Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case
Requests for arbitration
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arthur Rubin and WP:ADMINACCT | 28 July 2017 | 0/0/0 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Arbitrator workflow motions | 1 December 2024 |
About this page Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority). Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests. Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide to case requests. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace. To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
Guidance on participation and word limits Unlike many venues on Wikipedia, ArbCom imposes word limits. Please observe the below notes on complying with word limits.
General guidance
|
Arthur Rubin and WP:ADMINACCT
Initiated by Twitbookspacetube at 05:06, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Twitbookspacetube (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
- The Rambling Man (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
Statement by Twitbookspacetube
The subject of a recent arbcom case, The Rambling Man (Hereafter TRM), has found themselves suffering abuse and attacks due to a poorly worded sanction that allowed other editors, including the admin mentioned above (Hereafter AR), to game the system and abuse TRM in a variety of ways. The wording is currently subject to an amendment request.
In addition, AR has participated in conduct unbecoming of an administrator in violations of WP:ADMINACCT, WP:3RR, WP:INVOLVED and WP:NPA - as such, I feel that, while a block (Which can be achieved via community consensus) is too severe, but removal of admin tools (Which can only be done here) would be an appropriate remedy. But, what I feel isn't how arbcom makes decisions.
Relevant diffs
If you bring an ANI complaint, I will provide diffs showing that you are disrupting discussions at WT:RY and Talk:2017, including statements that no rational person with a reasonable understanding of English could believe.
strike reference to the specific person. For the purpose of the closure, it doesn't matter who was lying, only that there have been statements which could not plausibly be made in good faith.
unless you want to claim that your statements were edited by others, the evidence is there.
You have made various absurd claims about WP:RY
Your lie that WP:RY is not a guideline applicable to 2017 is still present in Talk:2017. If you will strike that, I will strike my comment. If you redact my comment, without redacting ALL your related (that is, following) comments at Talk:2017, I will recommend you be blocked.
My next edits anywhere on Wikipedia under any of my accounts will be a personal status update or the diffs.
TRM can provide more in their statement if they so desire. Twitbookspacetube 05:06, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Statement by Arthur Rubin
Statement by The Rambling Man
Statement by {Non-party}
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.
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).
Arthur Rubin and WP:ADMINACCT: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0>
Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)