Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RodentofDeath

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Case Opened on 18:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Case Closed on 00:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Watchlist all case pages: 1, 2, 3, 4

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this case. Only add a statement here after the case has begun if you are named as a party; otherwise, your statement may be placed on the talk page, and will be read in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators, the parties, and other editors may suggest proposed principles, findings, and remedies at /Workshop. That page may also be used for general comments on the evidence. Arbitrators will then vote on a final decision in the case at /Proposed decision.

Once the case is closed, editors may add to the #Log of blocks and bans as needed, but it should not be edited otherwise. Please raise any questions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requests for clarification, and report violations of remedies at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement.

Involved parties[edit]

Requests for comment[edit]

Statement by John254[edit]

As described on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/RodentofDeath, RodentofDeath operates a single purpose account for the purpose of editing Angeles City and prostitution-related pages, and has engaged in repeated, blatant WP:NPOV violations, contentious editing, edit warring, and personal attacks. Furthermore, I regard RodentofDeath's username as inappropriate and threatening. While many established users at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/RodentofDeath have described RodentofDeath's behavior as highly disruptive, there are no statements favorable to RodentofDeath endorsed by anyone except RodentofDeath himself. John254 20:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by RodentofDeath[edit]

This action against me seems to be ignoring the root of the problem, which is the insertion of false information into wikipedia articles about Angeles City. User susanbryce has a documented conflict of interest and has also been the subject of a press release from the Senate of the Philippines accusing her of running a smear campaign. its a shame the actual problem isnt dealt with directly and instead the resulting conflict of me removing false info she inserts into articles is seen as the problem. The problems with Angeles City related articles and her edits have been going on since before I a member here at wikipedia.

The only supporter of susanbryce's edits and insertion of false info into the Angeles City related articles seems to be edg. While i feel he is a very good contributor to wikipedia he seems a bit misguided when it comes to the Angeles City topic, of which he seems to have little knowledge. Edg also has a very strong reluctance to admit that Angeles isnt filled with pedophiles and child prostitutes even when faced with facts.

all of the accusations you are making about me apply to susanbryce also. she also operates a single purpose account with the purpose of running a smear campaign, blatant WP:NPOV violations, contentious editing, edit warring, and personal attacks on me including saying i am "attacking" her. i look forward to your statements on her edits and lies inserted into articles repeatedly. thanks and have a wonderful day. RodentofHappinessPeaceUnderstandingandCivilityRodentofDeath (talk) 04:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Susanbryce[edit]

Hello, I joined wikipedia around 12 months ago. Like most newbies here, I admit I made some mistakes in the beginning. This is because I did not know the rules or guidlines here, wikipedia is a massive site and it can be hard to find your way around and understand. Like most people who join inintially, I posted on subjects I was familiar with. Soon, a number of experienced neutral Editors joined in and explained a few things to me, I listened to their advice and always 100% followed it. Over time, I also actively sort help from other editors, such as Edgarde, Phaedrus86, Devalover, etc, asking them how to do certain things and often asking them to review my work. For example, i sought a review of an article I set up from Devalover....http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Devalover&diff=139944873&oldid=139944602. Recently i sort advice on tags from Athaenara.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Athaenara&diff=177670226&oldid=177656997. In fact, im constantly seeking advice from experienced Editors and always following their advice and co-operating with them. I admit im not an educated person, never went to school, and English is my secondary language so its been a struggle. Over time, with guidence fron more experienced editors Ive grown as an Editor and have been involved in a range of articles, many I have set up myself. My latest article im working on is here.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhope_Asia_Philippines. Currently im working on adding all the Charities in the Philippines to Wikipedia, this is a big long term assignement as it involves some eventual 2,000 charities and Im guessing it will take me several years.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charities_in_the_philippines. I feel over time as I have become a more accomplished Editor under the guidence of others I have shown a lot of improvement. In fact I have recieved much support and compliments on some of the articles Ive started, Example, from user Capitalistroadster "You have made a good start. It is a well referenced report" in reference to my article on Preda Foundation....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PREDA_Foundation. Im am interested in a range of articles from human rights, womens issues, human trafficking, charities, etc. im working hard to be a quality editor here on wikipedia and seek to work in with other editors in developing high quality articles that meet wikipedias high quality guidlines. I continue to seek advice and help from other nuetral experienced Editors in articles and developing myself as an Editor. Kindest RegardsSusanbryce (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add , when I first started out some 12 months ago, I posted some links to some sites which later some Editors kindly pointed out I should not have done, once this was pointed out I did not post to those sites again, I was new here and still in my learning stage and made some mistakes. I should also point out that many times I actively sort reviews of my work from experienced editors and have followed their guidlines. as I said, I made some mistakes when I first started out on wikipedia, but Ive learned and grown as an Editor since and ask arbitrators to focus on more recents edits that show more of my editing experience. kind regardsSusanbryce (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, I grew up in a third world slum city, at that time there was no electricity, no running water, and no school, I sold mangoes on a street corner as a child to survive, also my language is tagalog, not english, so please understand its been difficult for me here researching, posting, etc. But ive always, I repeat always sort out the help of other experienced, neutral editors , ive requested their help, asked them to review my work, and fix my mistakes. My posts are in good faith. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Human_trafficking_in_the_Philippines&diff=136354744&oldid=136347657

Preliminary decisions[edit]

Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (4/0/0/0)[edit]

Temporary injunction (none)[edit]

Final decision[edit]

All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)

Principles[edit]

Purpose of Wikipedia[edit]

1) Wikipedia is a project to create a neutral encyclopedia. Use of the site for other purposes—including, but not limited to, advocacy or propaganda, furtherance of outside conflicts, and political or ideological struggle—is prohibited.

Passed 8 to 0, 00:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Decorum[edit]

2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their interactions with other users, to keep their cool when editing, and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct—including, but not limited to, personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, and gaming the system—is prohibited. Users should not respond to such behavior in kind; concerns regarding the actions of other users should be brought up in the appropriate forums.

Passed 8 to 0, 00:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Findings of fact[edit]

Susan Bryce[edit]

1) Susanbryce (talk · contribs) self-identifies as an activist for children's rights, anti-human trafficking and against child sex slavery. She identifies as the founder of "Angeles, Philippines Child Rescue Agency" in Angeles City. Her Wikipedia editing is heavily based around children's rights issues pertaining to the Philippines and Angeles City, with more than 90% of her article and talk edits being related to this topic. [1]

Passed 9 to 0 at 00:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

RodentofDeath[edit]

2)RodentofDeath (talk · contribs) has edited six articles in total, all pertaining to issues regarding child prostitution, human trafficking and children's rights in the Philippines and Angeles City in particular. [2]

Passed 9 to 0 at 00:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks by RodentofDeath against Susanbryce[edit]

3) RodentofDeath has made several personal attacks against Susanbryce, including this post to his userpage, which was a thinly-disguised reference to Susanbryce's post the previous day to her own userpage. RodentofDeath's post further includes claims of child kidnapping, extortion and real life stalking.

RodentofDeath has also made further personal attacks, such as "nutcase", "lunatic" and "former prostitute".

Passed 9 to 0 at 00:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Attacks in articles[edit]

4) RodentofDeath edited the article Human trafficking in Angeles City to carry information attempting to discredit Susanbryce: [3]. RodentofDeath's lead then read:

"Human trafficking in Angeles City, Philippines doesn't exist. An smear campaign run by Susan Bryce has been active for years spreading lies about this Philippine city....

and variations thereof ([4] [5]). These edits inserted original research, being RodentofDeath's personal comments in an attempt to disprove certain contentions.

Passed 9 to 0 at 00:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Remedies[edit]

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.

RodentofDeath banned[edit]

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

Passed 8 to 0, 00:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Susanbryce reminded[edit]

2) Susanbryce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is reminded of the prohibition on using Wikipedia as a platform for advocacy.

Passed 6 to 1, 00:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Enforcement[edit]

Enforcement of restrictions

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.

In accordance with the procedure for the standard enforcement provision adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.

Appeals and modifications

0) Appeals and modifications

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 Committee.

Appeals by sanctioned editors

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:

  1. ask the enforcing administrator to reconsider their original decision;
  2. request review at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard ("AE") or at the administrators’ noticeboard ("AN"); and
  3. submit a request for amendment at "ARCA". If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by email through Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee (or, if email access is revoked, to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org).
Modifications by administrators

No administrator may modify or remove a sanction placed by another administrator without:

  1. the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or
  2. prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" below).

Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped.

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.

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 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.

Important notes:

  1. For a request to succeed, either
(i) the clear and substantial consensus of (a) uninvolved administrators at AE or (b) uninvolved editors at AN or
(ii) a passing motion of arbitrators at ARCA
is required. If consensus at AE or AN is unclear, the status quo prevails.
  2. 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 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.
  3. 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 functionary blocks of whatever nature.
  4. 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 discussed at another venue.
In accordance with the procedure for the standard appeals and modifications provision adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.

Log of blocks and bans[edit]

Log any block, ban or extension under any remedy in this decision here. Minimum information includes name of administrator, date and time, what was done and the basis for doing it.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RodentofDeath&oldid=1138654387"