1078:. A user mentions "the dysfunctional WP:ANI culture", to which AlisonW replies "This sequence of events over recent days has shown that there is, indeed, something broken when my simple reversion of what appeared to be many cases of deletion vandalism has resulted in this situation. That current policy appears to vary wildly from past ethos (eg. 'assume good faith' appears to have disappeared?) is regrettable..." Another user then takes issue with some of that and says "You say: 'assume good faith' appears to have disappeared? This whole incident began because you did not assume that Veverve was acting in good faith: even in your arbcom statement (which I realise you are revising) you apparently continue to hold that their edits were vandalism..." And that's when we get the comment from AlisonW "I don't hold that the edits were vandalism, but that they appeared to be so." This doesn't read to me like someone has finally understood the situation - this reads like someone is trying to fine tune their response in a manner reminiscent of Wikilawyering ("relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions"). I take issue with AlisonW's belief that "my simple reversion ... has resulted in this situation". If it was a simple reversion we would not be here. It was an edit war, followed by a block when involved, and then - despite attempts to point it out - a refusal to accept that they were wrong. Indeed, AlisonW asserts that "there is, indeed, something broken", and that the "current policy" is what is wrong, rather than AlisonW, because "'assume good faith' appears to have disappeared?". And then we get the "remorse and an admission of fault" in which other people are still blamed: "I failed to assume
1196:
that the statement was overly long per se, but rather that it essentially contained a great deal of information not pertinent to the matter before the committee, instead seemingly trying to explain that AlisonW was so important during the early days of this project that the committee and the community should basically just giver her a pass on being unfamiliar with current expected standards for administrators. I don't know how anyone even vaguely familiar with the contemporary culture of this website could have thought would be compelling, particualrly right now when both the committee and the broader community have just agreed to greatly diminish the advanced permissions and "reserve powers" of Jimmy Wales. Also, as with the majority of cases involving admin behavior,
2070:. Involvement is generally construed very broadly by the community, to include current or past conflicts with an editor (or editors), and disputes on topics, regardless of the nature, age, or outcome of the dispute; however, involvement does not include prior interactions in a purely administrative role or in making minor edits that do not show bias. The sole listed exception to this prohibition is for straightforward cases, such as blatant vandalism, within which involved editors may take "obvious" administrative actions if "any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion".
934:
taking time to self-reflect rather than digging in your heels to justify your actions. I'm a firm believer that when you mess up, the correct response is straightforward: apologize, explain why the bad thing happened, say what you're going to do to keep the bad thing from happening in the future. If the initial reply, or even a later reply, had been a no-strings-attached "I'm sorry, I thought I was doing the right thing, I'm going to take some time to review (policies) before I block again" I think this could have ended a couple days ago and saved us all some drama.
1042:
response. If there is no response, then it is generally better in non-obvious cases to seek other opinions before using admin tools. I tend to think that Bold, Revert, Discuss is somewhat misused, and should be Bold, Discuss, Agree. If we use the words Block, Unblock, Discuss, there is perhaps more clarity that the discuss should come in the middle rather than the end of the cycle: Block, Discuss, Unblock. That kinda makes more sense. If we talked to each other more, and shared more information, we would likely have fewer problems and less stress.
1007:, I do thank you for your current statement, and I believe if you'd made that statement earlier, we wouldn't be here. Now that we are here, I think we have some questions to address. Was the block proper (which leads to, were the removals in good faith?) Was AlisonW involved after her reverts? Is this likely to happen again? As per my normal rationale, I have a lower standard of accepting cases regarding administrators, as Arbcom is the only place where desysop is a possible outcome, though not the only outcome. As such, I
951:, it's a nice idea, but the issues that get..."elder"...admins dragged to ArbCom aren't "I don't understand block policy" or "I don't know when to use the protect button," they're actions that show that the admin has lost community trust or has displayed judgment so questionable that they shouldn't be trusted with any of the mop's tools. This is one of those situations - this isn't just a bad block, it's a failure to understand INVOLVED, and that is something that is relevant to all admin actions.
1238:
repeatedly reverted in a content dispute, and I don't believe that
Veverve's removals were vandalism or all that disruptive. The initial responses at AN were not encouraging either, but I do think it's good that AlisonW was at least responding there and has kept tabs on this case, and has been at least honest in her answers. I think the idea of a suspended one month case is nice, but I'm not sure if it'll necessarily accomplish its stated goal of cooling things down.
511:
2232:) is an editor who started editing in October 2018. He has made over 50,000 edits to date. Prior to the incident that initiated this case, he has been blocked 1 time partially for edit warring (17 March 2022, 1 week), 3 times fully for edit warring (9 September, 1 week; 16 September, 2 weeks; 12 March 2023, 1 month) and reblocked one time for harassment, in connection to the 16 September block (30 September 2022, 2 weeks) (
134:
1173:
used here on WP much, if at all, before now, and I'm not sure it should be. I don't think it is fair to paint a whole group with the same brush, there are numerous admins from back then that are either still active, handed in their bits voluntarily, or had them removed for inactivity. I can't see how anyone would lump them into the "legacy" group. Also, WPO is a discussion forum with
1331:
project but also because a lot of what has already been written here rings true: we now have really high expectations for sysops to know what they're doing, take feedback, and reflect on matters — and while the community is justified in having these expectations, they're higher than most responsible people can meet 100% of the time for a volunteer hobby like
Knowledge (XXG).) Best,
2681:
1258:
she then proceeded to double-down with almost no supporters taking her side. Part of being a good administrator is knowing when a debate has been lost, even if one does not agree with the majority, and the lack of such cognisance is obviously the reason we are here. On the third hand, however, I am somewhat heartened by
2747:
While asking the enforcing administrator and seeking reviews at AN or AE are not mandatory prior to seeking a decision from the committee, once the committee has reviewed a request, further substantive review at any forum is barred. The sole exception is editors under an active sanction who may still
2714:
Administrators are free to modify sanctions placed by former administrators – that is, editors who do not have the administrator permission enabled (due to a temporary or permanent relinquishment or desysop) – without regard to the requirements of this section. If an administrator modifies a sanction
2132:
5) Standard rollback is a fast way of undoing problematic edits, but it has the disadvantage that only a generic edit summary is generated, with no explanation of the reason for the change. For this reason, it is considered inappropriate to use it in situations where an explanatory edit summary would
1257:
I doubt we will get anything significant over what has been already provided. That being said, I am still mulling over the appropriate sanction to levy. On the one hand, AlisonW made what the community feels is an inappropriate block, which in and of itself should not merit removal of sysop. However,
2116:
is disruptive. An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions. Editors engaged in a dispute should reach consensus or pursue dispute resolution rather than edit war. While reverting vandalism is not edit warring, only reverting
1180:
It's a real thing, we have seen numerous arbcom cases in the past to establish that, but it is not applicable to every admin from the early days and does seem a little disrespectful to use in an arbitration proceeding. It behooves all of us to remeber that behind every name on our screens there is a
1041:
have done - reached out and talked helpfully and respectfully to AlisonW, is a good example of what we should all strive to do. When things are borderline or dubious or might be a mistake, then consider talking rather than blocking or reporting, and have patience - within reason - when waiting for a
933:
or just act by motion (preference for the latter, I don't think there is enough here for a full case). I don't think I have excessively high standards for admins (we're all human and I expect all of us to make mistakes), but when everyone in the room is telling you "you've screwed up," you should be
928:
AlisonW, your years of service are appreciated, but I think the most honorable course of action here is to recognize that you are no longer up on community norms, voluntarily hand in the bit, take the time to familiarize yourself with those new norms, and then re-RfA in the future. If that option is
2137:
in which it may be correctly used is to revert obvious vandalism and other edits where the reason for reverting is absolutely clear. Editors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected)
1691:
I have deeply considered a block sanction since my comment above, and there's still a part of me that would like that to work; however, if we can't trust an admin to use the block tool, then we can't trust an admin to use the delete/undelete and protect/unprotect tools. The point that appears to me
1555:
Yes it appears we will be going for a case. Unless some folks withdraw support for the case and shift to a motion. However, that is unlikely. I'm keeping an open mind and may return to the view I had at the start of this case request that this was simply a mistake that AlisonW would not repeat. It
1172:
On the term "legacy admins": I have mostly seen this used on
Wikipediocracy to describe admins from the early days who use their tools in a way that might have been ok 15-20 yeaqrs ago, but not since then. It isn't just any admin from say, pre-2007. That being said, I don't really recall seeing it
1195:
With regard to the Alison's inital statement here: I also would not count it against anyone for not knowing the rules of arbitration pages. I've been on the other side of that coin a few times and am very aware that it is easy to make an error in that regard. What I would take expection to is not
1056:
I'm concerned that despite several people attempting to bring AlisonW up to speed, there is still not quite enough awareness of why we are here. I agree with
GeneralNotability that an honourable way out of this situation is for AlisonW to resign the tools. If AlisonW is not comfortable with that,
1330:
for an expedited case, with a view to potential desysop if AlisonW opts not to resign, broadly per
GeneralNotability. (A brief philosophical aside: I'm always a bit saddened when a case like this comes up, not just because AlisonW has made distinguished contributions over many many years to this
2755:
All actions designated as arbitration enforcement actions, including those alleged to be out of process or against existing policy, must first be appealed following arbitration enforcement procedures to establish if such enforcement is inappropriate before the action may be reversed or formally
2751:
These provisions apply only to contentious topics placed by administrators and to blocks placed by administrators to enforce arbitration case decisions. They do not apply to sanctions directly authorised by the committee, and enacted either by arbitrators or by arbitration clerks, or to special
1472:
I genuinely do not think that a full case, even one on a accelerated timetable, is likely to turn up anything that has not been said here. The block that incited this incident was bad, but was not desysop-worthy. However, AlisonW's followup at ANI and here have not met my expectations for admin
1237:
I'll need to think on this more but I'm leaning accept, with a preference for a admonish/desysop motion as similar to
GeneralNotability I don't think there's enough for a complete case here. The issue I see here is AlisonW's understanding of INVOLVED; you should not be blocking editors you have
1119:
I took a very brief look at AlisonW's use of the block tool, and I see three blocks issued in the last decade, and all three strike me as problematic, and I'm seeing some other admin actions that seem out of touch with current standards. I am therefore leaning towards accepting this case.
2050:
is held to a high standard as a result of this trust. Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with this; administrators are not expected to be perfect. However, consistently or egregiously poor judgement may result in the removal of administrator status.
1457:
indicate to me a user who is not up to date on the responsibility of the tools. I feel the facts regarding AlisonW's behaviour following the concern being raised at their block are here before us, and for me there is enough to reach this desysop conclusion.
1254:
2648:
Appeals may be made only by the editor under sanction and only for a currently active sanction. Requests for modification of page restrictions may be made by any editor. The process has three possible stages (see "Important notes" below). The editor may:
2093:. Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Even factually correct material may not belong on Knowledge (XXG), and removing such content when it is inconsistent with
2117:
obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism—is considered an exception. Edits from a slanted point of view, general insertion or removal of material, or other good-faith changes are not considered vandalism.
1200:
is a pertinent policy, and AlisonW indicated here that she thinks it is "difficult" to determine if she was in violation of that policy. That's all far more compelling to me than whether she knew about word limits or formatting on arbitration pages.
2715:
placed by a former administrator, the administrator who made the modification becomes the "enforcing administrator". If a former administrator regains the tools, the provisions of this section again apply to their unmodified enforcement actions.
2495:
7) As
Veverve's edits were neither vandalism nor outside discretion, AlisonW made a block while involved in a content dispute. Even if AlisonW had not been involved, a unilateral block was not warranted for Veverve's behavior in this instance.
50:
1141:, Statements at case requests are limited to 500 words. While we are flexible, espescially for case subjects, your statement is well past 2,500 words. Please limit your comments to the matters under discussion here.
2710:
Nothing in this section prevents an administrator from replacing an existing sanction issued by another administrator with a new sanction if fresh misconduct has taken place after the existing sanction was applied.
799:
72:
45:
2638:
This procedure applies to appeals related to, and modifications of, actions taken by administrators to enforce the
Committee's remedies. It does not apply to appeals related to the remedies directly enacted by the
2748:
request an easing or removal of the sanction on the grounds that said sanction is no longer needed, but such requests may only be made once every six months, or whatever longer period the committee may specify.
2605:
0) Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year.
1692:
to have emerged from comments here and on the AN board is that AlisonW is not quite up to date on Admin policy and procedures, and has been slow to recognise that despite the assistance and guidance of others.
1296:. I'd prefer it if we could proceed by motion. To do that we need to examine the evidence to see if this is a one-off or a pattern. To do that we need to gather the evidence. To do that we need to open a case.
1906:
AlisonW was given warnings and advice regarding the block, but sadly did not listen - instead kept attempting to justify the edit warring and the block. As such I have doubts if they would heed this warning.
1676:
If we are sanctioning an admin, it should be all-or-nothing; being an admin is based on the trust of the community. If an admin does not have the trust required to block someone, they should not be an admin.
1453:
Using an admin tool in a questionable block is not, for me, an automatic desysop. There needs to be more, and the slow and generally inappropriate responses, and the reluctance to see where they went wrong
2527:
In the case request she appeared to accept that she was involved and suggested future alternatives on her part to her actions here, an indication that she has received and processed the feedback provided.
612:
2025:
67:
355:
1715:
I'm assuming this was done to put all options on the table, but, as I have often expressed, any admin that needs to be sanctioned to control their behavior is manifestly unfit to be an admin at all.
2585:
1a) For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, AlisonW's administrative user rights are removed. She may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
1057:
then a motion to see if there is consensus to either desysop or issue a sanction on the use of the block tool. I would rather hold off accepting a case until we've looked at those or other options.
2668:
2438:
which were reverted were not vandalism. They were sufficiently explained by edit summary. Lastly, they were within the bounds of editorial discretion according to at least two editing guidelines,
529:
392:
224:
670:
61:
724:
2138:
may have their rollback rights removed. Since rollback is part of the core administrator tools, an admin could be stripped of their administrative privileges entirely to remove those tools.
157:
2326:
is unacceptable and is far from the 'trivia' you suggested on my talk page. This is not a religious text, it is a place to discover information, as such the section is entirely appropriate
1455:, and the little mistakes which indicate a lack of care and attention to detail (posting a (largely off-topic) statement three times over the limit, posting a comment in the wrong place),
386:
56:
1541:
I think this motion is well-reasoned and I would like to support it, but as we are at a majority to accept a full case, that seems to be what the committee will be doing instead.
1473:
accountability and communication and have shown her to be very out of touch with modern community norms, and I simply do not think she meets expectations for the admin toolkit.
1158:
As always, the bar is lower for acepting admin conduct cases, and I beleive that bar has been met. I am also open to handling it by motion if other arbs want to go that route.
2407:. Amakuru reverts that edit, pointing back to the talk page. Veverve leaves a few more comments there on 14 June and then apparently disengages from the article and talk page.
2393:
1795:
1582:
1374:
350:
1651:)'s use of the block tool is suspended indefinitely. AlisonW may appeal the suspension twelve months after the enactment of this motion, and every twelve months thereafter.
382:
178:
170:
39:
2177:
324:
2575:
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.
1897:
I would rather this come from a case after we take evidence. If this is a one-off then this seems appropriate. If this is part of a pattern, a desysop is correct --
2173:
344:
189:
167:
2768:
2657:
2612:
522:
377:
315:
234:
162:
2180:). Between the two accounts, AlisonW has made some 12,000 edits, 150 block-related actions, 800 deletion-related actions, and 100 protection-related actions (
1958:
I don't see the benefit of warning without a case. We'd need to be certain of what happened, and certain that no harsher sanction would be the right outcome.
2443:
1743:
Adminship is about trust. If an admin doesn't have trust to block, they shouldn't be an admin. I cannot picture a situation I would support such a motion.
320:
914:, I did see that response (but I do appreciate you flagging it for me). I'm interested to see whether the answer changes given the escalation to ArbCom.
330:
310:
193:
2661:
335:
248:
229:
451:
2783:
543:
369:
260:
2274:
whole section removed without explanation. Content is relevant and encyclopaedic so reinstated. Discuss on talk page if you consider it necessary.
2799:
536:
293:
2517:
She was later inconsistent about whether the dispute was content-motivated, with a comment agreeing at AN (apparently sarcastically) that it was
906:
219:
148:
25:
1496:
I do not like the idea of desysop by motion, especially for "loss of confidence". I do not believe we should be doing so in this situation.
748:
1228:
per my "would a reasonable person see an issue in this situation" standard for accepting an admin case as well as some private evidence --
285:
125:
576:
271:
214:
21:
2549:
She again apologized in case evidence for the incorrect procedure but then backtracked on whether it was correct to block
Veverve.
2532:
She repeated several times that she believed that this case was (page-blanking) vandalism and that the removals were unexplained.
1986:
1425:, and for losing the trust or confidence of the community by failing to adequately show an understanding of community concerns,
206:
588:
256:
154:
606:
594:
266:
184:
2203:
Particularly, the blocks of both Pragal1983 and Sinan eraaa (the two blocks in 2021) were within administrator discretion.
2229:
2169:
1861:
1648:
1436:
742:
634:
582:
1838:
The
Committee recognizes AlisonW's long service, and encourages their continued involvement in the project. However, for
1790:
For this motion there are 10 active arbitrators. With 0 arbitrators abstaining, 6 support or oppose votes are a majority.
1625:
The Committee recognizes AlisonW's long service, and encourages their continued involvement in the project. However, for
1577:
For this motion there are 10 active arbitrators. With 0 arbitrators abstaining, 6 support or oppose votes are a majority.
1417:
The Committee recognizes AlisonW's long service, and encourages their continued involvement in the project. However, for
2374:: AlisonW follows up on unblock request. She makes no further comments on Veverve's talk page relating to this incident.
1369:
For this motion there are 10 active arbitrators. With 1 arbitrator abstaining, 5 support or oppose votes are a majority.
688:
600:
444:
2782:
Any block, restriction, ban, or sanction performed under the authorisation of a remedy for this case must be logged at
1847:
1634:
1940:
1734:
1478:
956:
939:
919:
902:
841:
Just a reminder to all commentators that the word limit is 500 words, and this includes your replies to other users. –
646:
2043:
1869:
1865:
1843:
1839:
1630:
1626:
1422:
1418:
1864:) is admonished and warned that the Committee will consider that any further examples of a lack of understanding of
1103:, I agree that mentioning the minor procedural errors is not needed or appropriate, and I have struck that comment.
2672:
1967:
1752:
1505:
1353:
1020:
992:
700:
664:
652:
305:
2447:
2732:(i) the clear and substantial consensus of (a) uninvolved administrators at AE or (b) uninvolved editors at AN or
1439:) is desysopped. AlisonW may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.
718:
706:
640:
2341:
2113:
2090:
786:
409:
2703:
prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" below).
2546:
She first apologized for her actions and appeared to recognize that what she did was wrong in the case request.
2192:, with the remainder of their block-related actions in 2012 and prior. Her other records are similar, with the
2172:) is an editor and administrator. Her former account name is VampWillow, which began editing in 2004 and which
694:
658:
2134:
144:
17:
2284:
I have explained each and every removal. Read my edit summaries and do not act as if I did not explain myself
971:
I'm concerned by what I'm seeing here, and will be interested to hear AlisonW's point of view. In addition, @
1259:
712:
437:
2346:
Disruptive editing: Regular massive deletions of content the editor feels are irrelevant over many articles
1936:
1730:
1474:
952:
935:
915:
898:
2555:
2089:
has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the
2086:
2047:
1082:
might actually be trying to good". An apology in which the other person is blamed is not a true apology.
2707:
Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped.
1959:
1744:
1497:
1318:
1012:
984:
766:
570:
89:
2312:
2185:
2067:
2066:
2) Editors are expected to not act as administrators in cases where, to a neutral observer, they could
2012:
1998:
1973:
1944:
1930:
1916:
1901:
1758:
1738:
1724:
1710:
1701:
1686:
1565:
1550:
1529:
1511:
1482:
1467:
1357:
1322:
1305:
1288:
1271:
1245:
1232:
1210:
1197:
1190:
1167:
1150:
1129:
1112:
1091:
1066:
1051:
1026:
998:
960:
943:
923:
876:
856:
836:
1926:
1720:
1546:
1242:
1206:
1186:
1163:
1146:
1125:
114:
2439:
2365:
2380:: Tamzin first places the request on hold with a question to AlisonW, and then nearly a day later (
2181:
754:
2294:
2263:
2094:
2008:
1994:
1912:
1697:
1682:
1561:
1463:
1267:
1108:
1087:
1062:
1047:
542:
Actions taken to enforce remedies authorised in the case (if applicable) are to be logged at the
2223:
2163:
1855:
1642:
1430:
736:
628:
2543:
Regarding her belief about the block, at first, she "stands by" her decision to block at AN.
1314:
1301:
1100:
1096:
682:
565:
411:
84:
980:
2696:
No administrator may modify or remove a sanction placed by another administrator without:
2046:
are trusted members of the community and are expected to follow Knowledge (XXG) policies.
1922:
1898:
1716:
1707:
1542:
1526:
1525:
I prefer a case, but this is the only quick option that I see as a viable path forward. --
1253:
opening a case; this request is based on a single incident and its fallout, and much like
1239:
1229:
1202:
1182:
1159:
1142:
1121:
1071:
1038:
911:
873:
517:
This case is closed. No edits should be made to this page except by clerks or arbitrators.
109:
2322:
I can see that you have strong views about religion, however removing an entire section,
1985:
I would like to see a time frame, perhaps two years, attached to this warning, as we did
528:
Specific requests for amendment or clarification about the decision should be raised at
414:
1347:
1284:
103:
2793:
2400:
2004:
1990:
1908:
1693:
1678:
1557:
1459:
1263:
1104:
1083:
1058:
1043:
848:
828:
2358:: AlisonW reverts 2 more Veverve edits on 2 other pages; one reversion uses rollback
2355:
2331:
1181:
real person, and an ArbCom case is enough stress without stereotyping on top of it.
2219:
2159:
1851:
1638:
1426:
1136:
1004:
972:
894:
867:
731:
623:
2266:
in their edit summary. The content remains removed until 8 June (nearly 6 months).
413:
133:
1262:, in that at the very least AlisonW has recognised that boundaries were crossed.
2305:: Veverve makes their last (unrelated to dispute) edit of their editing session.
1921:
We're clearly well past the point where a warning would be an effective remedy.
1297:
677:
1341:
1333:
1280:
1034:
948:
98:
1080:
someone making such major deletions with no explanation in the edit summary
2738:
is required. If consensus at AE or AN is unclear, the status quo prevails.
2465:
5) As Veverve's edits were not vandalism, AlisonW misused rollback twice.
2700:
the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or
2252:
843:
823:
2511:
8) AlisonW's first response on Veverve's talk page was content-motivated
2028:, where comments and discussion from the voting phase is also available.
1279:. I do not know yet if I would prefer a full case or closing by motion.
1033:
Waiting for a fuller response from AlisonW. Meanwhile, I feel that what
798:
Preliminary statements given in the case request stage may be found at
2653:
ask the enforcing administrator to reconsider their original decision;
897:: what have you taken away from the AN/I discussion about your block?
521:
Any violations of the remedies passed in the case should be raised at
2403:. Veverve participates twice in that discussion before attempting to
2671:. If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by email through
2448:
Knowledge (XXG):Verifiability#Responsibility for providing citations
1556:
depends on what AlisonW says about this and the two blocks in 2021.
1075:
530:
Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment
1868:
within two years of the enactment of this motion may result in
2769:
procedure for the standard appeals and modifications provision
2470:
Passed 10 to 0 with 1 abstentions at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2396:
particularly regarding whether AlisonW may have been involved.
2276:
AlisonW has no apparent previous engagement with this article.
505:
415:
2251:
3) This is a timeline of relevant edits made to the article
2197:
2193:
2189:
1074:- I did look at that comment, and read it in the context of
2520:, and elsewhere that the dispute was not content-motivated.
2771:
adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.
2615:
adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.
2480:
6) The incident inciting this case was a content dispute.
2311:: AlisonW reverts Veverve's 9 June edit on Metatron using
2255:
and the actions taken by AlisonW and others in response:
2334:: AlisonW reverts 4 more Veverve edits on 4 other pages.
2550:
2547:
2544:
2539:
2537:
2535:
2533:
2528:
2525:
2523:
2521:
2518:
2515:
2514:, as is her comment in response to the unblock request.
2512:
2436:
2434:
2432:
2430:
2428:
2426:
2424:
2404:
2399:
11 June: Gråbergs Gråa Sång (re)starts a discussion on
2389:
2385:
2381:
2377:
2371:
2361:
2349:
2337:
2317:
2308:
2302:
2288:
2279:
2269:
2259:
2233:
976:
818:
772:
760:
496:
490:
484:
425:
340:
298:
174:
882:
2198:
previous 5 protection log entries stretching to 2012
2178:
Knowledge (XXG):Former administrators/reason/renamed
883:
Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (7/1/0)
2299:
AlisonW does not respond in this talk page section.
2194:
previous 10 deletion log entries stretching to 2015
1729:Beeblebrox and Primefac cover my feelings exactly.
872:You can have 250 additional word for responses --
2613:procedure for the standard enforcement provision
523:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement
2444:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style/Trivia sections
2262:: Veverve removes the disputed content, citing
1177:different standards than in WP project space.
445:
8:
2735:(ii) a passing motion of arbitrators at ARCA
2784:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration enforcement log
2501:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2485:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2455:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2413:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2241:Passed 10 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2208:Passed 10 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2122:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2102:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2075:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2056:Passed 11 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2625:
2590:Passed 7 to 4 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2563:Passed 8 to 0 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
2554:These comments satisfy the requirement to
2320:: AlisonW comments on Veverve's talk that
2291:: Veverve comments on AlisonW's talk that
2143:Passed 8 to 3 at 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
537:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Arbitration Committee
452:
438:
121:
1793:
1580:
1372:
2673:Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee
975:would you mind giving your thoughts on
544:centralised arbitration enforcement log
124:
2752:functionary blocks of whatever nature.
2364:: Veverve objects to the block citing
2345:
2321:
2292:
2283:
2273:
2190:AlisonW had last made 2 blocks in 2021
1840:inappropriate use of the blocking tool
1633:, and showing a poor understanding of
1627:inappropriate use of the blocking tool
1572:Motion: AlisonW block tool restriction
2236:). None of these blocks were undone.
482:Watchlist all case (and talk) pages:
7:
2675:(or, if email access is revoked, to
2352:for failing to leave a block notice.
225:Clarification and Amendment requests
2658:arbitration enforcement noticeboard
2405:remove the section again on 13 June
2024:All tallies are based the votes at
535:General questions can be raised at
2667:submit a request for amendment at
2095:Knowledge (XXG)'s content policies
1846:, showing a poor understanding of
1806:Support votes needed for majority
1593:Support votes needed for majority
1385:Support votes needed for majority
32:
2800:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration cases
888:Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)
821:this comment as a clerk action. –
2725:For a request to succeed, either
2679:
509:
132:
2692:Modifications by administrators
2282:: Veverve reverts with summary
2272:: AlisonW reverts with summary
2174:became an administrator in 2004
2506:
2342:without leaving a block notice
983:cycle and dispute resolution?
1:
2644:Appeals by sanctioned editors
1844:involved in a content dispute
1631:involved in a content dispute
1423:involved in a content dispute
2630:0) Appeals and modifications
1255:the Athaenara case last year
476:on 17:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
468:on 23:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
356:Conflict of interest reports
2756:discussed at another venue.
2662:administrators’ noticeboard
2601:Enforcement of restrictions
2344:. The block summary states
2247:Metatron and block timeline
1866:admin policy and procedures
185:Search archived proceedings
126:Knowledge (XXG) Arbitration
18:Knowledge (XXG):Arbitration
2816:
2368:, files an unblock request
2340:: AlisonW blocks Veverve,
2068:reasonably appear involved
929:not taken, I'm willing to
230:Arbitrator motion requests
2680:
2621:Appeals and modifications
2062:Administrator involvement
2013:10:05, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1999:09:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1974:12:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1945:23:52, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
1931:17:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
1917:10:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1902:10:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1759:12:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1739:23:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
1725:17:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
1711:10:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1702:10:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1687:09:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1566:17:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
1551:17:18, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
1530:10:56, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1512:12:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1483:19:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1468:10:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1358:07:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1323:05:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
1306:16:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
1289:17:58, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1272:12:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1246:04:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1233:19:56, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
1211:23:48, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
1191:21:22, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
1168:17:22, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
1151:18:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
1130:18:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
1113:10:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
1092:17:32, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
1067:23:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
1052:14:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
1027:07:38, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
999:13:49, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
961:23:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
944:21:56, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
924:20:36, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
907:17:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
877:20:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
857:18:15, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
837:06:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
2507:AlisonW's justifications
781:Prior dispute resolution
2767:In accordance with the
2746:
2611:In accordance with the
2491:AlisonW and involvement
2440:Knowledge (XXG):Be bold
2085:3) On Knowledge (XXG),
1870:removal of admin status
1706:absolute non-starter --
1419:misuse of an admin tool
1364:Motion: Desysop AlisonW
800:/Preliminary statements
2656:request review at the
2133:normally be expected.
2003:Two year limit added.
1785:Motion: AlisonW warned
793:Preliminary statements
46:Preliminary statements
2418:
2188:). Before this case,
1982:Arbitrator discussion
1778:Arbitrator discussion
1538:Arbitrator discussion
1076:the discussion thread
981:Bold, Revert, Discuss
426:Track related changes
286:Arbitration Committee
2461:AlisonW and rollback
2328:(emphasis original).
2324:"in popular culture"
2297:is not encyclopedic.
807:Preliminary decision
235:Enforcement requests
163:Guide to arbitration
95:Drafting arbitrators
2556:explain her actions
2423:4) Veverve's edits
1799:
1586:
1378:
979:in relation to the
2581:AlisonW desysopped
2392:, Tamzin starts a
2097:is not vandalism.
2026:/Proposed decision
1794:
1581:
1373:
257:Contentious topics
155:Arbitration policy
2762:
2761:
2660:("AE") or at the
2577:
2186:VampWillow Xtools
2091:project's purpose
1937:GeneralNotability
1834:
1833:
1731:GeneralNotability
1621:
1620:
1475:GeneralNotability
1413:
1412:
1340:
953:GeneralNotability
936:GeneralNotability
916:GeneralNotability
899:GeneralNotability
889:
552:
551:
503:
462:
461:
429:
397:
267:General sanctions
215:All open requests
145:About arbitration
118:
107:
93:
76:
68:Proposed decision
65:
54:
43:
2807:
2686:
2684:
2683:
2682:
2626:
2573:
2394:discussion at AN
2350:later apologized
2149:Findings of fact
1800:
1791:
1587:
1578:
1379:
1370:
1338:
1140:
1101:User:Paul August
1097:User:Newyorkbrad
887:
871:
855:
846:
835:
826:
787:WP:AN Discussion
776:
749:deleted contribs
728:
674:
616:
560:Involved parties
555:Case information
513:
512:
506:
502:
501:
480:
454:
447:
440:
428:
423:
416:
395:
351:Clerk procedures
343:
301:
272:Editor sanctions
249:Active sanctions
207:Open proceedings
177:
136:
122:
112:
101:
87:
70:
59:
48:
37:
2815:
2814:
2810:
2809:
2808:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2790:
2789:
2779:
2777:Enforcement log
2763:
2719:Important notes
2678:
2676:
2631:
2623:
2603:
2598:
2583:
2571:
2509:
2493:
2478:
2476:Content dispute
2463:
2421:
2419:Veverve's edits
2390:3 minutes later
2386:lifts the block
2260:18 January 2023
2249:
2216:
2156:
2151:
2135:One of the ways
2130:
2110:
2083:
2064:
2040:
2035:
2021:
1935:Per the above.
1875:
1874:
1848:blocking policy
1789:
1787:
1654:
1653:
1635:blocking policy
1576:
1574:
1442:
1441:
1368:
1366:
1134:
1039:User:Ritchie333
893:A question for
885:
865:
844:
842:
824:
822:
814:
809:
795:
783:
734:
680:
626:
568:
562:
557:
510:
504:
483:
481:
477:
469:
458:
424:
418:
417:
412:
402:
401:
400:
389:
372:
362:
361:
360:
347:
339:
327:
302:
297:
288:
278:
277:
276:
251:
241:
240:
239:
209:
199:
196:
181:
173:
151:
120:
30:
29:
28:
12:
11:
5:
2813:
2811:
2803:
2802:
2792:
2791:
2778:
2775:
2774:
2773:
2760:
2759:
2758:
2757:
2753:
2749:
2745:
2742:
2741:
2740:
2739:
2736:
2733:
2727:
2726:
2705:
2704:
2701:
2694:
2693:
2689:
2688:
2665:
2654:
2646:
2645:
2633:
2632:
2629:
2624:
2622:
2619:
2618:
2617:
2602:
2599:
2597:
2594:
2593:
2592:
2582:
2579:
2570:
2567:
2566:
2565:
2508:
2505:
2504:
2503:
2492:
2489:
2488:
2487:
2477:
2474:
2473:
2472:
2462:
2459:
2458:
2457:
2446:and a policy,
2420:
2417:
2416:
2415:
2409:
2408:
2397:
2375:
2369:
2359:
2353:
2335:
2329:
2315:
2306:
2300:
2286:
2277:
2267:
2248:
2245:
2244:
2243:
2215:
2212:
2211:
2210:
2182:AlisonW Xtools
2155:
2152:
2150:
2147:
2146:
2145:
2129:
2126:
2125:
2124:
2109:
2106:
2105:
2104:
2082:
2079:
2078:
2077:
2063:
2060:
2059:
2058:
2044:Administrators
2039:
2038:Administrators
2036:
2034:
2031:
2020:
2019:Final decision
2017:
2016:
2015:
2001:
1983:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1976:
1954:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1947:
1933:
1919:
1904:
1893:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1882:
1877:
1836:
1835:
1832:
1831:
1828:
1824:
1823:
1820:
1816:
1815:
1812:
1808:
1807:
1804:
1786:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1779:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1768:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1741:
1727:
1713:
1704:
1689:
1672:
1668:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1661:
1656:
1623:
1622:
1619:
1618:
1615:
1611:
1610:
1607:
1603:
1602:
1599:
1595:
1594:
1591:
1573:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1553:
1539:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1521:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1492:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1470:
1449:
1444:
1415:
1414:
1411:
1410:
1407:
1403:
1402:
1399:
1395:
1394:
1391:
1387:
1386:
1383:
1365:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1325:
1308:
1291:
1274:
1248:
1235:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1178:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1094:
1069:
1031:
1030:
1029:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
884:
881:
880:
879:
862:
861:
860:
859:
817:Just noting I
813:
810:
808:
805:
794:
791:
790:
789:
782:
779:
778:
777:
729:
675:
621:
561:
558:
556:
553:
550:
549:
548:
547:
540:
533:
526:
514:
479:
472:
464:
460:
459:
457:
456:
449:
442:
434:
431:
430:
420:
419:
410:
408:
407:
404:
403:
399:
398:
390:
385:
380:
374:
373:
368:
367:
364:
363:
359:
358:
353:
348:
338:
333:
328:
323:
318:
313:
308:
303:
296:
290:
289:
284:
283:
280:
279:
275:
274:
269:
264:
253:
252:
247:
246:
243:
242:
238:
237:
232:
227:
222:
217:
211:
210:
205:
204:
201:
200:
198:
197:
192:
187:
182:
172:
165:
160:
152:
147:
141:
138:
137:
129:
128:
35:Main case page
33:
31:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2812:
2801:
2798:
2797:
2795:
2788:
2787:
2785:
2776:
2772:
2770:
2765:
2764:
2754:
2750:
2744:
2743:
2737:
2734:
2731:
2730:
2729:
2728:
2724:
2723:
2722:
2720:
2716:
2712:
2708:
2702:
2699:
2698:
2697:
2691:
2690:
2685:wikimedia.org
2674:
2670:
2666:
2663:
2659:
2655:
2652:
2651:
2650:
2643:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2635:
2634:
2628:
2627:
2620:
2616:
2614:
2609:
2608:
2607:
2600:
2595:
2591:
2588:
2587:
2586:
2580:
2578:
2576:
2568:
2564:
2561:
2560:
2559:
2557:
2552:
2551:
2548:
2545:
2541:
2540:
2538:
2536:
2534:
2530:
2529:
2526:
2524:
2522:
2519:
2516:
2513:
2502:
2499:
2498:
2497:
2490:
2486:
2483:
2482:
2481:
2475:
2471:
2468:
2467:
2466:
2460:
2456:
2453:
2452:
2451:
2449:
2445:
2441:
2437:
2435:
2433:
2431:
2429:
2427:
2425:
2414:
2411:
2410:
2406:
2402:
2401:Talk:Metatron
2398:
2395:
2391:
2387:
2383:
2382:1:16, 11 June
2379:
2378:4:12, 10 June
2376:
2373:
2370:
2367:
2363:
2360:
2357:
2354:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2336:
2333:
2330:
2327:
2325:
2319:
2316:
2314:
2310:
2307:
2304:
2301:
2298:
2296:
2290:
2287:
2285:
2281:
2280:05:44, 9 June
2278:
2275:
2271:
2270:16:40, 8 June
2268:
2265:
2261:
2258:
2257:
2256:
2254:
2246:
2242:
2239:
2238:
2237:
2235:
2231:
2228:
2225:
2221:
2213:
2209:
2206:
2205:
2204:
2201:
2199:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2168:
2165:
2161:
2153:
2148:
2144:
2141:
2140:
2139:
2136:
2127:
2123:
2120:
2119:
2118:
2115:
2107:
2103:
2100:
2099:
2098:
2096:
2092:
2088:
2080:
2076:
2073:
2072:
2071:
2069:
2061:
2057:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2049:
2048:Their conduct
2045:
2037:
2032:
2030:
2029:
2027:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2006:
2002:
2000:
1996:
1992:
1988:
1984:
1981:
1980:
1975:
1971:
1970:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1957:
1956:
1955:
1952:
1951:
1946:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1932:
1928:
1924:
1920:
1918:
1914:
1910:
1905:
1903:
1900:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1891:
1890:
1885:
1884:
1883:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1873:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1860:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1829:
1826:
1825:
1821:
1818:
1817:
1813:
1810:
1809:
1805:
1802:
1801:
1797:
1792:
1784:
1780:
1777:
1776:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1766:
1765:
1760:
1756:
1755:
1750:
1749:
1748:
1742:
1740:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1726:
1722:
1718:
1714:
1712:
1709:
1705:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1690:
1688:
1684:
1680:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1670:
1669:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1652:
1650:
1647:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1616:
1613:
1612:
1608:
1605:
1604:
1600:
1597:
1596:
1592:
1589:
1588:
1584:
1579:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1554:
1552:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1537:
1536:
1531:
1528:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1519:
1518:
1513:
1509:
1508:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1490:
1489:
1484:
1480:
1476:
1471:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1456:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1440:
1438:
1435:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1420:
1408:
1405:
1404:
1400:
1397:
1396:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1384:
1381:
1380:
1376:
1371:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1352:
1349:
1346:
1343:
1336:
1335:
1329:
1326:
1324:
1320:
1316:
1312:
1309:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1292:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1275:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1241:
1240:Moneytrees🏝️
1236:
1234:
1231:
1227:
1224:
1223:
1212:
1208:
1204:
1199:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1179:
1176:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1138:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1095:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1070:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1023:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1010:
1006:
1002:
1001:
1000:
996:
995:
990:
989:
988:
982:
978:
974:
970:
962:
958:
954:
950:
947:
946:
945:
941:
937:
932:
927:
926:
925:
921:
917:
913:
910:
909:
908:
904:
900:
896:
892:
891:
890:
878:
875:
869:
864:
863:
858:
854:
852:
847:
840:
839:
838:
834:
832:
827:
820:
816:
815:
811:
806:
804:
803:
801:
792:
788:
785:
784:
780:
774:
771:
768:
765:
762:
759:
756:
753:
750:
747:
744:
741:
738:
733:
730:
726:
723:
720:
717:
714:
711:
708:
705:
702:
699:
696:
693:
690:
687:
684:
679:
676:
672:
669:
666:
663:
660:
657:
654:
651:
648:
645:
642:
639:
636:
633:
630:
625:
622:
620:
614:
611:
608:
605:
602:
599:
596:
593:
590:
587:
584:
581:
578:
575:
572:
567:
564:
563:
559:
554:
545:
541:
538:
534:
531:
527:
524:
520:
519:
518:
515:
508:
507:
500:
499:
494:
493:
488:
487:
478:
475:
470:
467:
455:
450:
448:
443:
441:
436:
435:
433:
432:
427:
422:
421:
406:
405:
394:
391:
388:
384:
381:
379:
376:
375:
371:
366:
365:
357:
354:
352:
349:
346:
342:
337:
334:
332:
329:
326:
322:
319:
317:
314:
312:
309:
307:
304:
300:
295:
292:
291:
287:
282:
281:
273:
270:
268:
265:
262:
258:
255:
254:
250:
245:
244:
236:
233:
231:
228:
226:
223:
221:
220:Case requests
218:
216:
213:
212:
208:
203:
202:
195:
191:
188:
186:
183:
180:
176:
171:
169:
166:
164:
161:
159:
156:
153:
150:
146:
143:
142:
140:
139:
135:
131:
130:
127:
123:
119:
116:
111:
105:
100:
96:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
69:
63:
58:
52:
47:
41:
36:
27:
23:
19:
2781:
2780:
2766:
2718:
2717:
2713:
2709:
2706:
2695:
2647:
2637:
2636:
2610:
2604:
2589:
2584:
2574:
2572:
2562:
2553:
2542:
2531:
2510:
2500:
2494:
2484:
2479:
2469:
2464:
2454:
2422:
2412:
2323:
2250:
2240:
2226:
2217:
2207:
2202:
2166:
2157:
2142:
2131:
2121:
2114:Edit warring
2111:
2108:Edit warring
2101:
2084:
2074:
2065:
2055:
2041:
2023:
2022:
1968:
1961:
1960:
1876:
1858:
1837:
1803:Abstentions
1788:
1753:
1746:
1745:
1655:
1645:
1624:
1590:Abstentions
1575:
1506:
1499:
1498:
1454:
1443:
1433:
1416:
1382:Abstentions
1367:
1350:
1344:
1332:
1327:
1313:per Cabayi.
1310:
1293:
1276:
1260:this comment
1250:
1225:
1174:
1155:
1079:
1021:
1014:
1013:
1008:
993:
986:
985:
930:
886:
850:
830:
797:
796:
769:
763:
757:
751:
745:
739:
721:
715:
709:
703:
697:
691:
685:
667:
661:
655:
649:
643:
637:
631:
619:filing party
618:
609:
603:
597:
591:
585:
579:
573:
516:
497:
491:
485:
473:
471:
465:
463:
94:
80:
79:
77:
34:
2786:, not here.
2664:("AN"); and
2596:Enforcement
1315:Enterprisey
1198:WP:INVOLVED
1011:this case.
812:Clerk notes
701:protections
647:protections
589:protections
566:Ad Orientem
474:Case closed
466:Case opened
190:Ban appeals
168:Noticeboard
85:Dreamy Jazz
2639:Committee.
2366:WP:POPCULT
2033:Principles
1987:with TimWi
1923:Beeblebrox
1899:Guerillero
1798:reference
1717:Beeblebrox
1708:Guerillero
1585:reference
1543:Beeblebrox
1527:Guerillero
1377:reference
1230:Guerillero
1203:Beeblebrox
1183:Beeblebrox
1160:Beeblebrox
1143:Beeblebrox
1122:Beeblebrox
1072:Ritchie333
912:Black Kite
874:Guerillero
767:block user
761:filter log
713:page moves
659:page moves
601:page moves
396:(pre-2016)
383:Statistics
316:Procedures
110:Guerillero
81:Case clerk
2677:arbcom-en
2295:WP:TRIVIA
2264:WP:TRIVIA
2234:block log
2087:vandalism
2081:Vandalism
1035:User:Jc37
977:this edit
773:block log
707:deletions
653:deletions
595:deletions
321:Elections
2794:Category
2569:Remedies
2372:15:30–33
2362:15:11–16
2356:14:57–59
2332:14:47–52
2318:14:33–41
2313:rollback
2293:what is
2253:Metatron
2230:contribs
2196:and the
2170:contribs
2128:Rollback
2005:SilkTork
1991:Primefac
1909:SilkTork
1862:contribs
1796:Majority
1694:SilkTork
1679:Primefac
1649:contribs
1583:Majority
1558:SilkTork
1460:SilkTork
1437:contribs
1375:Majority
1264:Primefac
1105:SilkTork
1084:SilkTork
1059:SilkTork
1044:SilkTork
743:contribs
689:contribs
635:contribs
577:contribs
57:Evidence
24: |
22:Requests
20: |
2220:Veverve
2214:Veverve
2160:AlisonW
2154:AlisonW
1953:Abstain
1881:Support
1852:AlisonW
1767:Abstain
1660:Support
1639:AlisonW
1520:Abstain
1448:Support
1427:AlisonW
1251:Decline
1137:AlisonW
1005:AlisonW
973:Veverve
895:AlisonW
868:AlisonW
732:Veverve
624:AlisonW
393:Reports
331:History
311:Members
306:Contact
294:Discuss
158:(CU/OS)
2669:"ARCA"
2348:. She
2176:(c.f.
1892:Oppose
1842:while
1671:Oppose
1629:while
1491:Oppose
1421:while
1334:KevinL
1328:Accept
1311:Accept
1298:Cabayi
1294:Accept
1277:Accept
1243:(Talk)
1226:Accept
1156:Accept
1009:accept
931:accept
719:rights
695:blocks
678:Tamzin
665:rights
641:blocks
607:rights
583:blocks
336:Clerks
194:Report
108:&
2338:14:55
2309:14:31
2303:09:56
2289:05:46
1319:talk!
819:moved
486:Front
370:Audit
16:<
2442:and
2224:talk
2164:talk
2009:talk
1995:talk
1969:talk
1962:Worm
1941:talk
1927:talk
1913:talk
1856:talk
1827:3–4
1819:1–2
1754:talk
1747:Worm
1735:talk
1721:talk
1698:talk
1683:talk
1643:talk
1614:3–4
1606:1–2
1562:talk
1547:talk
1507:talk
1500:Worm
1479:talk
1464:talk
1431:talk
1406:3–4
1398:1–2
1342:L235
1302:talk
1285:talk
1281:Izno
1268:talk
1207:talk
1187:talk
1175:very
1164:talk
1147:talk
1126:talk
1109:talk
1099:and
1088:talk
1063:talk
1048:talk
1037:and
1022:talk
1015:Worm
994:talk
987:Worm
957:talk
949:jc37
940:talk
920:talk
903:talk
851:Talk
831:Talk
755:logs
737:talk
683:talk
629:talk
571:talk
387:Talk
378:Talk
345:Talk
325:Talk
179:Talk
149:Talk
115:Talk
104:Talk
99:Izno
90:Talk
73:Talk
62:Talk
51:Talk
40:Talk
26:Case
2218:2)
2158:1)
2112:4)
2042:1)
1339:aka
845:MJL
825:MJL
725:RfA
671:RfA
613:RfA
498:PD.
492:Ev.
261:Log
2796::
2721::
2687:).
2558:.
2450:.
2388:.
2384:)
2200:.
2184:,
2011:)
1997:)
1989:.
1972:)
1943:)
1929:)
1915:)
1872:.
1850:,
1830:4
1822:5
1814:6
1811:0
1757:)
1737:)
1723:)
1700:)
1685:)
1637:,
1617:4
1609:5
1601:6
1598:0
1564:)
1549:)
1510:)
1481:)
1466:)
1409:4
1401:5
1393:6
1390:0
1356:)
1321:)
1304:)
1287:)
1270:)
1209:)
1189:)
1166:)
1149:)
1128:)
1111:)
1090:)
1065:)
1050:)
1025:)
997:)
959:)
942:)
922:)
905:)
617:,
495:,
489:,
97::
83::
66:—
55:—
44:—
2227:·
2222:(
2167:·
2162:(
2007:(
1993:(
1966:(
1939:(
1925:(
1911:(
1859:·
1854:(
1751:(
1733:(
1719:(
1696:(
1681:(
1646:·
1641:(
1560:(
1545:(
1504:(
1477:(
1462:(
1434:·
1429:(
1354:c
1351:·
1348:t
1345:·
1337:(
1317:(
1300:(
1283:(
1266:(
1205:(
1185:(
1162:(
1145:(
1139::
1135:@
1124:(
1107:(
1086:(
1061:(
1046:(
1019:(
1003:@
991:(
955:(
938:(
918:(
901:(
870::
866:@
853:‐
849:‐
833:‐
829:‐
802:.
775:)
770:·
764:·
758:·
752:·
746:·
740:·
735:(
727:)
722:·
716:·
710:·
704:·
698:·
692:·
686:·
681:(
673:)
668:·
662:·
656:·
650:·
644:·
638:·
632:·
627:(
615:)
610:·
604:·
598:·
592:·
586:·
580:·
574:·
569:(
546:.
539:.
532:.
525:.
453:e
446:t
439:v
341:+
299:+
263:)
259:(
175:+
117:)
113:(
106:)
102:(
92:)
88:(
75:)
71:(
64:)
60:(
53:)
49:(
42:)
38:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
