The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Arbitration report

The Report On Lengthy Litigation

The Arbitration Committee closed six cases this week, including the high-profile case against participants in a pedophile userbox wheel war. (see related story)

Beckjord

A case against Beckjord was closed on Tuesday. As a result, Beckjord has been banned for one year. After this ban expires, Beckjord is subject to probation, personal attack parole, a one-account limit, and a ban from editing articles relating to the paranormal. Beckjord, whose full name is Jon-Erik Beckjord, was accused of using Wikipedia to promote his beliefs regarding Bigfoot and other paranormal phenomena, as well as using numerous sockpuppets as well as personal attacks and incivility.

EffK

A case against EffK was closed on Tuesday. As a result, EffK has been banned for one year. After this ban expires, EffK is to be indefinitely banned from all articles relating to the Roman Catholic Church, as well as any other articles he may disrupt, at the discretion of any administrator, for any period of time up to and including three months. EffK had posted "original research" regarding the Catholic Church, and had made personal attacks against other users.

Pedophilia userbox wheel war

A case against participants in a pedophilia userbox wheel war was closed on Friday. A full story can be found here.

Reddi

A case against Reddi was closed on Saturday. As a result, Reddi has been placed on probation and revert parole, allowing him only one revert per article per week. Reddi was accused of edit-warring and disruptive editing on science-related articles.

Freestylefrappe

A case against Freestylefrappe was closed on Sunday. As a result, Freestylefrappe has been desysopped, with the ability to reapply at any time. Freestylefrappe had been accused of improper blocking, abuse of administrative status, personal attacks, and failure to communicate with other users.

Ruy Lopez

A case against Ruy Lopez was closed on Sunday. As a result, the case was closed, and merged into an appeal of a prior arbitration case against VeryVerily.

Other cases

Cases were accepted this week involving Lapsed Pacifist (user page), bible verses, and editors on Shiloh Shepherd Dog. All are in the evidence phase.

Additional cases involving users IronDuke and Gnetwerker, Leyasu (user page), Instantnood (user page), Boothy443 (user page), and Dyslexic agnostic (user page) are in the Evidence phase.

Cases involving VeryVerily (user page), Tommstein (user page), Zeq (user page), Theodore7 (user page), KDRGibby (user page), editors on WebEx and Min Zhu, editors on Rajput, users RJII and Firebug, Sortan (user page), and Carl Hewitt (user page) are in the voting phase.

No motions to close are on the table at this time.

Also this week: From the editor — Userbox warring — Wikimedia committees — News and notes — Press coverage — Features and admins — B.R.I.O.N. — T.R.O.L.L.

In this issue

13 February 2006 (all comments)

Arbitration report

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

For the purposes of full disclosure, the writer of this article was a party in the arbitration case against Freestylefrappe. However, he believes that his participation in this case did not affect his writing of the case summary. Please leave any comments regarding the neutrality of this article here. Ral315 (talk) 03:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"on the table"

I note that the phrase "on the table" is being used here in the British sense. You might want to use "under consideration" instead. --James S. 07:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the key difference is "on the table", not "to table". I'm American, and I can recognize the difference between these. Ral315 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can tell exactly what is meant by context here, but turn on CSPAN-2 around 4:50 p.m. Eastern time some weekday. At the end of the Senate's business day, just before the gavel, Bill Frist will get up and move usually about a dozen "calendar" or noncontroversial requests, all of which will end with the words "I ask unanimous consent that reading be waived, that the motion be agreed to, and that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table." --James S. 23:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost is written by editors like you – join in!

Home

About