|
[[Category:Wikipedia arbitration]]
== Clarification request: Eastern Europe ==
'''Initiated by''' [[User:RGloucester|RGloucester]] '''at''' 23:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
;Case or decision affected
:{{RFARlinks|Eastern Europe}}
''List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:''
*{{userlinks|RGloucester}} (initiator)
*{{admin|Coffee}}
*{{userlinks|Russian editor1996}}
''Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request''
<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. -->
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Coffee&diff=647024977&oldid=647017752 diff of notification Coffee]
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Russian_editor1996&diff=647025051&oldid=646670682 diff of notification Russian editor1996]
=== Statement by RGloucester ===
::The following request for clarification is submitted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=647022921&oldid=647022650 on the advice] of [[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]], following a report I submitted [[WP:AE#Russian editor1996|to AE]].
:Whilst the editor in question was plenty disruptive, I wonder why administrator [[User:Coffee|Coffee]] blocked {{user|Russian editor1996}} According to his block notice, he issued the block under [[WP:ARBEE]]. However, it was not logged at [[WP:AC/DSL/2015]] until [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Coffee&diff=646893120&oldid=646796681 I asked him] about it. What's more, the editor was never issued an alert per [[WP:AC/DS]]. Coffee has not explained why the editor in question was blocked indefinitely, and I can see nothing that warrants such a block. This seems entirely out of process. Coffee responded that the block was per "IAR", but no reason was given for applying IAR, and I'm fairly certain that DS should not be issued in a willy-nilly manner. The editor in question had been present on Wikipedia for quite a while. He made only a few minor changes to Donbass war/Ukrainian crisis articles, and none of them particularly disruptive. I simply do not understand how this user was summarily blocked for no apparent reason. What's more, this was done under [[WP:ARBEE]]. The procedure for [[WP:ARBEE]] was completely ignored. I request that the Committee determine whether this application of DS was appropriate. If it was not, I request that Coffee be admonished, both for his inappropriate application of DS, and for his [[User talk:Coffee#Confused|flippant behaviour in the face of accountability]]. [[User:RGloucester|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt;color:#000000">RGloucester </span>]] — [[User talk:RGloucester|☎]] 23:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
::I think the suggestion by Courcelles is inappropriate, to say the least. This is a matter of principle. The block was inappropriately applied. Coffee must be admonished, and the sanction lifted. There were no grounds for a sanction. Ignoring the ARBEE issue, for a moment, can someone please tell me where they see grounds for an indefinite block in the blocked editor's edit history? [[User:RGloucester|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt;color:#000000">RGloucester </span>]] — [[User talk:RGloucester|☎]] 02:05, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
:::Again, how is this acceptable? The user has no history of talk page engagement, so it is unlikely they can understand the unblocking process. The user was blocked for no reason. As Mr Davies noticed, no rationale was given other than "arbitration enforcement". If the "DS prohibitions no longer apply", what is the point of this block? Again, there was no rationale other than "arbitration enforcement", and no evidence of any kind of misconduct. How can you let this block stand? This is a travesty. [[User:RGloucester|<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt;color:#000000">RGloucester </span>]] — [[User talk:RGloucester|☎]] 16:23, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
=== Statement by Coffee ===
I would restate what I had over at AE, but I find that not necessary as I believe most if not all of the Arbitrators here have looked at that. I will say that I was indeed forgetful regarding the proper DS procedure (it ''has'' been a minute since I performed one of those actions), and can assure you all I'll get it right the next time I feel it necessary to issue a block of this nature. The only other thing I'll state <small>(even though I already stated this at AE)</small> is that RGloucester '''''himself''''' stated at my talk page that '''''"[Russian editor1996] was nothing but disruptive"'''''. Therefore, if he has any further questions regarding why that editor was blocked, he should consult our policies on [[WP:DE|DE]]. Happy Presidents Day to you all and it's good to see the system here still working. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<font color="#009900">have a cup</font>]] // [[Special:Contributions/Coffee|<font color="#4682b4">beans</font>]] // </small> 21:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:Oh and lastly, all things taken into consideration, I'm fully behind the below motion made by Roger. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<font color="#009900">have a cup</font>]] // [[Special:Contributions/Coffee|<font color="#4682b4">beans</font>]] // </small> 21:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
=== Statement by Russian editor1996 ===
=== Statement by Callanecc ===
I'll add what a bit of what I said on RGloucester's talk page:
The issue you want addressed is whether the Committee is happy with IAR being used to impose an out of process discretionary sanction. The sanction being out of process for a few reasons: it wasn't logged (which was fixed after you let them know), there was no alert and they weren't aware by other means, and discretionary sanctions can only be used for "blocks of up to one year in duration" not indefinite. The other issue here is that this block could have been placed as a normal admin action rather than as a discretionary sanction (unlike a TBAN for example). This looks to me like an admin coming back from a break and not familiarising themselves with a procedure which gives them wide ranging powers before using it, obviously that's just a guess though.
:{{ping|Courcelles}} That would be my suggestion entirely. <b>[[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]]</b> ([[User talk:Callanecc|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Callanecc|contribs]] • [[Special:Log/Callanecc|logs]]) 00:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
===Statement by NE Ent===
==== Russian editor1996 ====
Could someone provide a single diff of why Russian editor1996 (RE96) is "plenty disruptive"? Looking at the [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Russian_editor1996 their contributions] I'm not seeing anything -- no POV pushing, no incivility, no edit warring, no posting to noticeboards -- just edits. Not perfect edits? Sure, but isn't that what we -- or at least used to -- encourage with [[WP:BEBOLD]]?
If we look at RE96's edit from [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=April_Uprising&diff=560730577&oldid=560350364 a year and half ago], we see the addition of a fairly complete infobox, and comparing his additon to the current revision [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=April_Uprising&diff=643787751&oldid=560730577] seems to indicate no one has had much of a problem with that.
So the evidence suggests that RE96 is neither an "editor" nor anyone with any malice -- simply a "dabbler," if you will. [[:File:Top_Wikipedians_compared_to_the_rest_of_the_community,_8_January_2014.svg]] shows us that dabblers have actually performed the overwhelming majority of (67%) of edits to the project. So how is blocking them without prior discussion benefiting the project? If we assume RE96 is a reasonably self-confident person without much of an agenda, why would they bother jumping through unblock hoops when they could simply spend their time somewhere else on the Internet? While I appreciate ya'll's willingness to declare the "arbcom" block an ordinary block, why not do the right thing and simply unblock RE96 until someone can explain why they should be blocked? "IAR" (or "because I felt like it") should not be considered as meeting the requirements of [[WP:ADMINACCT]], nor a legit reason to be blocking folks.
==== Coffee ====
While we're here anyway: Arbcom 2014 stated [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Proposed_decision#Decorum|"Administrators are expected to behave respectfully and civilly in their interactions with others. This requirement is not lessened by perceived or actual shortcomings in the conduct of others. Administrators who egregiously or repeatedly act in a problematic manner, or administrators who lose the trust or confidence of the community, may be sanctioned or have their access removed."]]
Coffee's statements to RGloucester [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACoffee&diff=646959875&oldid=646958889], including ''why do you seem have a cactus lodged up your ass? ... Jesus christ, give it a rest. ''<small>Or take it to AE if you like
unnecessary drama.</small>'' ... Hell, not even the editor in question has complained about being blocked. Yet, you're over here advocating for this guy like it's Christmas morning. Whatever floats your boat (I assume, drama)...'' clearly do not meet that standard. Although quite excessively snarky, I wouldn't say they're "egregious," nor am I aware of chronic history, such that I can argue we're in the admonishment zone, but a emphatic word or two (e.g. "Knock it off") seems appropriate. <small>[[User talk:NE Ent|NE Ent]]</small> 19:59, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
=== Statement by {other-editor} ===
Other editors are free to make relevant comments on this request as necessary. Comments here should address why or why not the Committee should accept the case request or provide additional information.
<!-- * Please copy this section for the next person. * -->
=== Eastern Europe: Clerk notes ===
:''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).''
*'''Recuse''' since I have commented and am going to. <b>[[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]]</b> ([[User talk:Callanecc|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Callanecc|contribs]] • [[Special:Log/Callanecc|logs]]) 00:46, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
=== Eastern Europe: Arbitrator views and discussion ===
*While I'm not particularly troubled by the lack of logging (admins occasionally forget to do that, especially when they're not really familiar with DS and the attendant body of bureaucratic rules, and anyone can log the restriction in their stead), no sanction may be validly imposed if the editor has not been warned or isn't otherwise aware of the fact that DS have been authorised for the area of conflict and it's up to the person asking for the imposition of DS or for the admins actually imposing them to prove that the person was indeed warned or was otherwise aware. Failure to do so should lead to the lifting of the sanction and the bollocking of the admin responsible.<p>While there is a place for IAR in dealing with discretionary sanctions(*), to bypass the need for a warning is not it.<p>{{small|(*)An example being my comment here, in spite of your lack of standing to file this request, since the sanctioned editor has not appealed his restriction.}} <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;" class="texhtml"> '''[[User:Salvio giuliano|Salvio]]'''</span> [[User talk:Salvio giuliano|<sup>Let's talk about it!</sup>]] 11:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
* Concur with Salvio. Absent the mandatory pre-block alert, it's an out of process block. I'd like to hear from {{u|Coffee}} please on this. [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|''talk'']]</sup> 13:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
**I just went to turn this into an ordinary admin block but there's no specific misconduct to point to, either in the block log or the talk page notice so that's that option unavailable. (Unless someone wants to reblock of their own volition with a brand new rationale.) The best route forward now is to alert the editor to DS and overturn the block altogether. Thoughts? [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|''talk'']]</sup> 12:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
*It appears that Coffee won't be around until Tuesday, although his comments on his talk page and at AE are clearly relevant. He's stated that the talk page of one of the relevant articles mentions the sanction. But I agree it's an out of process block, although I see no reason to think it wasn't done in good faith. I don't think it's up to us to lift the block, particularly as the editor hasn't appealed. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 14:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
::RGloucester, there's no rush. Nothing dreadful is going to happen if we wait for Coffee to reply. As for unblocking, again, the editor hasn't appealed. Providing everyone agrees it's within our remit, I agree we can convert it into an ordinary Admin block and let the community handle anything else. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 09:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
*:I also can't see where the editor has edited a talk page, and only one of the several articles edited recently, [[Talk:2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine]], has the sanctions notice, and the article itself has no edit summary. So it's not at all clear how the editor would have known about any sanctions. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]])
*Fairly clear this is not a valid AE block for a couple reasons. I think we should convert it to a usual admin block, and then toss it back to usual community processes. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 18:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
*I'm in full agreement with Courcelles. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 13:50, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
====Motion (Eastern Europe)====
:''{{ACMajority|active=14|inactive=1|recused=0|motion=yes}}''
{{Ivmbox|1=On 11 February 2015, {{admin|Coffee}} blocked [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARussian_editor1996&diff=646670682&oldid=615871233 an editor] relying on the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe|discretionary sanctions provisions for Eastern Europe]]. As a discretionary sanctions block it was out of process as the editor had not been [[WP:ACDS#alert|pre-notified of discretionary sanctions for the topic]]. Accordingly, the [[WP:ACDS#modifications|prohibitions on modification]] do not apply and the block may be modified by any uninvolved administrator. Coffee is advised to better familiarize themselves with the [[WP:AC/DS|discretionary sanctions provisions]] before using this process again.}}
'''Enacted''' - --'''[[User:Lixxx235|L235]]''' ([[User talk:Lixxx235|t]] / [[Special:Contribs/Lixxx235|c]] / [[User:Lixxx235/siginfo|<small>ping in reply</small>]]) 00:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
:Support:
:# On passing, this text can be copied to [[User:Russian editor 1996]]'s talk page, under the block notice as well as to Coffee's talk. [[User:Roger Davies|<span style="color:maroon; font-variant:small-caps">'''Roger Davies'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Roger Davies|''talk'']]</sup> 16:01, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 16:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 16:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 16:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# --[[User:Guerillero|<font color="#0b0080">Guerillero</font>]] | [[User_talk:Guerillero|<font color="green">My Talk</font>]] 17:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;" class="texhtml"> '''[[User:Salvio giuliano|Salvio]]'''</span> [[User talk:Salvio giuliano|<sup>Let's talk about it!</sup>]] 21:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# Works for me. I don't feel like an admonishment would be necessary. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]] <small>[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|(talk)]]</small> 21:14, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# Simple mistake. Let's move on. -- [[User:DeltaQuad|<font color="green">DQ</font>]] [[User_Talk:DeltaQuad|<font color="blue">(ʞlɐʇ)</font>]] 22:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
:# ''[[User:NativeForeigner|NativeForeigner]]'' <sup>[[User talk:NativeForeigner|Talk]]</sup> 03:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
:# [[User:AGK|<font color="black">'''AGK'''</font>]] [[User talk:AGK#top|[•]]] 11:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
:Oppose:
:#
:Abstain:
:#
:Comments:
:*
----
== Amendment request: Wifione ==
| 