The Signpost

Arbitration report

Case closes within 1 month

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Ncmvocalist

The Arbitration Committee opened no cases this week, but closed one, leaving none open.

Closed case

Stevertigo 2 (Week 4)

This case concerns accusations of wiki-hounding and disruptive editing, and was filed by Stevertigo, a Wikipedia editor since 2002. He alleged that several editors deem his editing to be "disruptive" or "in need of banning" because they "still hold the grudge that previous cases did not find in their favor regarding [Stevertigo]". He also alleged that he "largely won" an argument against two editors in relation to the Time article, and that those two editors began editing the Punishment article due to an undue interest in Stevertigo's editing rather than due to an interest in the article. The case moved to the proposed decision phase during the week, and within 48 hours, 11 out of 12 active arbitrators finished voting on the decision. The case was closed shortly thereafter.

What is the effect of the decision and what does it tell us?


Earlier in the week, the Committee made an announcement that sparked a brief controversy. The Committee confirmed that Polargeo was the subject of several investigations, and that he requested for his tools to be removed earlier this month. It also stated that "Polargeo has created and/or used at least ten alternate accounts in a manner neither consistent with Wikipedia's policies nor meeting the minimum standards expected of administrators." The Committee's decision was that Polargeo will need to make a successful request for adminship if he wishes to regain his administrator tools.

+ 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.
  • Seems like an overdue, much-needed restriction is finally in place. StrPby (talk) 00:18, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm now curious as to when the last time the ArbCom had zero open cases before them. Is it possible that it dates to the committee's founding? Powers T 20:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, there have been other instances, though it is not frequent. (In general, as is mentioned in the arbitrator interview article elsewhere in this week's Signpost, the committee has fewer full-fledged cases come before it these days than it used to, which of course increases the odds that there will be none pending at a given moment.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • So no news is good news. (It looks kind of steange to see an empty Arnb report)SYSS Mouse (talk) 17:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • A sad day. There can't be many of us 2002 (or earlier) folk left editing. — Hex (❝?!❞) 02:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0