Proposed principles

Rollback

1) Rollback is a "fast method of undoing blatantly unproductive edits, such as vandalism and nonsense". It does not allow users to provide an edit summary, and because of that, it's use shall never be taken lightly. Misuse of it can render harm to Wikipedia, and result in immediate revocation of the tool.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

"it's use shall never be taken lightly." somewhat goes against the spirit of "Rollback is not a big deal." The guideline states it should be used with care, yes, but I think this is taking it a bit far. I prefer the wording provided in the other proposals. Also, it's = it is; you meant to use its. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 05:20, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Not "too far". Maybe a bit strict, but not "too far". The reason I decided to make this page is because I felt the need to focus on what I wish to be done and why. Ryulong, who is the subject of this case needs to be taken care of appropriately and effectively, as more or less suggested in other proposals on the Ncmvocalist page. — Mythdon t/ c 05:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

sorta. maybe take some text straight from the description page of the tool, or highlight that you cannot provide an edit summary, so any use that is not simple vandalism reversion is discouraged as incomplete communication? -- Rocksanddirt ( talk) 18:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Template

2) {text of Proposed principle}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed findings of fact

Ryulong's use of rollback

1) Ryulong has used rollback in situations in which "undo" would have been more necessary given the content did not meet the requirements in WP:ROLLBACK to rollback. Additionally, Ryulong could have gone to an old revision and saved the page.

Comment by Arbitrators:

"Ryulong could have gone to an old revision and saved the page" is not a statement of fact and cannot be considered a finding. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by parties:

Proposed. May need better wording though. — Mythdon t/ c 04:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Modified to reflect evidence more clearly. — Mythdon t/ c 04:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

(changed "went" to "gone" for grammatical reasons) Stifle ( talk) 15:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Template

2) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

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.

Ryulong instructed

1) Ryulong is instructed to:

A) Refrain from making questionable rollbacks

B) Only use rollback as stated in the rollback guideline

C) Consult with other administrators or rollbackers when in doubt as to whether rollback would be legitimate or not.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 03:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong desysopped

2) For persistent abuse of privileges, Ryulong is desysopped for at least 6 months. After this 6 month period, Ryulong must request re-adminship through an RfA, and note this Arbitration Case in the nomination. If Ryulong wishes for his adminship status to be returned prior to the 6 month period end, he must appeal with the Arbitration Committee and get permission from them before running again.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

not supported by any finding of fact. -- Rocksanddirt ( talk) 18:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Abuse of privledges and powers is directly found by the facts in a manner that would suggest a permanent desysopping, not just 6 months removal. User has proven to abuse the tools in a manner that they cannot be trusted in the future without direct community involvement towards such via RfA. Ottava Rima ( talk) 20:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC) reply

This is expressed as a permanent desysopping, with a 6-month restriction on reapplication, unless I'm misreading it. Stifle ( talk) 15:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Ryulong restrictions after resysopping

3) If Ryulong regains adminship, Ryulong must follow these restrictions for 6 months after regaining adminship:

A) Only use rollback as explained in the rollback guideline, and only if blatantly unproductive and unquestionable.

B) If in doubt, Ryulong must ask other editors about potential rollbacks on-wiki before proceeding.

C) If questioned about a rollback, Ryulong must explain the rollback to the editor questioning it.

D) Use "undo" in situations rollback is not legitimate

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

As stated below, if Ryulong is resysopped after being forcibly desysopped, he should not be subject to further restrictions. By that point he will have demonstrated that he has regained the trust of the community or Committee. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 19:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

If reading your comment, I am now convinced that this is not necessary. It is being left open for discussion though. — Mythdon t/ c 21:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong restrictions before resysopping

4) Ryulong must follow these restrictions during the 6 month period of his desysopping:

A) Ryulong may not use rollback in any situation, and is required to only use "undo".

B) Ryulong must provide an explanatory edit summary when reverting edits.

C) Ryulong may only make reverts of vandalism, nonsense, etc.

D) Ryulong must not request adminship during this period. Ryulong must consult with the Arbitration Committee for permission before running for adminship prior to the end of this period.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong instructed (2)

5) Should Ryulong be resysopped or gain rollback privileges, Ryulong is instructed to:

A) Refrain from making questionable rollbacks

B) Only use rollback as stated in the rollback guideline

C) Consult with other administrators or rollbackers when in doubt as to whether rollback would be legitimate or not.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed as an alternative. — Mythdon t/ c 06:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong desysopped/restricted

6) For persistent abuse of privileges, Ryulong is desysopped for at least a six month period. During this period, Ryulong is required to abide by these restrictions:

A) Ryulong may not use rollback for reversions.

B) When using "undo" for reverting unconstructive edits, Ryulong must provide an explicit edit summary where there is no reasonable doubt as to what the reasoning is for reverting.

C) When in doubt, Ryulong must consult with other editors who have been around for at least one year as to whether or not the edits he wishes to revert are unconstructive before proceeding, and must be done directly on-wiki.

D) Ryulong must get permission from the Arbitration Committee before starting an RfA prior the end of this six month period. In cases where another editor wishes to nominate Ryulong for adminship, Ryulong must get permission get from the Arbitration Committee before declaring acceptance. Should there be an RfA, Ryulong must note to editors this very arbitration case.

However, Ryulong will not be resysopped automatically. Ryulong must either:

A) Make an RfA

B) Be nominated by another editor for adminship

C) Contact the Arbitration Commitee for request for privileges back

D) Or request rollback privileges from any administrator. This must be done through requests for permissions to maintain neutrality.

Ryulong must then follow a set of restrictions six months from resysopping or being granted rollback:

A) Ryulong must only use rollback as allowed in the rollback guideline.

B) Ryulong must consult with other experienced editors before using rollback, when in doubt as to whether it should be used. In cases where such consultation meets a "do not use rollback" conclusion, Ryulong must use "undo" with an explanatory edit summary. Such consultation must be done publicly on-wiki.

C) Ryulong may also consult multiple editors at WP:AN when in doubt. This is in fact the preferred action instead of restriction B. Like above, if denied to use the function, Ryulong must use "undo" with an explanatory and sufficient edit summary.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Basically a merger of the above plus more. — Mythdon t/ c 01:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Entirely unnecessary. If he is desysopped, then if the community or ArbCom is willing to trust him with the tools again, he should not be subject to another probationary period. This is far too extreme and seems intent on dragging Ryulong through the mud. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 18:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

After reading your comment, I am getting convinced that this is not necessary. But I'm leaving this open for discussion. — Mythdon t/ c 21:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong desysopped

7) For persistent abuse of rollback, Ryulong is desysopped. He may request re-adminship through an RfA only.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 20:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Ryulong desysopped

8) Ryulong's administrative privileges are revoked. He may request return of his privileges either through RfA, or appeal to the Committee.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. Better wording. — Mythdon t/ c 06:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Template

9) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Template

10) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed enforcement

Enforcement by blocking

1) Should Ryulong violate the above restrictions, Ryulong may be blocked from editing for at least 24 hours. Subsequent violations will rise in duration of block.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Enforcement by re-revocation of adminship

2) Should Ryulong violate the adminship and rollback restrictions above, Ryulong will be redesysopped either temporarily or permanently.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Proposed. — Mythdon t/ c 04:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Too inspecific. How is this determined, and by whom? Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 18:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Comment by others:

Template

2) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others: