| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
|
| Track related changes |
This is the central log for all sanctions issued pursuant to anArbitration Committee contentious topics remedy in 2015 as well as any appeals or modifications made to sanctions issued in 2015.
The required information is the user or page the sanction is being applied to, enforcing administrator, date, nature of sanction, including expiry date (if applicable), basis or context (such as link to AE request), and a diff of the user notification (if applicable).
| “ | All sanctions and page restrictions, except page protections, must be logged by the administrator who applied the sanction or page restriction atWikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log. Page protections must clearly note in the protection reason that the protection action is an arbitration enforcement action and link to the applicable contentious topic page (e.g.,WP:CT/BLP), which will cause the action to be automatically logged atWikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/Protections. To be valid, sanctions must be clearly and unambiguously labelled as an arbitration enforcement action (such as with "arbitration enforcement", "arb enforcement", "AE" or "WP:AE" in theWikipedia log entry or the edit summary). If a sanction has been logged as an arbitration enforcement action but has not been clearly labelled as an arbitration enforcement action any uninvolved administrator may amend the sanction (for example, a null edit or reblocking with the same settings) on behalf of the original administrator. Labelling a sanction which has been logged does not make the administrator who added the label the "enforcing administrator" unless there is confusion as to who intended the sanction be arbitration enforcement. A central log of all page restrictions and sanctions (including blocks, bans, page protections or other restrictions) placed as arbitration enforcement (including contentious topic restrictions) is to be maintained by the Committee and its clerks atWikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log andWikipedia:Arbitration enforcement log/Protections. | ” |
| — Arbitration Committee procedures on logging sanctions | ||
Zad6804:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]Zad6821:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]Zad6821:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]"I have to say that I would have imposed the same [TBan] on you for your edit-warring, if it hadn't been for the purely procedural reason that I can't find evidence you have been formally notified of thediscretionary sanctions regime forWP:MOS ...Fut.Perf.☼ 08:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)"
"It is clear that this topic ban did not have the support of the community"[7];
"retroactively unbanned"[8] as of when request was made. — SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 10:30, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Zad6803:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)Zad6803:55, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]Zad6821:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]Zad6823:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]Zad6814:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]In May 2015 administratorZad68 imposed extended confirmed protection ofTalk:Gamergate controversy as a discretionary sanction in response tothis AE request. The Arbitration Committee notes that Zad68 is currently inactive so the sanctioncannot be modified without consensus or Committee action. Therefore the Committee lifts the discretionary sanction onTalk:Gamergate controversy (not the article) to allow the community to modify the protection level in accordance with theWikipedia:Protection policy.
Zad6801:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Facepalm — My bad; totally didn't realize and/or forgot these wereall already under 1RR. For whatever reason I was thinking that only applied to the Syrian one. --slakr\ talk /08:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]