some of the talk pages too) have been in protected status for a long time. What further proof could there be that an injunction is needed? Is it not absolutely crazy that he is allowed to be unblocked while no one can edit the main philosophy project topics? It is kind of like responding to a neighborhood burgler by putting walls around all the houses, instead of just arresting the burgler. Or responding to a school bully by requiring all students to run away when he approaches instead of standing up to him. --Nate Ladd 01:45, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: Another page had to be protected from him. Now his record is perfect. All three of the articles he edits frequently are protected, but his last 24 hour block ran out 3 hours ago. So all the houses have walls and the burgler has been released. This situation is insane. By letting him run loose while you protect the pages he damages, you are helping him bring development of the philosophy articles to a halt. --Nate Ladd 03:37, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

As at 21:06, August 28, 2005 (UTC) he has been blocked under his IP 67.182.157.6, but has made six edits since then using 172.198.185.228. He is taking ArbCom for a ride. Perhaps implementing the injunction will persuade him of the seriousness of this process. At the least, we might be able to unlock the five pages that are presently blocked, and have been for weeks, because of his actions. Banno 21:06, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Non-Arbitrators Votes
I figured it would be useful to have a section where the rest of us can voice an opinion.

DotSix/Donald/Adrigo/Mark - whatever the monicker, the actions are the same. I have read much of the history and have dealt with him recently in the Agnosticism article, and am of the opinion that not only does he contribute nothing of value, but he in fact takes away from the Wiki process by grinding to a halt development of those pages. Therefore, I add my votes to the following proposal and remedy (which mimic the main page)

DotSix edit restrictions
1) DotSix, using any IP, is prohibited from editing any Wikipedia page other than his talk page and the pages of this Arbitration case until a final decision is made in this case.


 * Support:
 * (Non-Arbitrator) Michael 23:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose:


 * Abstain:

One year ban
1) DotSix, and all his sockpuppets, are banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.


 * Support:
 * (Non-Arbitrator) Michael 23:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose:


 * Abstain: