Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-02/Arbitration report

New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

The

The three arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee (AUSC) will be incoming member AGK, and current arbitrators David Fuchs and Jclemens. With the promotion of community representatives Courcelles and AGK of the AUSC into the full ArbCom, the only at-large community member of the subcommittee is Keegan. Arbitrator PhilKnight said that the committee is discussing the two empty seats on AUSC and a "formal announcement will follow shortly". The AUSC deals with scrutiny and review of oversight and checkuser functions.

The Ban Appeals Subcommittee (BASC) will consist of Elen of the Roads, PhilKnight, and new arbitrator Hersfold.

The committee opened this case after a

With a draft target of January 12 to complete both evidence and workshop phases, decision drafters Risker and Hersfold have to contend with at least 23 submissions. So far, this is a total of about 140 diffs and a great deal of analysis to comb through.

The case involves accusations of "disruptive editing" in debates over the retention and usage of images of Muhammad. The evidence target has been set for January 11 by drafter AGK. 14 editors have since posted evidence submissions, which have included concerns about specific users involved in the debates.

Drafter AGK also posted questions to involved parties regarding issues such as image use and the inclusion of secondary sources.

The evidence and workshop phases are now coming to a close. A proposed decision is due by January 16 and will be drafted by Roger Davies, Jclemens, and Elen of the Roads. The case involves the appeal of a ban on TimidGuy imposed by Jimmy Wales on alleged POV and conflict-of-interest issues.

Several arbitrators posted proposed principles, findings of fact, and analysis of evidence in the case workshop. Several proposed principles deal with the process of imposing a ban and the illegitimacy of "secret bans" (which is a disputed element of the case).

Now in its ninth week, the case is in a late stage of the workshopping and drafting of a final decision. Discussion by arbitrators has centered on proposals by several committee members. No date for a final decision has been posted.

• A request for arbitration (Greyhood and Putin) is likely to be rejected, with five arbitrators declining review.
• A request for amendment (
  binding RfC
  as a new remedy.
• There are four requests for clarification in an arbitration committee decision, which are presently being discussed by different members of the committee.
• In an announcement by Risker, three retiring arbitrators will remain on pending cases until those cases are completed.

← Previous "Arbitration report"

Next "Arbitration report" →

In this issue

2 January 2012 (all comments)

Interview

News and notes

WikiProject report

Featured content

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.

I think the part about "secret bans" doesn't make any sense. There was no secret ban in this case, and ArbCom discussion doesn't center on that question. The bit about "secret bans" was a misunderstanding only, at the beginning of the discussion. Putting it in Signpost strikes me as WP:UNDUE, particularly without explanation!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 19:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence in question just says "Several proposed principles deal with the process of imposing a ban and the illegitimacy of "secret bans". That is taken from this proposed principle by arb Kirill, among others he proposes which discuss the issue of bans. I would be glad to add in some additional explanation, but the sentence is itself true. Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]