Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Added principles of this case: Clarify |
SilverLocust (talk | contribs) →Block of Rp2006: Motion archived from Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions (permalink) |
||
Line 159:
Just as a note, I have added the principles from this case to [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Principles]]. Feel free to edit the index to correct any errors I may have put accidentally. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/2601:647:5800:1A1F:20EC:5F67:ED8B:DBEC|2601:647:5800:1A1F:20EC:5F67:ED8B:DBEC]] ([[User talk:2601:647:5800:1A1F:20EC:5F67:ED8B:DBEC|talk]]) 05:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
== Block of Rp2006 ==
:'''[[Special:Permalink/1230295221#Block of Rp2006|Original discussion]]'''
{{atop|1=Motion adopted. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 21:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)}}
{{ivmbox|The Arbitration Committee assumes the block of {{user|Rp2006}}.}}
'''Enacted''' - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 21:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
{{ACMajority|active=10|motion=yes}}
'''Support:'''
#A [[Special:Diff/1229647244&oldid=1229611424|consensus of uninvolved administrators at AE]] recently decided to block Rp2006 for violations of their topic ban coming immediately after the expiration of ArbCom's 1 month block of them. This is an indefinite block, with the first year being Arbitration Enforcement. Given the private evidence we have, I think it makes sense for ArbCom to assume responsibility for this block. I also would like to see extra scrutiny applied to any unblock request rather than having it go through the typical process if Rp2006 were to apply after a year when the AE part of the block expires. {{u|Seraphimblade}}, the blocking administrator (acting on the AE consensus), has [[Special:Diff/1229662830|no objections]] to us doing this. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 14:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
# my personal preference would be to call this a ban and let them appeal in 12 months, but this works too --[[User:Guerillero|Guerillero]] <sup>[[User_talk:Guerillero|<span style="color: green;">Parlez Moi</span>]]</sup> 17:02, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
# [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 18:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
# Given that there is private information that should be considered when addressing any future unblock requests. - [[User:Aoidh|Aoidh]] ([[User talk:Aoidh|talk]]) 13:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
# [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 17:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
# [[User:Cabayi|Cabayi]] ([[User talk:Cabayi|talk]]) 08:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
'''Oppose:'''
#
'''Abstain:'''
#
=== Arbitrator views and discussions ===
=== Community discussion ===
As a note, if this passes I'll tack it onto the remedies list for [[WP:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing|SCE]] in my notes as the previous block against Rp2006 was also under that case and based on what I can grok from the AE thread this block was levied for pretty much the same reasons as the previous. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">Jéské Couriano</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[User:Jéské Couriano/AG|threads]] [[User:Jéské Couriano/Decode|critiques]]</small></sup> 18:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
{{abot}}
| |||