Arbitration Committee proceedings
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anachronist | 16 June 2024 | 0/4/0 |
| Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amendment request: Article titles and capitalisation | none | (orig. case) | 7 June 2024 |
| Clarification request: mentioning the name of off-wiki threads | none | none | 4 June 2024 |
| Amendment request: India-Pakistan | none | (orig. case) | 7 June 2024 |
| Clarification request: Contentious topics restrictions | none | none | 10 June 2024 |
| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Block of Rp2006 | 18 June 2024 |
Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision—at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion to close the case until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.
These notes were last updated by - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 05:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC); the last edit to this page was on 14:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC) by AlexandrDmitri.
| Proposed Principles | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | Proposal Name | Support | Oppose | Abstain | Status | Support needed | Notes |
| 1 | Purpose of Wikipedia | 2 | 9 | 0 | 
|
Cannot pass | |
| Proposed Findings of Fact | |||||||
| Number | Proposal Name | Support | Oppose | Abstain | Status | Support needed | Notes |
| None proposed | |||||||
| Proposed Remedies | |||||||
| Number | Proposal Name | Support | Oppose | Abstain | Status | Support needed | Notes |
| None proposed | |||||||
| Proposed Enforcement | |||||||
| Number | Proposal Name | Support | Oppose | Abstain | Status | Support needed | Notes |
| None proposed | |||||||
- Notes
For this case there are 15 active arbitrators, not counting 1 recused. 8 support or oppose votes are a majority.
| Abstentions | Support votes needed for majority |
|---|---|
| 0–1 | 8 |
| 2–3 | 7 |
| 4–5 | 6 |
- Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request so welcome to the team. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide thoroughly to familiarize yourself with the process.
- You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on IRC where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and to get any advice on requests as well as the mailing list. Please note that we have implemented a policy of zero tolerance on mishandled requests, and that failure to assess correctly will result in suspension. I would like to emphasize that it is not a race to complete a request, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly.
- Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, although you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked "Account Creator Needed" by the bot and "Flagged user needed" in the tool. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at WP:PERM.
- Please keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse will result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 15:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding Muhammad images has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- The community is asked to hold a discussion that will establish a definitive consensus on what images will be included in the article Muhammad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and on where the images will be placed within the article. As with all decisions about content, the policies on verifiability and the neutral point of view must be the most important considerations. The editors who choose to participate in this discussion are asked to form an opinion with an open mind, and to explain their decision clearly. Any editor who disrupts this discussion may be banned from the affected pages by any uninvolved administrator, under the discretionary sanctions authorised in this decision. The decision reached in this discussion will be appended to this case within two months from the close of the case.
- Ludwigs2 is prohibited from contributing to any discussion concerning Muhammad.
- Ludwigs2 is banned from the English Wikipedia for one year.
- Tarc is admonished to behave with appropriate professionalism in his contributions to discussions about disputed article content.
- FormerIP is admonished to behave with appropriate professionalism in his contributions to discussions about disputed article content.
- Hans Adler is reminded to engage in discussions about disputed article content with an appropriate degree of civility.
- Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to Muhammad, broadly interpreted.
- The participants in the dispute about depictions of Muhammad are reminded that editors who engage extensively in an intractable dispute can become frustrated, and that it is important to be aware that as editors we are limited in our ability to contribute constructively to a deadlocked disagreement. Our exasperation with a dispute can make us unprofessional or unreceptive to compromise. We therefore encourage the disputants of this case to consider if their participation in the coming community discussion of depictions of Muhammad would be useful, and we remind them that if they disrupt the community discussion they may be banned from the discussion or otherwise sanctioned under the discretionary sanctions provision of this case.
For the Arbitration Committee