Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-01-10/Arbitration report
Arbitration report
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Arbitration Committee closed one case this week and opened none, leaving four cases open.
Evidence phase
- G.-M. Cupertino: A case regarding the behavior of G.-M. Cupertino, accepted without significant prior dispute resolution as several arbitrators believed lower levels of dispute resolution would be fruitless.
- Scientology: A case regarding behavioral problems in Scientology-related articles; the case is related to the prior case Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/COFS.
- PHG: A case brought by PHG, in a follow up to a prior case against PHG, Franco-Mongol alliance. This case will review PHG's editing since the prior case, and may impose new sanctions, or repeal current sanctions, as necessary.
Voting
- Fringe science: A case initially filed about the behavior of ScienceApologist, but opened to look at editing in the entire area of fringe science, and the behavior of editors who are involved in the area of dispute. In a proposed decision now being voted on by arbitrators, Coren has proposed the creation of a new type of arbitration remedy, "supervised editing", which an editor may be placed under when he does not "engage other editors or the editorial process appropriately". A designated supervisor would be permitted to revert or refactor the edits of the other editor at his or her discretion, ban the editor from articles, or require that the editor propose any substantial content edits to the supervisor, who will make the edits on his behalf. After the period of supervision terminates, the supervisor will submit a report to the committee who will revise the remedy that placed the editor under supervision. Other remedies include placing ScienceApologist under said supervision, restricting Martinphi from editing policy and guideline pages, admonishing Pcarbonn, and issuing general warnings to behave and seek mediation. Only Coren has voted on any measure.
Closed
- Ireland article names: A case to deal with the disputes about the naming of Ireland-related articles. The committee passed a resolution calling for the community to develop a mechanism to find consensus on naming of Ireland-related articles. A further remedy will create a three-member panel of uninvolved administrators to develop and supervise such a mechanism, if a suitable one is not created within fourteen days of the closure of the case. Until such a consensus is found, the articles in question are to remain at their current titles, and after a consensus is found, no further discussions about moving the pages may take place for two years.
10 January 2009
News and notes
In the news
Dispatches
Features and admins
Technology report
Arbitration report
Discuss this story