all proposed

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.
• Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
• Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if they so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

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.

On this case, 1 Arbitrator is recused and 5 are inactive, so 4 votes are a majority. (8 active, 1 of which is recused)

For all items

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.

Hkelkar, who is an advanced student of physics, has requested a continuance extending from November 24 to December 19 during finals. He has agreed to not edit outside his user pages during this period. While a continuance and continued evidence are arguably futile, see Wikipedia:Snowball clause, as the suggested remedy is a one year ban, a continuance is granted suspending further action until December 19.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 18:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. I dislike continuances in general, but this is tolerable. Charles Matthews 19:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

1. Has continued to edit Fred Bauder 14:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. ➥the Epopt 16:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Continues to edit. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain:

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.

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy requires fair representation of all significant points of view regarding a topic.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably and calmly in their dealings with other users, to assume good faith, and to observe Wikiquette, civility, writers' rules of engagement, and avoid personal attacks.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

3) Wikipedia:Assume good faith contemplates the extension of courtesy and good will to other editors on the assumption that they, like you, are here to build an information resource with a neutral point of view based on reliable, verifiable sources.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

4) The use of Wikipedia for political propaganda is prohibited by Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

5) Edit warring is harmful. When disagreements arise, users are expected to discuss their differences rationally rather than reverting ad infinitum. The three-revert rule should not be construed as an entitlement or inalienable right to three reverts, nor does it endorse reverts as an editing technique.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

6) Accounts and anonymous ips which mirror the behavior of another user may be treated as though they are that user.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

7) Users who disrupt using aggressive biased editing may be banned from affected articles, in extreme cases from the site.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

8) It is disruptive to remove statements that are sourced reliably, written in a neutral narrative, and pertain to the subject at hand.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

9) Wikipedia is a reference work. Use of the site for political struggle accompanied by harassment of opponents is extremely disruptive.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

10) Users who engage in activities which are extremely disruptive may be banned.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

11) Harassment is a very serious and disruptive activity and should be avoided on and off Wikipedia.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

12) Editors who harass other editors may be blocked or banned for an appropriate length of time.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 20:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has made personal attacks "fascist right wing hindu mentality"

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

2) BhaiSaab (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has made a series of provocative edits to User talk:Hkelkar and other pages [1] [2] [3] [4] [5], *"Israel shouldn't be on the map in the first place.". See this comment by Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA).

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

3) Hkelkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has made provocative statements:

• "Thanks the gods for that. We never needed pedophiles anyway"
• "Qutub Minar is basically just one big penis."
• "I'm sure you do. However, wikipedia is not the place for ululating. Get a blog for that"
• [6] "Your view is fodder for Pakistani ISI agents and other liberal socialist India-haters and Indophobes"
• [7] "I should start and article about the Self-hating Indian"
• More statements here.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

4) Hkelkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) self identifies as being an Indian Jew, having a Hindu father and a Jewish mother [8] [9] [10]. See also Shiva's Trident's user page

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

6) TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has skeptically focused on Hkelkar's self-identification [11] [12] [13] [14], See comment by Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) [15].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

7) There is substantial evidence that Subhash bose (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), Shiva's Trident (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and Hkelkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are the same user, see User:Shiva's Trident and note by Dmcdevit. Others include Pusyamitra Sunga (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), see also Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Subhash bose, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Subhash bose (2nd), Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Subhash bose (3rd), Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Subhash bose, and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Hkelkar. Here Shiva's Trident signs a provocative post as [[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] [16].

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

8 Hkelkar has engaged in aggressive biased editing "rv rubbish edits and BLP violation. Terry if you persist then I will report you for BLP"

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

9) Hkelkar made this edit to User talk:SlimVirgin:

:Finally, I find TerryJ-Ho's accusations of "Hindu Chauvinists" rather rich. I'm sure if YOU did another Google search, you will see a vast plethora of Muslim sites saying "Hindus are dung eaters","Hindus are subhuman kaffirs","To kill a Hindu is not a crime, but the true path to Allah","Kill all Hindus, it's cheaper than getting them out of Pakistan",(this one's famous for having been said during the Noakhali Genocide) "We shall take Pakistan by killing all Hindus", and many more.Hkelkar 05:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

A Google search for any of the quoted language produces exactly one hit, User talk:SlimVirgin.

More: (Human Rights Watch, a "terrorist organization" who should be "hanged from lampposts").

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

10) TerryJ-Ho under the heading, "Culture of Hate" at User_talk:SlimVirgin#Culture_of_Hate posted a comparison of HKelkar to remarks made on a Hindutva website: "All muslims should go back to Pakistan and Bangladesh where I am sure they will be welcomed.". More: "Lies lies spread by Hindutvaadis" irrelevant commentary in the talk page of an unrelated article.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

11) BhaiSaab has engaged in wikistalking .See User_talk:Hkelkar#.3B and User_talk:Fred_Bauder#HArrassment_by_BhaiSaab and BhaiSaab's own admission's here.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

12) BhaiSaab has retired from editing Wikipedia, saying he "will not be returning". He has had his userpage deleted and added the simple goodbye message ({{retirement}}) to his user talk page.[17]

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

1. Appears to be no longer true. He has recreated his user page (albeit blank but for a period) and appears to be here once more. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 17:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Clearly still editing regularly: [18]. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain:

1. Await clarification. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

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.

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) BhaiSaab (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for one year.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

2) Hkelkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) editing under any name or anonymous ip is banned from Wikipedia for one year.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

3) TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for a year for personal attacks, disruptive comments, edit-warring and incivility.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

4) BhaiSaab is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

5) Hkelkar and socks is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

6) TerryJ-Ho is placed on probation for an indefinite period. He may be banned from any article or set of articles which he disrupts. All bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

7) In lieu of a one-year ban for edit warring and incivility, Hkelkar (talk · contribs), BhaiSaab (talk · contribs) and TerryJ-Ho (talk · contribs) are placed on extended personal attack, civility and edit warring parole for one year. Any uninvolved administrator can block any of the three for up to one week for edit warring, incivility and personal attacks, and up to one year after the fifth block. The Arbitration Committee also reminds the parties that claiming tu quoque and/or "I was baited, he/she was being incivil" etc. defences when attempting to be unblocked should not be used, and recommends that any administrator reviewing {{unblock}} requests on these grounds decline the request. Hkelkar, TerryJ-Ho and Bhaisaab are also placed on standard one-revert parole; that is, both are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, both are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.

Support:

1. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

1. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain:

1. Offered Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

8) BhaiSaab is banned from attempting to contact Hkelkar outside of Wikipedia. He must not post any information on wikipedia relating to Hkelkar's real life without his permission.

Support:

1. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

1. I'll support the second sentence, but the first is simply absurd. I'm not going to try to enforce it. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain:

1. Offered, seems to be WP:BEANS Fred Bauder 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. First sentence is unenforceable, and the second is already policy. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. As per Fred, Jayjg; seems pointless. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) Bans imposed by this decision may be enforced by appropriate blocks. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hkelkar#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 15:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Charles Matthews 16:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. ➥the Epopt 17:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
5. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

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 principles, findings, and remedies pass except:

Motion 1) Motion for continuance by Hkelkar (2-3-0)

Finding 12) BhaiSaab retired (1-2-2)

Remedy 7) Probation (2-2-1)

Remedy 8) BhaiSaab not to contact Hkelkar (1-1-3)

Cowman109^Talk 16:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Close. Charles Matthews 11:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Close Fred Bauder 12:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. ➥the Epopt 15:23, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]