From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After considering /Evidence and discussing proposals with other Arbitrators, parties and others at /Workshop, Arbitrators may place proposals which are ready for voting here. Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain. Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed. Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed. Only Arbitrators or Clerks should edit this page; non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

For this case, there are 9 active Arbitrators, so 5 votes are a majority.

Contents 1 Motions and requests by the parties 1.1 Template 2 Proposed temporary injunctions 2.1 Template 3 Proposed final decision 3.1 Proposed principles 3.1.1 No original research 3.1.2 Falsification of sources 3.1.3 Administrative discretion 3.1.4 Template 3.2 Proposed findings of fact 3.2.1 Sadi Carnot 3.2.2 Blocking of Sadi Carnot 3.2.3 Template 3.3 Proposed remedies 3.3.1 Sadi Carnot banned 3.3.2 Parties encouraged 3.3.3 Template 3.4 Proposed enforcement 3.4.1 Template 3.5 Discussion by Arbitrators 3.5.1 General 3.6 Motion to close 3.6.1 Implementation notes 3.6.2 Vote

[edit] Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on /Workshop. Motions which are accepted for consideration and which require a vote will be placed here by the Arbitrators for voting.
Motions have the same majority for passage as the final decision.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed motion}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed final decision

[edit] Proposed principles

[edit] No original research

1) Wikipedia is not a venue for publishing, publicizing, or promoting original research in any way.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Falsification of sources

2) Deliberate attempts to misrepresent or falsify the content of sources are extremely harmful to the project.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Administrative discretion

3) Administrators are normally afforded wide discretion to block users who they believe are a danger to the project.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. Yes, we want our administrators to take action if they see a problem. Extreme violations of policy warrant extreme measures to protect the Project. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. I have always argued for this. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

4) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed findings of fact

[edit] Sadi Carnot

1) Sadi Carnot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log), formerly Wavesmikey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log), has for an extensive period of time engaged in knowingly misrepresenting sources in order to promote his original research on Wikipedia ([1], [2]).

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Blocking of Sadi Carnot

2) Sadi Carnot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) was indefinitely blocked by Jehochman (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights), and subsequently unblocked by Physchim62 (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves • rights).

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

[edit] Sadi Carnot banned

1) Sadi Carnot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Parties encouraged

2) The remaining parties are encouraged to move forward from this unfortunate incident with a spirit of mutual understanding and forgiveness.

Support:

1. Kirill 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
2. James F. (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Fred Bauder 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
4. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Paul August ☎ 20:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Template

3) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Proposed enforcement

[edit] Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

[edit] Discussion by Arbitrators

[edit] General

[edit] Motion to close

[edit] Implementation notes

Clerks and Arbitrators should use this section to clarify their understanding of the final decision--at a minimum, a list of items that have passed. Additionally, a list of which remedies are conditional on others (for instance a ban that should only be implemented if a mentorship should fail), and so on. Arbitrators should not pass the motion until they are satisfied with the implementation notes.

• All proposals are adopted. Appears ready to close unless any arbitrators have additional proposals. Newyorkbrad 15:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vote

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

1. Move to close, everything passes. Charles Matthews 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
2. Close. Kirill 16:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Close. FloNight♥♥♥ 19:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
4. Close. Paul August ☎ 20:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
5. Close Fred Bauder (talk) 15:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)