UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 122: Line 122:
:Ok I am confused. Didn't the UBCS and Umbrella Corporation agree to disagree by having their own pages for this war, because I am pretty sure that's what I was trying to put across. No I am not thinking Arbi's, things are fine the way they are now and should be left at that.{{User:Jackson/Sig}} 02:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:Ok I am confused. Didn't the UBCS and Umbrella Corporation agree to disagree by having their own pages for this war, because I am pretty sure that's what I was trying to put across. No I am not thinking Arbi's, things are fine the way they are now and should be left at that.{{User:Jackson/Sig}} 02:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::You aren't following, your 'agreement' with UBCS means precisely dick now. UBCS brought this case, it implies that they are unhappy with how the current arrangement is progressing. Therefore, as it has been brought, this is now an arbitration case, if you choose not to represent yourself, a representative will be chosen for you and the arbitration will progress and you will be bound by that result. I personally couldn't give a shit about whatever agreement the pair of you have, you are both filling up my admin pages with your drama and if I can I'll end it here and now. Therefore, under the Arbitrations Guidelines that I have explained to you, the precedent you can read from past cases and the guidelines linked from this page; Will Umbrella represent themselves in this case aginst UBCS? -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 03:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::You aren't following, your 'agreement' with UBCS means precisely dick now. UBCS brought this case, it implies that they are unhappy with how the current arrangement is progressing. Therefore, as it has been brought, this is now an arbitration case, if you choose not to represent yourself, a representative will be chosen for you and the arbitration will progress and you will be bound by that result. I personally couldn't give a shit about whatever agreement the pair of you have, you are both filling up my admin pages with your drama and if I can I'll end it here and now. Therefore, under the Arbitrations Guidelines that I have explained to you, the precedent you can read from past cases and the guidelines linked from this page; Will Umbrella represent themselves in this case aginst UBCS? -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 03:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::: '''YOUR ADMIN PAGES''' ? Who died and put you in charge ? --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User talk:Hagnat|talk]] [[Special:Listusers/sysop|mod]]</sup> 03:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::They are mine as I'm a member of this community, they are my administration pages in place to allow maintenance and smooth progression of the community as much as they are any other community member's. Surely you are not suggesting that admin pages = power? For surely that would be the incorrect tack to take by a supposed ''trusted user'' who is supposed to know and serve the wishes of this community as expressed by their hard voted policy. No-one died and put me in charge, I wouldn't want to be 'in charge' as I understand that it is the wishes of the community that would be prevalent. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 03:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::: So ifr the community said STFU, Iscariot, you would? oh please... [[User:Conndraka|Conndraka]]<sup>[[Moderation|mod]] [[User_talk:Conndraka|T]][[AZM]] [[Coalition for Fair Tactics|''CFT'']]</sup> 03:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::Define community, give me a number. Because I will if you'll demote yourself if I can get the same number. Want to see who the community really supports? Without your DHPD zergs of course.... -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 03:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Leave it to Iscariot to start a fight with a sysop in a page that has nothing to do with anything.--{{User:SirArgo/Signature}} 03:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Me? You'll notice I point out to the users involved in this case the precedents regarding arbitration. It is a sysop that begins this confrontation, with no prior involvement in attempting to reduce the conflict in the community two sysops intentionally engage my comments to escalate the situation without providing aid to the case in hand. Who's acting in bad faith again? Given that, what's your interest here? Have you volunteered as arbitrator? Have you researched this conflict? Have you given your opinion on it to the participants? Have you tried to assist them by explaining the page statutes? No, you haven't. You are the person who I first encountered trying to unsuccessfully create drama for me regarding my signature. Your bias is clear, kindly clear these pages so that the users that this page is here for can resolve their conflict. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 03:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::I HAVE offered to be arbitrator and I DID research this conflict. I have read over the original case quite a few times. In fact, I urged in the creation of this arbitration case to avoid an edit war! See [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Talk:Umbrella_Biohazard_Containment_Service/Umbrella here]. Maybe if you had done '''YOUR''' research properly you would have seen that.
:::::::::And as for your signature once again I WOULD HAVE DONE THAT FOR ANYONE WHO WAS USING A BLINKING SIGNATURE> Until yours, I have never seen someone who had one! And as YOU admitted, it is just to piss people off.--{{User:SirArgo/Signature}} 03:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::{{Ohsnap}} --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User talk:Hagnat|talk]] [[Special:Listusers/sysop|mod]]</sup> 03:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::Anyone mind if I move the above to the talk page? It's irrelevant to the arbitration. {{User:Linkthewindow/Sig}} 04:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::Be my guest.--{{User:SirArgo/Signature}} 04:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Excuse me, I invite you to show me the exact edit where I state my signature is there ''"just to piss people off"''. This you have clearly claimed in an attempt to libel me and besmirch my image in this community. SHOW ME THE EDIT WHERE I SAY MY SIGNATURE IS THERE SOLELY TO ''"PISS PEOPLE OFF"''. You cannot, your attempt to distort the truth is obvious for all to see. The purpose of my signature is to advertise the [[Mall Tour 2009]] in the most effective way possible. There is no deep dark motive regardless of your baseless belief. You are attempting to libel not only myself, but also the group I advertise. In this you will fail, the community sees clearly. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 04:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Also I contest this being moved to the talk page as I can demonstrate through arbitration by a third party how this is relevant to the case in hand. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 04:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::::: How come you dicking around in the case is relevant to the case ? LOL. --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User talk:Hagnat|talk]] [[Special:Listusers/sysop|mod]]</sup> 04:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
::::::::: Its interesting that you throw around the term DHPD Zerg when the only issue of the DHPD ever zerging was about 7 mos before you supposedly started playing Urbandead. Now some things are starting to click with some past issues, And I'm beginning to think that there is something that we've been missing. A Hatred of the sysop team... Attacks of incompetence against the oldest members of the team... Sir... I beleive you may be a banned user. makes sense now to prove it. But not here. [[User:Conndraka|Conndraka]]<sup>[[Moderation|mod]] [[User_talk:Conndraka|T]][[AZM]] [[Coalition for Fair Tactics|''CFT'']]</sup> 04:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
:::::Oh shit Iscariot [[User_talk:SirArgo#My_Signature|What the fuck is this?]]. At the bottom you state "''...poor form, but nothing illegal or anything they can do about it"'' in regards to having a blinking signature. You basically said "it's not encouraged because it's annoying, but fuck them because it's not illegal!". And BTW, I am NOT bringing Mall Tour '09 down with you. I support THEM fully! So please, stop making these false accusation against me.--{{User:SirArgo/Signature}} 04:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
=Arbitration Cases in Progress=
=Arbitration Cases in Progress=
<!--
<!--

Revision as of 04:14, 11 January 2009

Template:Moderationnav

While the wiki community attempts to work on the basis of encouragement and cooperation, there are occasions where wiki users find themselves unable to reach accord. In the event of this happening, the Arbitration Team may be called upon to intervene, and attempt to find a reasonable compromise that, while perhaps not satisfying both parties, may at least assist in defusing the situation, thanks to the unbiased third party.

Guidelines for Arbitration Requests

In assisting in Arbitration, we generally suggest that both parties agree to the Arbitration. This is not, by any means, a requirement, but we do require that both parties be represented in proceedings.

Any Arbitration request should provide at least the following:

  • The aggrieved parties. Either person vs person, or [list of people] vs [list of people].
  • The reason for the arbitration. This should very specifically be without reference to people, as that information has already been provided. It should be a short paragraph indicating the causes of the aggrievement, and why both parties feel it requires arbitration
  • Any pages affected by the aggrievement. This should be a simple list of links.

Once the Arbitration commences, the Arbitrator will request statements from all parties involved. Any evidence to back up one's statement should be provided in link form. Each party will then have an opportunity to rebut their opponent's statement. After these two steps, the Arbitrator will then consider the case, and reach a conclusion, and determine the outcome that is required. It's the duty of the Arbitrator to move a case he accepted to a subpage of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration, and to update the status of the arbitration case in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.

As a note, by requesting an Arbitration, all parties are thus obliged to accept the outcome of the Arbitration. Not doing will be considered Vandalism, and such vandalism attempts will be treated as if the vandal has already received two warnings.

After the Arbitration is over, it will then be moved to an archive page. As publicly accessible pages, they may be used to establish precedent in further, applicable cases.

Current Arbitrators

For guidelines on how to arbitrate, see Arbitration Guidelines.

The following users have placed their hand up as users who are willing to be contacted to act as an Arbitrator. The role of Arbitrator is not restricted to the Administration Team; any user can be contacted as an Arbitrator and use this page for the arbitration, so long as both parties agree to the Arbitrator. Users who wish to place their hand up as an Arbitrator should place their name below on the list, using *{{usr|YourUserPage}}

Also note that not all listed Arbitrators are active on the Wiki.

Available Arbitrators in Alphabetical Order

Arbitration Cases Currently Under Consideration

Administration Notice
Use this header to create new arbitration cases. Once all sides have chosen an arbiter, move the case to a sub-page of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration and update its status in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.



Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service vs Umbrella Corporation

Involved Users Umbrella Biohazard Containment Service, Umbrella Corporation
Arbitrator undefined
Created 23:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC) by Haliman - Talk
Status Undefined
Summary Due to the increased hostility, vandalism, insults, spais, murder, etc. (anything bad, it's happened.) I have been told to go to Arbies. I will accept fair Arby.


Once again, I offer to arbitrate. I have a good knowledge of the happenings (both past and present) in this case and you both know me to be impartial. -- Cheese 23:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Accepted. I seemed vague in the request for this case, but you already know. This case will solve everything, right? Not just that one page? --Haliman - Talk 23:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hopefully, but both groups have to want this to make any resolution work. -- Cheese 23:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Ohhh....can't we another restraining order again or something..or deletion of both biased war reports.--Thadeous Oakley 23:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Wiki wise, the UBCS has done nothing to vandalize Umbrella's pages. We want the vandalism to stop. Trust me. --Haliman - Talk 23:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm here to represent UBCS too.--LithedarkangelMeth!The Great Meth Man 23:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Thadeous: We can do that as well, but if you want we can use this as a sort of mediation to get all your issues with each other sorted. Either way, would you be willing to accept me as arbitrator? -- Cheese 23:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
*goes to offline*
Thadeous has gone to sleep can I get an update on this arbitration, I have refused to read anything Haliman posts due to the dangerous raises in blood pressure it tends to cause me (sarcasm). Let me catch myself up and then we'll try and work an agreement.Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 00:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Now that I have a better understanding, I would rather just apologize for editing that particular wiki page. I don't have a history of malicious editing and the edit in its purpose wasn't malicious at all. I am still a wiki noob as I don't have a complete understand of the wiki coding, I assumed that that particular page was neutral when I edited it being that it was 'our' war. I am currently constructing our own page for this war so there should no longer be confusion by any members like Beau or myself. I am not really familiar with arbitration but if its going to do the same thing as it did with 'Umbrella' routing options than I don't think it could be a problem but I find it unnecessary. Oh and since my name is fixed could I have my toolbar back please?Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 00:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Would both groups be happy just to have a NPOV, mainspace (that is, owned by neither group,) page documenting the war? Linkthewindow  Talk  01:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Wouldn't that create a huge opportunity for an all-out edit war? I think that's what happening right now as well.--SirArgo Talk 01:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
As SirArgo said. That is a possibility, better not making it possible.--LithedarkangelMeth!The Great Meth Man 01:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Its fine the way it is now, I have finished our own page, and now that I have more knowledge of the wiki I don't think this should be an issue again. Sorry for the outburst earlier but you must see it from my ignorant point of view earlier. I don't think this Arbitration is necessary. Also can I have my toolbar back? Where do I go to ask for my toolbar?Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 03:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
What toolbar are you on about? =/ You've asked about it at least 4 or 5 times but you haven't clarified what or where it actually is. -- Cheese 17:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
The only toolbar in the wiki? The wiki toolbar that appears at the top of the selected page for editing. Contains things like the button that places your signature.Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 20:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Clikc on your preferences, edit, and then check to see if what I circled is checked or not.-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 20:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks man! I don't know how that got unchecked. Didn't even know that was possible.--Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 02:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
That only works when both sides are willing to put pettiness aside, and leave their bad blood on the battlefield... so, let the trenchy vs. trenchy propaganda war begin! and may the best group win look slightly less foolish in the end -- boxy talkteh rulz 07:12 10 January 2009 (BST)
And that's why I propose deletion of both the pages.--Thadeous Oakley 10:59, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Umm, no, Thadeous.Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 20:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

In case they're still trying to decide on an arbitrator I'll volunteer. I've gotten used to stress in my life, I'd miss it if there wasn't any all of a sudden. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 11:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Likewise I offer my services, apart from the lack of stress.--RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 11:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Likewise. Anyone getting Deja Vu here?-- Adward  18:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Fourthed. I'll arby if necessary. --Pestolence(talk) 21:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
If you would like it, I offer to arbitrate as well.--SirArgo Talk 21:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Well since we both have our own war "report" now can't we leave at that? I really don't feel anything for an arb case. Besides, cant we settle this at our forum under the same negotiation topic? There is no use in creating an in-game peace when this "wiki war" continues.--Thadeous Oakley 23:27, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd help, but you banned me. As for the reports, one public report would be better than two POV'd ones. --Haliman - Talk 23:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
You actually said: Screw negotiations on your forums! --LithedarkangelMeth!The Great Meth Man 00:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Right, UBCS requested this arbitration, accordingly the community assumes that they will participate and represent themselves. One question only is currently relevant, will Umbrella participate in this arbitration and represent themselves? This question requires a yes or no answer from Umbrella regarding their participation according to the statues set out in the arbitration precedents. -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 02:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok I am confused. Didn't the UBCS and Umbrella Corporation agree to disagree by having their own pages for this war, because I am pretty sure that's what I was trying to put across. No I am not thinking Arbi's, things are fine the way they are now and should be left at that.Umbrella-White.pngPresident JacksonUmbrella-White.png 02:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
You aren't following, your 'agreement' with UBCS means precisely dick now. UBCS brought this case, it implies that they are unhappy with how the current arrangement is progressing. Therefore, as it has been brought, this is now an arbitration case, if you choose not to represent yourself, a representative will be chosen for you and the arbitration will progress and you will be bound by that result. I personally couldn't give a shit about whatever agreement the pair of you have, you are both filling up my admin pages with your drama and if I can I'll end it here and now. Therefore, under the Arbitrations Guidelines that I have explained to you, the precedent you can read from past cases and the guidelines linked from this page; Will Umbrella represent themselves in this case aginst UBCS? -- To know the face of God is to know madness....Praise knowledge! Mischief! Mayhem! The Rogues Gallery!. <== DDR Approved Editor 03:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration Cases in Progress

Kristi of the Dead vs. Recruitment

Involved Users Kristi of the Dead, Recruitment
Arbitrator undefined
Created 01:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC) by Kristi of the Dead
Status Undefined
Summary n/a


St. Iscariot vs. Boxy

Involved Users Iscariot, Boxy
Arbitrator WanYao
Created 04:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC) by WanYao
Status Concluded.
Summary n/a


Archives