Decided: The calendar date (in UTC) when the case was decided. If the case did not reach a decision, it will be Closed instead. If the case involved an administrator "retiring", it will be "Deopped" instead.
Abbrev.: A shorthand abbreviation of the casename. See ArbCaseAbv for more details.
Type: The type of case it is:
Admin: A case centred around the conduct of one or more administrators.
Dispute: A case that examines an intractible dispute between two or more editors directly.
Editor: A case about the (non-administrative) misconduct of an editor.
Functionary: A case centred around misuse of Suppressor or Checkuser permissions.
Omnibus: A case about misconduct in a topic area writ large.
Other: Any case that doesn't fall into one of the categories above.
Remedy name: The name of the remedy (or a description of it, for earlier cases which did not have sectioned remedies).
Remedy (in modern terms): Basically my best attempt to explain, in plain English and modern understanding, what the remedy means.
If this section has a coloured background, the colour indicates its status or origin:
Yellow (#FFFF00) is a temporary injunction issued mid-case.
Blue (#00BFFF) is a post-close amendment or motion.
Red (#CD5C5C) is a remedy that has since been rescinded or otherwise is wholly reliant on previous remedies that are themselves rescinded.
Green (#32CD32) is a remedy whose wording was amended post-close, either due to an amendment/motion or due to changes in process (such as Discretionary Sanctions to Contentious Topic).
Brown (#D2691E) is suspended or in abeyence, usually as part of a period where a remedy has been appealed.
Amended/Enacted: If a remedy was added or amended post-close, this will be the calendar date (in UTC) when the remedy was modified or took effect.
Rescinded: If a remedy was terminated, this will be the calendar date (in UTC) when the remedy was ended.
Enforceable?: Indicates whether a given remedy can be invoked at WP:AE. Any remedy that predates April 2006 and was not still in force by then predates AE entirely.
Sup/Opp/Abs/Rcs: The vote totals for a remedy (Support, Oppose, Abstain, Recused).
Any case that has been courtesy-blanked or closed without action will be given a very brief description and nothing further.
Great Irish Famine is placed under a mentorship arrangement, with three to five administrators to be named later serving as mentors. The mentors are allowed to summarily topic-ban any user from the article if they disrupt it. Any such bans must be logged on the case page. On request of any editor (provided a month has passed from this case's close or a year has passed from the last review) ArbCom may review the mentorship to see if it has improved the condition of the article and its climate. If the Arbitrators agree that it has, the mentorship will be terminated. (This remedy was seen as superseded by TRB's contentious topics designation and thus rescinded.)
Feb. 10, 2019
Yes
7
0
0
0
Sarah777 restricted
Sarah777 may be summarily topic-banned from any page she disrupts with POV editing or ethnic remarks (with anti-British remarks specifically being called out) at administrator discretion. All such bans (and blocks arising from same) are to be logged on the case page.
--
Yes
7
0
0
0
MarkThomas on civility restriction
For the next year, MarkThomas may be summarily blocked for up to 1w if he makes an edit judged to be incivil, a personal attack, or casting aspersions. All such blocks are to be logged on the case page.
COFS is required to rename his account as his name represents an organisation, and make the connexion between the new and old username clear. He ultimately chooses "Shutterbug".
--
--
No
9
1
0
0
Recruiting
Shutterbug is told in no uncertain terms to stop recruiting meatpuppets to take his side in Scientology-related disputes.
--
--
No
7
4
0
0
Anynobody prohibited from harassing Justanother
Anynobody may be summarily blocked for any edit or action that appears to be done in whole or in part to harass Justanother. These blocks are capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter, and must be logged on the case page.
--
--
Yes
8
0
0
0
Justanother urged to avoid
Justanother is told in no uncertain terms not to try and game Anynobody's sanction to get them sanctioned.
--
--
No
8
0
0
0
Article probation
Any editor disrupting pages about Scientology, broadly construed, may be summarily topic-banned from them (either individual pages or the topic-area as a whole) at administrator discretion. Any bans issued this way (and blocks arising from them) must be logged on the case page.
--
Amendment by motion
Yes
7
0
0
0
Amendment by motion
Article probation is rescinded. Any sanctions levied under it are converted to discretionary sanctions under the SCI contentious topic designation and remain bound by the standard appeal procedure for enforcement.
For the next 6mo, Chrisjnelson is under 1RR/week and required to explain all reverts he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. He may also be summarily blocked if he makes an edit judged to be incivil, a personal attack, or casting aspersions. Breaches of either of these are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1mo thereafter) and logged on the case page. It is worth noting that the reason Chrisjnelson was the only person to be sanctioned is Jmfangio being Checkuser-blocked indefinitely mid-case as a sockpuppet of Tecmobowl.
DreamGuy may be summarily blocked if he makes an edit judged to be incivil, a personal attack, or casting aspersions. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
--
Yes
4
0
0
0
DreamGuy limited to one account
DreamGuy must edit Wikipedia from that account and no other. He must inform the Committee if he intends to abandon the DreamGuy account for a different one.
Scope: Policy/conduct dispute over linking to attack websites
CT?: No
Remedy name
Remedy (in modern terms)
Enforceable?
Sup
Opp
Abs
Rcs
Policy matter remanded to the community
As there was no hard policy at the time on disputed external links or linking to attack sites and creating policy is out of ArbCom's remit, these two items are remanded to the community.
ArbCom makes sure to clarify that "attack sites" are not websites that merely engage in criticism of Wikipedia or of individual editors; attack sites are websites that willingly engage in harassment, stalking, and similar malicious behaviour towards Wikipedia's editors.
N/A
6
1
0
0
Advice to aggrieved parties
If you are dissatisfied with the article on you or your project, or regarding how you are treated on Wikipedia, please communicate on our talk pages, use our dispute resolution procedure[s], or contact the Wikimedia Foundation itself.
For the next year, Giovanni Giove is under 1RR/week and is required to explain every revert he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
For the next year, Giovanni33 is under 1RR/week and is required to explain every revert he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
ArbCom warns that attempts to turn Wikipedia into an ideological battleground may lead admins to summarily impose sanctions - helped along by the immediate next remedy.
--
--
No
5
0
0
0
Liancourt Rocks article probation
Any editor disrupting the Liancourt Rocks article may be summarily topic-banned from it. All such bans (and blocks arising from same) are to be logged on the case page/centralised log.
--
Motion: Liancourt Rocks (September 2015)
Yes
8
0
0
0
Motion: Liancourt Rocks (September 2015)
Liancourt Rocks article probation is replaced by a contentious topic designation. Provided the person being sanctioned has been alerted to the existence of this remedy, any administrator may summarily sanction a user who disrupts pages and discussions related to the Liancourt Rocks as they see fit. Any sanctions or warnings issued this way (both directly and consequentially) must be logged on the case page/centralised log, and for the first year they can only be appealed to WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement or to ArbCom directly. (See WP:Contentious topics for more details.) Any remedies from the article probation that were still in force are automatically converted to discretionary sanctions under the contentious topic designation and remain bound by the standard appeal procedures for enforcement.
Sep. 28, 2015
Motion: Removal of Unused Contentious Topics, Liancourt Rocks (October 2023)
Yes
8
0
0
0
Motion: Removal of Unused Contentious Topics, Liancourt Rocks (October 2023)[iv]
Motion:Liancourt Rocks (September 2015) is rescinded. Any remedies that were still in force remain so and remain bound by the standard appeal procedures for enforcement.
Provided the person being sanctioned has been alerted to this remedy's existence, users may be summarily sanctioned for disrupting pages or discussions about Eastern Europe, broadly construed. Any sanctions issued this way (both directly and secondarily) are to be logged on the case page.
--
Discretionary sanctions
Yes
7
1
0
0
Discretionary sanctions
Provided the person being sanctioned has been alerted to the existence of this remedy, any administrator may summarily sanction a user who disrupts pages and discussions related to Eastern Europe, the Balkans states, or their histories/cultures (hence "the EE area") as they see fit. Any sanctions or warnings issued this way (both directly and consequentially) must be logged on the case page/centralised log, and for the first year they can only be appealed to WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement or to ArbCom directly.
Pass: July 28, 2008 Amended four times (3 changes to CT template)
--
Yes
6
1
1
0
To rename Digwuren
The case is renamed from "Digwuren" to "Eastern Europe" to clarify the breadth of its scope.
Mar. 20, 2012
--
N/A
10
1
0
0
February 2015
A specific block levied as a discretionary sanction was not done according to procedure, and so its Arbitration enforcement privilege is stripped from it; the block can be appealed as a standard block.
Feb. 19, 2015
--
N/A
10
0
0
0
Motion: Eastern Europe and Balkans scope (February 2019)
Any lower-quality source (i.e. not a published journal article or book/article released by a reputable academic publisher) that is reverted off of an article in the Lithuanian history during WWII and/or history of the Jews in Lithuania topic areas cannot be reinstated unless and until a consensus is reached for its use on the talk page of the affected article or the reliable sources noticeboard.
For the next year, Bharatveer is under 1RR/week and required to explain all reverts he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. He may also be summarily blocked if he makes an edit judged to be incivil, a personal attack, or casting aspersions. Breaches of either of these are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1mo thereafter) and logged on the case page.
--
Yes
6
0
0
0
Motion: Bharatveer banned
Bharatveer learnt nothing from the editing restrictions, and is therefore sitebanned 1yr.
Scope: Addressing issues in The Troubles and British baronetcies topic areas
CT?: Oct. 27, 2011 - Present (Motion)
(The remedies below refer to "the TRB area", which refers to The Troubles, Irish nationalism en generale, and British nationalism in Ireland, all broadly construed.)
Remedy name
Remedy (in modern terms)
Enacted/Amended
Rescinded
Enforceable?
Sup
Opp
Abs
Rcs
Probation for disruptive parties
Anyone disrupting articles about British baronets or in the TRB area may be summarily placed upon 1RR/week and required to explain any revert they make in the topic areas (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article at administrator discretion.
--
Standard discretionary sanctions
Yes
5
0
0
0
Vintagekits
Vintagekits' indefinite community ban is lifted. As a condition, they are subject to the probation above (i.e. 1RR/week and justification of reverts in the British baronets and TRB areas).
--
--
Yes
5
0
0
0
Standard discretionary sanctions
Provided the person being sanctioned has been alerted to the existence of this remedy, any administrator may summarily sanction a user who disrupts pages and discussions in the TRB area as they see fit. Any sanctions or warnings issued this way (both directly and consequentially) must be logged on the case page/centralised log, and for the first year they can only be appealed to WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement or to ArbCom directly. (The original version included British baronets in the TRB area; this was removed after a sanctions appeal revealed that aspect of the area did not see any real disruption - or at least, not on the scale of the the other three topics!)
Pass: Oct. 27, 2011 Amended 4 times (2 changes to CT template)
--
Yes
14
0
0
0
Discretionary sanctions: 1RR
All editors working in the TRB area, writ large, are under 1RR. (The original version allowed it to be appealed on a per-page basis and was explicitly labeled as a discretionary sanction.)
Feb. 09, 2019 Amended Oct. 19, 2023
--
Yes
9
0
0
0
Amendment (February 2019)
This is mostly a housekeeping motion to clean some clutter and clarify some terms in the case (including the very-recently-passed 1RR). It also rescinds GIF's Mentorship remedy as redundant with the CT regime.
Alkivar's administrator rights are revoked. He may only get them back by successfully appealing this remedy, as ArbCom, citing consistently poor judgment in performing administrative actions, explicitly bars him from using Requests for Adminship.
Commodore Sloat and Biophys are strongly encouraged to willingly put themselves under a mutual interaction ban, on pain of ArbCom issuing harsher sanctions against the both of them. Per one of the two findings of fact, their behaviour here, while indicative of some areas of concern, wasn't severe enough to justify any hard sanctions.
For the next year, MichaelCPrice is under 1RR and must explain every revert he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
For the next year, Martinphi may be summarily topic-banned from any page or topic area they disrupt at administrator discretion. All bans (and blocks resulting from same) are to be logged on Martinphi's talk page and the case page. This sanction (and all others in this case) cannot be enforced by members of the Paranormal or Rational Scepticism WikiProjects.
Yes
5
0
0
1
ScienceApologist restricted
For the next year, ScienceApologist may be summarily blocked if they make edits judged to be incivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith. Blocks are capped at 1w for the first five (and 1mo thereafter) and logged on the case page.
Yes
5
0
0
1
ScienceApologist limited to one account
ScienceApologist must choose an account. Once they do, they must edit from that account and no other. (Due to relentless harassment of them on their original account, ScienceApologist abandoned that account and, after informing ArbCom, started using a currently-still-undisclosed alternate account.)
Scope: Assessing whether Ferrylodge's community ban was valid
CT?: No
Remedy name
Remedy (in modern terms)
Enforceable?
Sup
Opp
Abs
Rcs
Ferrylodge to be unblocked
Ferrylodge's community ban (and the accompanying block) is vacated as void ab initio due to the inconclusive result of the ban discussion.
N/A
7
0
0
0
Ferrylodge restricted
Ferrylodge may be summarily banned from any page in the pregnancy or abortion topic areas they disrupt at administrator discretion. Any bans (and blocks arising from same) are to be logged on the case page.
Yes
6
1
0
0
Community urged
Since ArbCom cannot force policy on Wikipedia, the policy discussion about community bans is remanded to the community.
(This case was referred to ArbCom from the Checkusers.)
Remedy name
Remedy (in modern terms)
Enforceable?
Sup
Opp
Abs
Rcs
Eyrian desysopped
Eyrian's administrator rights are revoked. Until he satisfies the conditions in Eyrian banned he cannot reapply for adminship in any fashion under any account.
N/A
8
0
0
0
Eyrian banned
Eyrian is sitebanned until he submits to the Arbitration Committee's questioning about his abuse of multiple accounts. As with Henrygb before him Eyrian refused to participate in the Arbitration at all, and would later attempt to evade his ban with more sockpuppets.
Privatemusings is indefinitely topic-banned from biographies of living people. Breaches are to be met with a warning and a block capped at 1w; recidivism is grounds for an indefinite block. All blocks are to be logged on the case page.
--
Privatemusings restriction lifted
Yes
7
1
0
1
Privatemusings banned for 90 days
Privatemusings is sitebanned 90d.
--
--
Yes
6
2
0
1
Privatemusings restriction lifted
Privatemusings restricted is rescinded and replaced with the mentorship arrangement below.
Aug. 17, 2008
--
N/A
8
0
0
0
Privatemusings placed under mentorship
Privatemusings is under a mentorship in the biographies of living persons topic area. The mentors are to keep in contact with each other and are allowed to summarily sanction Privatemusings at their discretion if he is disruptive.
For the next year, Asgardian is under 1RR and required to explain every revert he makes (except obvious vandalism) on the talk page of the affected article. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
(As all remedies are imposition of a contentious topic declaration and standardisation updates to same, they will be effectively merged into one for brevity.)
Remedy name
Remedy (in modern terms)
Rescinded
Enforceable?
Sup
Opp
Abs
Rcs
Discretionary sanctions
Provided the person being sanctioned has been alerted to the existence of this remedy, any administrator may summarily sanction a user who disrupts pages and discussions related to Macedonia or the Balkans states. Any sanctions or warnings issued this way (both directly and consequentially) must be logged on the case page/centralised log, and for the first year they can only be appealed to WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement or to ArbCom directly.
TDC is topic-banned from the Winter Soldier Investigation topic area for 1yr. Breaches are to be met with blocks (capped at 1w for the first five and 1yr thereafter) and logged on the case page.
