Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement

1959:(here on the RFAR) that I thought needed their actions examined. There may be more. This is not a two party dispute between Goethean and North8000, nor between Arzel and Goethean, or Malke 2010 and anyone, or even Arthur Rubin or North8000 and Xenophrenic, although one of them certainly called for Xenophrenic to be topic banned and he is involved in editing that article. In hindsight, I should have added his name to the case; not because I have seen anything in his actions to cause me to think sanctions are in order for him, but rather because he could give valuable evidence. Obviously it is not a dispute between North8000 and myself, since I have no dispute with him, and never did have any dispute with him (or any editor here, except long ago on far different articles.) There are at least a half dozen editors involved; I named the three I thought were causing the most serious issues. I concur that North8000 is the most serious problem at this time, and topic banning him would be helpful. It will not, however, resolve the entire problem. Should you choose that solution, I forsee many problems to come on TPM and other right-wing US political articles; anyone who gets a "pass" this time may well feel vindicated and justified in further battleground behavior. Well, I didn't mean to say so much, but dang, Anthony, I am really surprised anyone could read even just my first statement and somehow come away with the idea that it is a two party dispute. My communication skills must be going down the toilet with my health. 1769:(This is in response to Rexx's statement, but to the Arbs): I would prefer Arbcom accept this case; I think there have been serious problems with the behavior of some of those who have been active at TPM, and I also know the differences between community probation and ArbCom sanctions. Most of you know I enforced probation on Sarah Palin and now on Men's rights movement. It was done well; a much stronger consensus at ANI and a subpage with a chart to track who had been notified (not warned, we use notification) and a place to record sanctions. The TPM has no such page; but worse, it has no admins willing to babysit the article - until me, and you see what has happened here. I'm facing not just accusations of "involved" from the parties I've warned, there is an admin calling for me to be sanctioned for even trying to help on this toxic cesspit. On probation since 2010, I have found zero instances of anything being done about problems there. It's like the editnotice was added, and then things went on as before. If the article is under Arb probation, it can be seen at AE, which is always watched. In the past I have argued against that on some articles, but in this case, I think it might be warranted. I do think some of the editors on TPM should be looked at by Arbcom, but of course if you choose not to, please at least do pass a motion or two so other admins and myself can set up a better probation and enforce it. 2037:

thorough analysis (vs. the fact free mess that is occurring now) of what has occurred will show that I did ZERO wrong; if anything against me continues even an inch further I demand that thorough analysis. Any AN/ANI that is on a vague complaint (with contemplated sanctions) turns into fact-free disaster, and this one certainly has. POV warriors do not view POV warriors from the opposite side as their main targets. Persons who carefully, credibly and persistently work to bring the article to the neutral center are far harder to get rid of and the main threat to their POV agenda. A good way to spot fact-free ones is posts to the effect of "this just shows how bad North is" instead of "North did this: (insert specific)" I'm one of those and some of the most infamous of them (mostly not from this article) have showed up at the ANI with basis-free negative "assessments" of me as a part of their battle. And I am confident how any actual careful analysis (with the best hope of achieving that being Arbcom) will end up. However, beyond that, here is is where the clarity is needed.

3076:

enforced sanction is needed. I am hesitant to turn too quickly toward ArbCom, as I feel that each time a community resolvable situation is given up to ArbCom, the community loses some of the belief that the community can resolve issues. While some members of the community still believe that the problem can be resolved without ArbCom, I will support and applaud and encourage that - in the same way that I want to support and applaud and encourage admins like KillerChihuahua who attempt to resolve problems. We are a collaborative community who have together formed our rules and procedures, and we have created a community to be proud of. Working collaboratively we have created this encyclopedia, and we handle on a day to day basis complex issues. Let's hold our heads up, and let's not lose faith in ourselves. Certainly we need a body for truly intractable issues, or simply where the community have exhausted attempts at resolution. I'm not sure, yet, though, that the community are exhausted, and I for one am willing to wait. ArbCom will be here if needed. But I'd rather not rush into that yet.

2902:

we can issue sanctions which are then enforced by the community - which would mean someone who takes an interest in the case, the user, or in the topic, or who, as part of their volunteer work, are willing to keep an eye on ArbCom sanctions and enforce them as required. I would feel a little uncomfortable about not utilising sanctions because of a concern that such sanctions would overburden those who have volunteered to enforce them - that would then limit what options are available to us: we would be limited to either ban, warn or decline. Sanctions are an important part of what ArbCom does. If there is a concern that sanctions are now getting difficult to enforce, perhaps we can have a RfC on this to find a way of making it less burdensome. I'm not sure that it should influence our decision in how to deal with this particular case request. I think we should keep active all options until the matter has been more thoroughly discussed.

3029:. As community sanctions are listed on the same page as ArbCom sanctions, I'd be interested to hear what in effect would be the difference between the community imposing further sanctions and ArbCom doing it. Whichever way it goes, somebody will have to make an assessment and then carry out the appropriate sanction. If the concern is that existing community sanctions are not working on this topic because some individuals are not respecting that and/or because the situation is more complex than can be decided under pressure, but that making them ArbCom sanctions would simply be shifting the problem to another group of individuals who would also be unable to make the appropriate assessments, are the Committee being pushed in the direction of handing out topic/site bans - either now by gut-instinct motion, or in three months time after examining the contribution history of that Cecil B. DeMille cast list? 1616:, I'm not in a dispute. I'm an uninvolved admin sending up a flare. The issue is one of several editors exhibiting severe battleground behavior, and making the TPM article too toxic for others to edit. The article is under community probation, but that hasn't worked at all. I think the behavior of Arzel, Malke 2010, and especially North8000 need examination; I believe they are holding the article hostage to their views and attacking and accusing anyone with whom they disagree. Goethean asked me to take a look; I tried to caution and warn the editors who were exhibiting the poor behavior but the reaction was so hostile and accusatory that I took it to ANI, where it got even worse. They reject any editors and any sources which do not promote the Tea Party movement, to the point that the New York Times and MSNBC were dismissed as non-RS - rather snidely, too - by Arzel and Malke 2010. 2230:

several others could tell you, we had a far more collegial atmosphere in comparison. Once the aforementioned editors appeared, sometime in the fall of 2010, things changed dramatically. A few editors left immediately as the atmosphere was stiffled by the presence of a dominating administrator who made changes at will with virtually no discussion. I could not see the point in continuing especially after some of the encounters with Dylan Flaherty on my talk page that went beyond the pale to the point where he was banned from my talk page (but not blocked which seemed very unfair to me at the time.) In the end, it was more baggage than seemed reasonable to be carrying for a voluntary editor. And since then I've restricted myself to random edits and writing and editing legal articles.

2058:

continues even an inch further I demand that thorough analysis. KillerChihuahua, without basis, quickly dismissed the validity of the TE concern (the review which was ostensibly the reason Goethean was soliciting people) got into a battling mentality, incorrectly used their imprimatur in their battle, and baselessy escalated it into the shit-storm. With Geothean (via soliciting) probably being the largest in the other 2% involvement. So the list is flawed. And the idea of having one of the two involved disputants formulate it is also not a good idea, although I commend KC for closing the ani and bringing it here. Possibly a mediation between the two of us would be even a better idea. (but it looks like it may be over now)

1889:: I don't see how this is an improvement over your earlier assertions. I not only haven't misinterpreted or misunderstood consensus, I haven't said anything about content at all, let alone about consensus. And your shift from calling for me to be topic banned for misunderstanding some unspecified policy, to calling for me to be topic banned for supposedly misunderstanding some unstated consensus (when I've said nothing about such a thing) is still calling for me to be topic banned for an alleged misunderstanding. This is absurd. You have no diffs, because there was no such comment, whether accurate or a misunderstanding; and your call for a topic ban is not only baseless, it wouldn't even hold water if I 2303:

Beback, and the other admins would not reign him in. Will Beback really unsettled that page, as did his co-editor Dylan Flaherty. It was after Dylan started editing warring, and full disclosure everybody there did some of that including me, that the page got put on probation. Dylan is the one who really got things rolling in that direction with the page getting locked several times. After the article got put on probation, it got ignored by the admins because Will Beback was there. If ArbCom had been in control of things, all that disruption would not have happened, and I really believe editors would have settled down and focused on really establishing a collegial talk page to sort things out.

1955:, and/or feel free to ask questions. I will illuminate as much as I am able, but I thought I had made it very clear that it is a complex situation, and I brought this here because I think ArbCom is the right venue due to the complexity. If it had been North8000 alone, I would probably have started an ANI thread titled "Proposed topic ban for North8000" and done with it, or simply blocked him myself and gone on blocking him repeatedly until he either learned to edit collegially or wound up indeffed by default. I did not; I titled the thread "Tea Party movement, looking for community input" because it is several editors, not two. I in fact named the 2295:- You make an excellent point. The TPM talk page revolves around content disputes that fall along idealogical lines. I can go back and find diffs for you to arguments but as a quick example, one side wanted to show that the TPM came about as a 'response' to the election of Obama, while the other side claimed it was grassroots and all about the money. Arguments over petty, silly 'news' items such as an incident in Maryland where a man claimed his outdoor barbecue grill was sabotaged by tea party members because he was an Obama supporter. Xenophrenic fought like crazy for that and anytime it got deleted, he put it right back. 2713:. I've waited a week rather than a day, but I don't see much progress being made. My instinct is that this case might wind up being resolved as some people have already predicted, but except in the clearest situations, I'd prefer to open a case to examine the evidence rather than adopt a remedy based on my instincts. If the case is accepted, all parties are reminded that the focus will be on user misconduct and what remedies would best assist out goal of creating a reliable, neutral encyclopeida, and not on the underlying real-world political disputes. 3409:. The community sanction states that on this article, "no editor may make more than one (1) revert on the same content per twenty-four (24) hour period". Concerns about the length and quality of the article, as well as debate about wording and content, have been raised on the talkpage since 2010, and discussions now fill 21 archives. Reverts regularly take place, creating a slow-moving edit-war that may meet the wording of the community sanction, but not its spirit. The article is currently fully protected. 2825:

articles under discretionary sanctions? Outside of AE, I am aware that if a matter is complex enough to require time to consider, that an article is locked down until the matter is resolved. I am not an AE admin so these are genuine questions - if it is felt that AE admins are operating in a restricted manner compared to non-AE admins, I think it's something we should be seriously looking into, because we would want to be enabling AE admins rather than restricting them, or over-burdening them.

3035:

counter to the Knowledge spirit, and erodes the project. It is a wearisome, unpleasant and thankless task resolving conflicts - those of us who attempt it do get tired of it. We need to support those who still have the energy, interest and dedication to help resolve problems - otherwise, as with AE admins burning out because they are being asked to deal with too many sanctions, so we'll see dispute resolution volunteers giving up, and then the warriors will take over the encyclopedia.

2843:

of text, most of which are of questionable relevance, but all of which have to be read. As a result, you'll get very, very few admins who would be willing to look at it. Moreover, it's really a massive undertaking to review a lengthy and bitter dispute with dozens of diffs as a single admin, well beyond what we could reasonably expect from our administrators. I tried doing it once, and it was not pretty at all; the second time an equally massive thread in the topic area popped up, we

180: 2070:

article is a total disaster" too many times.) But I consider even that to be an effect, not a cause. But for the root cause this article is merely a poster child. It is flaws in policies and the system that been the ultimate cause of practically ALL of Knowledge's articles on contentious topics being unstable, strife-ridden junky articles. Any findings that would come out of tackling this one as a "poster child" would do immense good for Knowledge.

2729:@KC: When this was brought up on the mailing list last night, I wrote, "We could probably write the proposed decision for such a case now: discretionary sanctions, ban, ban, topic ban, topic ban, admonishment." Do you think that ArbCom replacing community article probation with discretionary sanctions for the area by motion would be a helpful step? That would allow the case to return to ArbCom for closer inspection only if it fails. 2211:

comments seemed biased towards Goethean which only made things worse with Arzel then commenting. I think North8000 reacted the way he did, and Arzel then commented as well, because KillerChihuahua seemed to them and myself, too, to be excusing Goethean’s last comment to me which was the one North8000 was reacting to. (Here is the diff with both Goethean's comment to me, my response to him, and North8000s comment:

4511:(where a consensus of uninvolved administrators will determine the result of the appeal), or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks shall be logged in the appropriate section of the main case page. As an alternative to blocking under this paragraph, the uninvolved administrator may impose a discretionary sanction, which shall be in addition to any sanction imposed in this decision. 1597:. So far, there have been multiple views on a number of editors, several editors have added to the "Proposed topic ban" lists (several with no evidence at all), and including North8000 calling for my desysopping, and Arthur Rubin calling for me being topic banned for BATTLE because I brought the issue to ANI. I think this one is going to to take an ArbCom case to make any headway. 4639:

such enforcement action is pending on 01 January 2015, the remedies will become formally vacated only if the appeal is successful. If enforcement action is taken and an appeal is rejected, the remedies shall become unsuspended and a request for their amendment may not be re-submitted to the committee until six months have elapsed from the passage of this motion.

2113:

action against any individual, just pointing out what has been happening at the article that can tend to reduce those problems. Oh wait!......that's me, and that's what I did.....so conservatively that I took two years to make sure (and I bet it will be the best thing that happened to that article in years) .......and look what happened. What a great system.

3026: 2163:"It is written as an opinion of the writer. Who says that this writer gets to define the Tea Party? Why doesn't it belong in the media section? It is formed from a media outlet, what makes the NYT special in this regard? Why not include ALL of the media opinions in the definition? Arzel (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)" 2978:. Nothing I've read since this request has been filed convinces me that further community review is likely to lead to a tempering of this dispute, nor do I think the community can easily tackle this dispute (without the investment of a disproportionate amount of editorial time). My original comments on this request are 1976:, thanks in advance for your patience here. I didn't expect to have to provide evidence until and unless the case were accepted. I am digging through diffs, but before I finish, is this covering the behavior of the editors on US politics as I originally listed the case or am I confined to Tea Party movement only? - 2091:@KC you may be half right, so I should clarify. The TPM article was and is just chugging along in its usual normal sad state. IMO your ANI post was a volley as a result of a dispute between you and me which then picked up a life of its own as a mindless fact-free shit storm. The dispute is mostly right here 3580:; others were made with no attempt to engage in the wider community effort to rewrite the article or to hold a meaningful discussion on the talk page of the movement agenda. Goethean has also engaged in protracted reverting in order to retain sections of the article that reflect negatively on the movement ( 3025:, though I suspect, as someone has hinted above, that when a problem is referred to ArbCom, the community might lose interest and motivation in attempting to resolve it. I'm interested to see that, as well as topic bans being proposed for what appears to be the cast list for a Cecil B. DeMille film, that 4559:

case is suspended for the period of one year from the date of passage of this motion. During the period of suspension, any uninvolved administrator may as an arbitration enforcement action reinstate the topic ban for failure to follow Knowledge's standards of conduct in the area previously covered by

3341:

states: "Involvement is generally construed very broadly by the community, to include current or past conflicts with an editor (or editors), and disputes on topics, regardless of the nature, age, or outcome of the dispute." Administrators are responsible for assessing for themselves the nature of any

3305:

6) The purpose of a talk page is to provide a location for editors to discuss changes to the associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject. Editors should strive to use talk pages effectively and must not misuse

3034:

I am concerned at the response to KillerChihuahua's attempt to sort out a problem, and, whatever else comes out of this, I'd like to see that users who respond inappropriately to reasonable attempts by uninvolved volunteers (admins or otherwise) to resolve problems are reminded that such behaviour is

2403:

specific edits, my impression is that there is an effort to add anything negative about any person connected to any organization in the TPm, whether or not relevant, even to the person. I've made some effort to remove material I consider undue, from unreliable sources (until I see consensus that the

2306:

As it is now, it is mired in incivility and obstruction. And there are editors there now whose behavior is just on the edge of true consequences for the things they say and do. They dance right on the edge of 3RR and personal attacks. And that behavior is the source of the obstructionism. And when an

2074:

BTW, in case anybody is wondering, my RW politics is libertarian, not conservative, and which is in conflict with conservationism on about 1/2 of issues. More importantly, that is irrelevant; we check those hats at the door when we edit wikipedia. A careful review of my discussion at the TPM article

2036:

There is an important lack of clarity and important flaws in the listing of participants in the formation of this, but if the current fact-free shit-storm at ani were to go even one inch further it should go to Arbcom (or possibly to mediation). (So "kill it all immediately" is also a good choice.) A

1736:

Comment: While I sympathise with those who wish to leave this at ANI, in the short time between posting there and filing here, there have been calls to topic ban 9 editors, a call to desysop me, several editors calling for the issue to be sent to ArbCom, 7 supports and 5 opposes (one of them mine) to

1562:(my first ever edit there) and advised the accusing editor, North8000, to either provide diffs, or cease the accusations (basically put up or shut up.) Then I added the TPM article to my watchlist. Less than a week later North8000 was making uncivil comments and personal attacks on article talk page. 3261:

4) Disagreements concerning article content are to be resolved by seeking to build consensus through the use of polite discussion – involving the wider community, if necessary. The dispute resolution process is designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication has not worked.

3221:

2) All Knowledge articles must be written from a neutral point of view, with all relevant points of view represented in reasonable proportion to their importance and relevance to the subject-matter of the article. Undue weight should not be given to aspects which are peripheral to the topic. Relying

3001:

I'd prefer to keep this case narrow in scope, and have us only examine the Tea Party movement. Omnibus cases are difficult to resolve and more difficult to conduct; and a case concerning "U.S. politics" would so broad in scope that it'd certainly be an "omnibus" case. I suggest to my colleagues that

2865:

On the other hand, we are supposed to let the Community handle things if we can. I'm still inclined to give discretionary sanctions a shot and if it doesn't work, we can take on a case then. Sandstein's idea seems like an interesting one. I've thought about it before, and I can see it working if the

2842:

Well, it's not built in, but 1) like most sanctions of the non-arbcom variety, people tend to bring up the "preventative not punitive" mantra if the sanction is separated from the misconduct for too long, and 2) if you let an AE thread drag on for too long, it tends to get filled with assorted walls

2661:

be ultimately responsible for a decision; this is not fair to either those whose behaviour is reviewed nor to the few administrators who are willing to carry out AE. Community sanctions have already been tried; are they sufficient? Are they working at all? If not, I am inclined to accept this case.

2229:

I don’t edit the Tea Party Movement anymore. Specifically, I became disenchanted after numerous run-ins with Will Beback and Dylan Flaherty, both now banned from editing Knowledge. If the page is in a sad state now, it wasn’t always like that. As Xenophrenic, who was editing back in 2010 with me and

2221:

And so my comment came in the context of defending North8000 for what I perceived to be a lack of fairness, but certainly not meat puppetry. As it turned out, KillerChihuahua and North8000 had already had an exchange on his talk page. She never came to my talk page with any concerns of meat puppetry

2057:

and the solicitation thread at KC's talk page another 5% of it. Another 5% would be analysis of the (lack of) any specific basis for opening the ANI thread. A thorough analysis (vs. the fact free mess that is occurring now) of what has occurred will show that I did ZERO wrong; if anything against me

2901:

I don't think discretionary sanctions is passing the issue back to the community, I think it's the Committee's attempt at reaching a solution. There is a limit to what the Committee can do. We can return the issue back to the community/decline; we can ban; we can give warnings of various sorts; and

2660:

Thanks to those who ensured the necessary links were present and clear. I agree with my colleague Timotheus that simply shuttling this off to discretionary sanctions and arbitration enforcement is simply shifting the burden from a committee of 15 to a tiny handful of admins, of which only one would

2298:

You can ban all the the editors there right now and a new group will come in and do the same. I like your analogy to the school teacher keeping the students focused on the work. This is why I believe ArbCom control of the article like it has over The Troubles articles, will turn that page around. I

2233:

I think North8000 was simply frustrated, being a more conservative editor, by the other-side-of-the-aisle bias that exists on Knowledge. He was looking for KillerChihuahua to acknowledge that Goethean had made an uncivil comment but instead she defended it. Fireworks ensued. If I've offended her or

2206:

Nor did I question the NYTs as a reliable source. My comment about the MSNBC and the NYTs was based on the objection to the NYTs opinion piece. In the past, I have always relied on the news coverage by the NYTs because they have very strict fact checking and they are reliable. But the opinion pages

2159:

My part in this endevour began because an editor added to the TPM agenda the agenda/defintion from the point of view of a person outside of the movement. I simply moved that sentence to later in the section with the reasoning that the movement should define itself first. I then made the following

4565:

The following restriction is enacted: Arthur Rubin is restricted indefinitely to one revert per page per week in the area of the Tea Party movement. Enforcement of this restriction shall be per the enforcement provisions in the Tea Party movement case and any enforcement actions shall be logged at

2824:

Is haste built into AE decisions, or can the admins there decide to take more time to consider a matter? I am aware that outside of AE if a matter is considered serious and complex enough, a RfC is initiated, and those typically take 30 days. Is the haste because of potential ongoing disruption to

2774:

One of the things I criticized as an AE admin is the Committee's relatively recent tendency to slap discretionary sanctions on a topic and call it a day, leaving the bulk of the work of actually figuring out who's deserving of sanctions to the less-well-equipped AE admins. It would be hypocritical

2210:

As to my comment that KillerChihuahua refers to, when I read the exchange between North8000 and KillerChihuahua, it came across to me that KC wasn’t listening to North8000. While I felt KillerChihuahua made some good points, it seemed to me that the two of them were winding each other up. And her

2069:

The most productive thing for Arb Com to take up is the overall intractable mess and strife at that article. The inevitable proximate finding will be that Xenophrenic primarily and Geothean secondarilyy have dominated the article via TE and prevented its Wikification. (And maybe that I said "this

4638:

of uninvolved administrators. If no such enforcement action is taken (or all such actions are taken and successfully appealed) by 01 January 2015, on that date the remedies will become formally vacated by this motion, and the case pages then amended by the clerks in the usual way. If an appeal of

2217:

That made KillerChihuahua seem not uninvolved as she was claiming, but rather very much involved. And I reacted to what seemed to me to be unfair advantage for Goethean. I’ve been on Knowledge long enough to know accusing someone of meat puppetry is not welcome and certainly never tell that to an

2112:

On of the few things that can / would help on articles that have long term difficulties (until we can fix the policies the enable those problems) is for a person to objectively make an extensive long term analysis and form conclusions. If an issue is spotted, but not where it merits disciplinary

2063:

If we are talking about the tussles at the article in recent times, (e.g. 1-2 years) the list is also malformed. Malke (who has been absent for a long time) should not be on it. And Xenophreninc, who has, by a lion's share, been the most involved should be on it. And KillerChihuahua was not

3285:

of Knowledge and must be adhered to, through the use of reliable sources. Different types of sources (e.g. academic sources and news sources), as well as individual sources, need to be evaluated on their own merits. Differentiation between sources that meet the standard (e.g. different academic

3075:

CartoonDiablo, I'm not sure where it would be "better" to comment, nor am I sure whose solution would be "better" - there are people who believe that only ArbCom can solve this situation because some users have ignored an admin attempting to remind them of a community sanction, and so an ArbCom

2411:

I'll supply some diffs, later, if there is anything potentially indicating I've done something wrong other than stating that KC has misinterpreted policies, guidelines, and individual edits, and suggesting, at ANI, a topic ban at ANI, only because there is as much evidence for one against KC as

2302:

These are my recollections since I've not been editing there in a long time as an active editor and I've not gone back to sort the archives but as I recall, the problem with the Tea Party Movement is that it was put on probation and then ignored by admins. There was an admin editing there, Will

3245:

3) Knowledge users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, harassment, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system, is prohibited. Making unsupported

2188:

The AN/I case has been reopened. The AN/I thread was less than 24 hours old and I'd like to see it continue before coming here. I think posting here right now is premature. If the situation changes and this is the venue then I will come back and make a statement and include whatever diffs are

2095:

and speaks for itself. Since as it shows I had already repeatedly disengaged, and it takes at least one to have a dispute, if you say that there is not currently a dispute between us then there no longer is one. So all that's left is the fact-free basis-free shitstorm which arose from it.

3357:

10.2) Wider community participation in dispute resolution can help resolve disputes; however, care should be taken by everyone to remain neutral and to carefully examine the issues in good faith to avoid further inflaming the dispute. Calls for sanctions should be based on quality evidence.

4560:

the ban. Such reinstatement may be appealed via the normal appeals process for arbitration enforcement actions. At one year from the date of passage of this motion, if the ban has not been reinstated or any reinstatements were successfully appealed, the topic ban will be lifted permanently.

2336:

has been to help ensure accuracy, neutrality and the use of reliable sources. There were lots of edit wars and battleground tactics at the article before I arrived, during the time that I edited the article, and edit wars have continued after I disengaged from the article a few days ago.

4506:

1) 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. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to

2352:

a reference to a 2007 Ron Paul rally as the origin of the Tea Party Movement. No sources have been offered which explicitly connect that rally to the Tea Party Movement, which is generally thought to have originated in 2009. Arthur Rubin, who very often takes the side of User:North8000,

2504:. Most of the other editors named are on the edge of the matter (on the TPm, anyway), and have few, if any, violations. I do apologize for saying KC should be banned from the subject; it's clear she doesn't understand what's happening, but that is not a reason for a topic ban. — 2429:

by a number of editors, and possibly misinterpreted consensus as not to note that thee two editors North8000 mentioned, as well as others, were edit warring against consensus in a couple cases (although, in the Ron Paul case, they seem to be correct, but for the wrong reason). —

2886:

Discretionary sanctions has nothing to do with the Community. It is, and has always been, a Committee process. Simply passing discretionary sanctions does nothing to return the dispute to the community; it merely shifts the actual, hard work to the few admins working at AE.

2390:

I quite agree with all parties that the article is in sad shape. However, it appears there is significant disagreement as to which parts are inappropriate or inadequately covered, but, until recently, discussions have generally been civil. I see few, if any, violations of

1652: 3466:. Also during the discussion, North8000 proposed that KillerChihuahua should be desysopped. Although some of these suggestions received much more support than others, there was no clear consensus as to how to proceed, and the matter was accepted for arbitration. 2129:

If this gets accepted, step 1 should be a thorough analysis, then a discussion, and then decisions. I am seeing comments here which are trying to skip the earlier steps and guess at or imply the final steps, which defeats the purpose of the Arbcom process.

4746:

Any block, restriction, ban, or sanction performed under the authorisation of a remedy for this case must be logged in this section. Please specify the administrator, date and time, nature of sanction, and basis or context. Unless otherwise specified, the

2585: 2153:

They reject any editors and any sources which do not promote the Tea Party movement, to the point that the New York Times and MSNBC were dismissed as non-RS - rather snidely, too - by Arzel and Malke 2010. KillerChihuahua 06:16, 25 February 2013

3449: 3321:

7) Users who disrupt the editing of articles by engaging in sustained aggressive point-of-view editing may be banned from the affected articles, or in extreme cases from the site, either by community consensus or by the Arbitration Committee.

3022: 2973:

I've been researching the dispute at greater length, and I don't think I can stand by my earlier reading of this as a low-level dispute. This dispute has been raging for quite some time, and the imposition of community-based general sanctions

2958: 1594: 1463: 3401:. The topic is sensitive, high-profile, and attracts polarising views. Editing of the article has been problematic from the start including a combination of vandal edits, edit-warring, and concerns about POV. In November 2010, there was an 1908:

adding: you need to stop making noise about the ANI subpage, it is only evidence you didn't bother to read my opening statement here, where I said it was at a sub-page and gave the link. I also left a link here on Talk:Tea party movement.

2225:

I felt the AN/I was premature as cooler heads could have prevailed. North8000 is not an unreasonable editor and I’m certain that had they both just stopped commenting, things would have picked up on a far better note the following day.

2492:@Followup. I'm afraid I over-reacted. Still, I don't see how an unbiased analysis could produce any conclusion but that Goethean sometimes "discussed" policy, but was never willing to follow it unless it agreed with his attempts to 4723:). Recognizing North8000's productive contributions and renewed voluntary commitments, the restrictions are suspended for one year, during which time the restrictions may be re-imposed (individually or entirely) upon request to 1657:"A complete topic ban, including a ban on discussion, administrative actions, and discussion of adminstrative actions. Your bringing this "report" here reflects a battlefield mentality which would best be removed from Knowledge. 4566:

the same case page. This restriction may be appealed after no less than one year from the date of passage of this motion, and if unsuccessful no less than one year following the decline of that or any subsequent appeal.

3631: 1585:

in order to enable Goethean to bully people - the exact phrasing was "you're here at the behest of goethean who apparently wants to bully editors he doesn't agree with. You, like goethean are failing to assume good

4526:

2) Should any editor subject to a discretionary sanction under this decision violate the terms of the sanction, then further sanctions may be imposed as appropriate pursuant to the discretionary sanction remedy.

2616: 3286:

viewpoints, all of which are peer reviewed) is a matter for consensus among editors. When there is disagreement or uncertainty about the reliability of particular sources, editors are encouraged to use the

92: 2010:

et al; I have no problem if you wish to focus on the TPM; however I will almost certainly be submitting evidence from other articles to illustrate more clearly the battleground approach of those editors.

2404:

sources are reliable), misquoted, or irrelevant. As for the NYT and MSNBC being "unreliable", I would like to see specific diffs, but at least one of the NYT references was to an editorial, which is

2979: 87: 2957:

in some form. I'm not exactly against the idea of just turning the DS knob and seeing what needs doing in three months, but something, and I'd slightly lean towards that being a case (shunting

1752: 1993:

I was digging through history and think I erred and left out an editor who should have been included in the Involved parties - what is the correct approach to add an editor? Thanks in advance.

2324:

As I recall, it may have been derailed by Dylan in the final stages. My point though is that these same editors are able to work together on this page, and civily, if there is some oversight.

3635: 697: 81: 70: 3873: 2376:

interested in discovering whether I had violated policy, and I figured that two admins who had no connection to the article would be the best people to help me answer that question. —

3246:

accusations of such misconduct by other editors, particularly where this is done repeatedly or in a bad-faith attempt to gain an advantage in a content dispute, is also unacceptable.

2945: 1720:

You might want to note the final line in the editnotice, that "Violations can be reported at WP:ANI. " - which is precisely what Arthur Rubin wants to sanction me for, oddly enough.

3716: 2975: 1677: 1540: 944: 2896: 2881: 2020: 2002: 1985: 1968: 1865: 1842: 1828: 1809: 1795: 1778: 1764: 1746: 1729: 1715: 1668: 1643: 3117: 2784: 2767: 2462:@Question: There are comments on the Arbitrator section proposing suspending any sanctions until there is progress at ANI. I can't find the ANI section. I also can't find, in 3639: 1631: 76: 65: 2744: 4631:) that, in the enforcing administrator's judgement, would have been considered disruptive for some other reason than that they breached the remedy had it not been suspended. 4548: 2914: 2860: 2837: 2819: 2805: 2639: 2486: 2437: 3262:

When there is a good-faith dispute, editors are expected to participate in the consensus-building process and to carefully consider other editors' views, rather than simply

2705: 2299:

could be naive about this, but I've edited a bit on The Troubles and things got sorted out between editors and without the incivility that occurs now on the TPM talk page.

3162:

until further notice. The Committee will reconvene on 1 July 2013 to determine if the conflict has been resolved; and if not, what further steps the Committee should take.

3134: 2965: 2722: 4791: 401: 4748: 3050: 1939: 1918: 1881: 4754: 3342:

possible involvement, and to ensure they are not being influenced by prior personal interactions with any of the editors or personal views regarding the subject-matter.

59: 3223: 2655: 1625: 1489: 624: 438: 270: 3088: 3070: 1786:, I do think replacing the community probation with standard discretionary sanctions would be helpful. I also think your "ban, topic ban, admonish" would be helpful. 1552: 2992: 3942:

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.

2166:

I would ask that KC provide a link where I said that the NYT and MSNBC were non-RS. I did not remove the information, and I am getting a little sick of this crap.

2307:

admin shows up, what is he to do? Even if he can see the editor is sailing close to the wind, all he can say to the other editor is, "I can't find any violation."

2687: 2670: 2511: 2473: 2457: 2419: 1852:

seems to be very adamant that this is a dispute between the two of us. There is no dispute between us, but that aside - if that is his view, then he is saying he

4587: 3962: 3677: 3159: 2597: 1559:, but as you can see by following the link, I got reams of vague accusations but not a single diff. I hatted the accusatory accusations on the article talk page 203: 2321:

Here is an example of cooperation and positive comments despite Dylan Flaherty. This is also with the help of the mediation cabal, which I believe I suggested.

3206:

1) The purpose of Knowledge is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopaedia in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among the contributors.

4656: 4645: 4266: 4257: 4187: 4177: 3493:

where several different editors revert the same material, so while no single editor is reverting more than once, the combined effort results in an edit war.

2243: 2198: 559: 3486: 3432:

was in line with policy. KillerChihuahua advised that the matter should be dealt with in a low-key fashion, offering to discuss it with North8000. Following

432: 4741: 4435:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 4361:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 4305:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 4122:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 4033:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 3012: 2141: 2124: 2107: 2086: 4160:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 4071:, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed to the Arbitration Committee after no less than six months have passed from the closing of this case. 2380: 1703: 2623: 1819:, this is a behavioral issue. Mediation is for content disputes. Mediation does not handle NPA, TE, and so on. There is nothing to mediate in this case. 3306:

them through practices such as excessive repetition, monopolization, irrelevancy, advocacy, misrepresentation of others' comments, or personal attacks.

2810:

They do not have the luxury of time. We have months in which we can systematically review someone's conduct. A thread at AE generally lasts a few days.

2479:

I see the subpage of ANI is still there, but not linked. Discussion is still occurring there, but, I don't know if all the parties are aware of it. —

4668: 2620: 1589:

There have been repeated instances of BATTLE and NPA from North8000, Azrel, and Malke 2010. The environment is toxic. I took this situation to ANI (as

3606: 4101: 2235: 2190: 801: 396: 2500:

from time to time, but among those active recently, only G was unwilling to follow consensus once established. I have doubts about North8000 being

2178: 3630:

6) One of Malke 2010's focuses on Knowledge has been modern American politics. In this topic area, he has treated Knowledge as a battleground (see

2851:

responsibility to resolve intractable user conduct disputes, not say "hey admins, here's some shiny new tools, now go resolve the dispute for us".

1800:

You could also follow RexxS's suggested course of action. The current probation is set up wrong, but I can fix it, I do have experience with that.

1016: 609: 428: 224: 216: 3463: 3460: 3457: 3453: 2579: 1474: 1447: 1390: 1333: 1276: 1219: 1162: 1105: 1048: 3476: 3038:

If the community discussion doesn't go anywhere, then I think we need to take this case and look carefully at the conduct of a number of people.

1872:

Mr Chihuahua brought me my tablet. I may not be fast to respond (I am still in the hospital and they're still doing tests) but I do have access.

4733: 4082: 579: 3429: 3996: 3958: 2548: 569: 3608: 2214:. As I made clear on the AN, I'm not defending North8000s reply. I thought the exchange was over and was not at all happy with his comment.) 1853: 1695: 370: 4720: 4542: 2385: 3428:

that Xenophrenic and Goethean were editing tendentiously in favour of their point of view. Goethean asked administrator KillerChihuahua to

3151: 1952: 1187: 3577: 2322: 603: 597: 220: 4445: 390: 235: 213: 2183: 632: 471: 423: 361: 280: 208: 2031: 4475: 4424: 3727: 3705: 1951:

a two party dispute, I'm not even sure who you think the parties are. Please re-read the statement I have given, and the ANI subpage

1566: 1556: 1301: 1010: 386: 3266:

back-and-forth between competing versions. Sustained editorial conflict is not an appropriate method of resolving content disputes.

2327: 4199: 1480:

Note: I've never filed an ArbCom case before so if I screw up, it's purely accidental - just let me know and I'll fix it, thanks -

1073: 968: 497: 366: 4521: 3638:). Malke 2010 has sought to disinclude sources authored by academics on the grounds that their research is flawed (see generally 2092: 2050: 818: 591: 376: 356: 239: 3490: 4690: 3541: 3536: 3172: 2169:

Additionally, I fail to see how questioning whether the actual movement should have first say in their agenda is problematic.

1513: 1508: 722: 381: 294: 275: 4483: 4238: 3002:

problematic editing on pages will only be arbitrated if they are brought to us as part of a separate request for arbitration.

2146: 344: 3708:) has attempted to block the inclusion of a peer-reviewed publication because he disagrees with the publication's conclusion. 3545: 1517: 1181: 866: 661: 415: 306: 3406: 4806: 3145: 2586: 1587: 1415: 1358: 1244: 628: 339: 4537: 3781: 3425: 2534:

Timotheus Canens' vote takes the tally to a net four to accept, and starts the 24 hour minimum clock to opening a case. —

2372:

article several years ago ('05 - '06), and with whom I have had very little contact since. I contacted them because I was

2354: 2348:

of tendentious editing. The reason that User:North8000 provided as evidence of my (alleged) tendentious editing is that I

2341: 2212: 2204: 3528: 1500: 1130: 673: 265: 194: 25: 4501: 3875:), and contributed to hostility at pages relating to the Tea Party movement article by making assumptions of bad faith ( 3775: 3445: 3437: 1833:

If I thought there was a snowballs chance in hell of mediation solving the issues at this article, I would not be here.

1582: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1563: 1560: 4772: 4294: 3368: 1688: 1295: 908: 770: 691: 679: 3709: 1634:

total edits to the article talk page; Feb 19, 23, 24; all in my capacity as an uninvolved admin. None to the article.

623:

as needed, but the other content of this page should not be edited. Please raise any questions about this decision at

141: 4628: 4593: 4216: 4149: 3977: 3762: 3611: 3140: 1067: 1034: 962: 667: 3402: 2049:

The article was and is chugging along in its average state of going nowhere. A look at two threads on my talk page (

4408: 4111: 3923: 3920: 3917: 3914: 3882: 3879: 3876: 3841: 3838: 3835: 3832: 3829: 3797: 3794: 3791: 3788: 3778: 3772: 3769: 3766: 3614: 3584: 3581: 3571: 3568: 3448:

that KillerChihuahua was involved in the dispute and siding with Goethean. KillerChihuahua then took the matter to

2590: 2314: 2286: 2281: 2276: 2271: 2266: 2261: 2256: 2251: 1040: 920: 812: 685: 3765:) has consistently failed to obey Knowledge's conduct standards: by personalising his dispute with other editors ( 4684: 4060: 3711:. Although he has attempted to work constructively with other editors, Phoenix and Winslow has contributed to an 2564: 1555:). I looked, couldn't find anything objectionable in his edits, so I asked the accusing editor to provide a diff 1028: 1022: 938: 926: 716: 331: 171: 3550: 2399:

edits (which, as far as I know, are completely uncoordinated, and almost certainly in good faith.) In terms of

1522: 4022: 3519: 3227: 1469: 1211: 914: 860: 317: 260: 21: 3674: 3671: 3668: 3665: 3662: 3574: 2521: 2349: 1659:". If he's asking for sanctions, seems appropriate to add him to this case so his evidence can be considered. 4469: 4461: 4418: 4387: 4350: 4234: 3910: 3869: 3825: 3734: 3699: 3605:

has acted in a manner that suggests a battleground mentality, for example proposing a desysop to make a point

2775:

for me to support a simple DS motion here. If we are going to do something here, I would accept a full case.

1409: 1352: 1238: 1205: 1199: 1004: 932: 252: 3567:. In February 2013, Goethean edit warred with two other parties about the agenda of the Tea Party movement ( 1325: 3562: 3352: 2516: 2360:

In response to User:North8000's accusation, I contacted two high-profile and completely uninvolved admins,

2151:

My primary comment to clear up a false statement that KC has continued to make against me. KC's statement

1534: 1124: 1097: 992: 490: 302: 200: 4727:

if warranted. Any restrictions not reimposed will automatically expire at the end of the one year period.

3337:

9) Administrators are expected not to use administrator tools in disputes in which they are involved. The

2696:

Holding off on voting for a day or two to see if any progress is made at ANI. Will evaluate at that time.

1313: 842: 4714: 3441: 3433: 3373:

12) It is not the role of the Arbitration Committee to settle good-faith content disputes among editors.

3158:

article. Pages relating to the Tea Party movement, in any namespace, broadly construed, are placed under

1193: 1085: 980: 764: 746: 312: 230: 2311: 890: 830: 4702: 4398:, broadly construed. This topic ban will expire after six months from the date this case is closed on. 4315: 3111: 2941: 2892: 2856: 2815: 2780: 2646:

Could someone please provide a link to the discussion that resulted in the article probation? Thanks.

2493: 1439: 1382: 1319: 1268: 734: 351: 2936:

as a case. I would be open to a motion authorizing DS in the topic area for the duration of the case.

1573:

on the article talk page that the article is under probation and in only a couple of hours North8000

1154: 878: 4571:

Any sanctions or other restrictions imposed under this case to date shall remain in force unaffected.

4278: 3489:

that the wording of the community sanctions makes assessment of edit warring difficult. In addition,

2466:, a summary of the active content disputes, unless it's in the (ignored) section which I started. — 2015: 1997: 1980: 1963: 1860: 1837: 1823: 1804: 1790: 1773: 1759: 1741: 1724: 1710: 1663: 1638: 1620: 1484: 1427: 1370: 1256: 1175: 1091: 986: 794: 655: 2793:

By less well equipped, do you mean not having direct access to CheckUser and Oversight permissions?

1142: 4465: 4414: 4132: 3695: 2874: 2760: 2737: 2313:

Goethean also informs the other editors this study will be in the article, despite their protests.

1457: 1307: 999: 836: 782: 160: 4708: 4095: 3947: 3689: 3558: 3532: 2463: 1681: 1530: 1504: 1079: 974: 740: 483: 4776: 3774:); edit warring over comments that negatively portray him – thereby further increasing tension ( 4766: 4288: 4043: 3730: 3419: 3388: 3282: 3216: 3191: 3023:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Tea Party movement; looking for community input

2508: 2483: 2470: 2454: 2434: 2416: 1692: 1464:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Tea Party movement; looking for community input

1289: 902: 884: 824: 3452:, stating that she had checked for tendentious editing by Goethean and found no problems. She 4696: 4622: 4210: 4143: 4006: 3756: 3554: 3201: 3150:

1) The Tea Party movement case is suspended until the end of June 2013 to allow time for the

3101: 3097:

I've had a skim read through the relevent pages and I believe that a case is necessary here.

2937: 2888: 2852: 2811: 2776: 2718: 2701: 2392: 2137: 2120: 2103: 2082: 1737:"shut this down". IOW, it went off the rails really fast, and that's why I brought it here. 1526: 1433: 1376: 1262: 1061: 956: 728: 190: 135: 17: 4634:

Enforcement action taken pursuant to the foregoing may be appealed in the ordinary way to a

4582: 4371: 4334: 4105: 3316: 3178: 3130: 2574: 2443:@ RexxS. I disagree. Whether or not KC has improperly taken sides, his interpretation of 2365: 2239: 2194: 2012: 1994: 1977: 1960: 1930:, that would be a benefit, but it is emphatically not the only reason I brought this here. 1857: 1834: 1820: 1801: 1787: 1770: 1756: 1738: 1721: 1707: 1660: 1635: 1617: 1481: 1170: 1148: 872: 806: 650: 643: 532: 521: 45: 8: 4678: 4054: 3383: 3256: 2867: 2753: 2730: 2558: 1421: 1364: 1250: 788: 710: 155: 109: 3405:

on article content. At about the same time, community sanctions were imposed, following

4432: 4395: 4358: 4302: 4157: 4119: 4068: 4030: 4016: 3973: 3719: 3712: 3658: 3524: 3513: 3398: 3394: 3338: 3155: 3085: 3067: 3047: 2911: 2834: 2802: 2425:

On consideration, I don't think KC has misinterpreted policies. He has misinterpreted

2333: 1496: 1136: 854: 124: 37: 3481:

3) The community sanctions provides that "No editor may make more than one (1) revert

2317: 4762: 4455: 4381: 4344: 4284: 4228: 3904: 3863: 3819: 2844: 2632: 2609: 2505: 2480: 2467: 2451: 2431: 2413: 2396: 1403: 1346: 1284: 1232: 897: 776: 4753:

All sanctions issued pursuant to a discretionary sanctions remedy must be logged at

4617:, but effective the passage of this motion they shall only be enforced for edits by 4618: 4206: 4139: 3752: 3652: 2714: 2697: 2683: 2666: 2651: 2542: 1118: 1056: 951: 130: 2961:

towards AE is suboptimal), is needed here, as the topic area is just not working.

4577: 3746: 3576:). Some of these reverts were made despite ongoing attempts to discuss the issue 3126: 3010: 2990: 2962: 2589:

Tea Party movement: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <10/0/0/0: -->

2568: 2501: 2361: 2174: 1935: 1914: 1898: 1877: 758: 2203:

First, let me start off by saying I did not call KillerChihuahua a meat puppet.

4782: 4724: 4673: 4496: 4479: 4428: 4391: 4354: 4298: 4220: 4153: 4115: 4086: 4064: 4050: 4026: 3625: 3602: 3287: 2554: 2345: 705: 104: 4265:

There having been no enforcement actions taken this remedy is vacated by the

4186:

There having been no enforcement actions taken this remedy is vacated by the

455: 4800: 4012: 3783:); and engaging in unnecessary mockery (e.g. of Collect's use of the signoff 3723: 3596: 3509: 3196: 3078: 3060: 3040: 2904: 2827: 2795: 2377: 1676:, the discussion is linked in my first sentence, at "is on community article 1544: 849: 149: 119: 3444:

North8000against uncivil behaviour. At this point, North8000 and Malke 2010

2357:

that the rally does not refer to the same tea party as the article covers.

459: 4635: 4508: 4451: 4377: 4340: 4224: 3900: 3859: 3815: 3673:) and has, on occasion and over a long period of time, edited combatively ( 3503: 3332: 3263: 2497: 1684:

page. I haven't been able to find any probation page such as we set up for

1548: 1398: 1341: 1227: 2156:

is simply false. I never said that the NYT or MSNBC were non-RS sources.

638: 3935: 3894: 3853: 3809: 3300: 2679: 2662: 2647: 2535: 1685: 1113: 3610:, posting to a user talk page multiple times despite being asked not to, 2170: 1931: 1910: 1894: 1873: 753: 3657:

7) Arthur Rubin has repeatedly edit warred with other contributors to

3276: 2528:

This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).

179: 4085:

at 20:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC). If not reimposed within one year at

2608:: @KC. Could you briefly summarise the actual dispute here please? 2043:

that is basically 98% a two person dispute, me and KillerChihuahua.

1893:

misunderstood something. We do not topic ban for misunderstandings.

3240: 3003: 2983: 457: 144: 3397:

article. The article was created in January 2010 as a split from

2234:

Goethean in any way, I certainly apologize as I did on the AN/I.

4321: 3456:. During this discussion, other editors proposed topic-bans for 4491:

Passed 8 to 0, with 1 abstentions 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

2408:

reliable for statements of "fact", only for notable opinions.

460: 4366:

Passed 5 to 3, with 1 abstention 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

4127:

Passed 7 to 1, with 1 abstention 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

3831:) and needlessly inflamed tensions with the other disputants ( 3647:

Passed 8 to 0, with 1 abstention 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

3471:

Passed 8 to 0, with 1 abstention 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

3424:

2) Following a content disagreement on 18 February, North8000

3414:

Passed 8 to 0, with 1 abstention 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

3393:

1) This case addresses concerns related to the editing of the

461: 4603: 3980:. This sanction supersedes the existing community sanctions. 2866:

community is fine with us using this case as a test vehicle.

2369: 1680:." - apologies if that was unclear. I got that link from the 1551:) and wanted a second opinion from an uninvolved admin (see 4755:

Knowledge:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log

2093:

User_talk:North8000#Tea Party Movement, POV pushing, and TE

2051:

User_talk:North8000#Tea Party Movement, POV pushing, and TE

4659:

formally vacates the remedies, 00:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

3281:

5) The verifiability policy is at the heart of one of the

2075:

will confirm this successful separation. Sincerely,

625:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment

620: 4576:

Passed by motion, 9 to 0 For the Arbitration Committee,--

3440:

that Goethean was "being rude as usual". KillerChihuahua

4613:

are suspended. These remedies may be enforced under the

3454:

proposed topic-bans for North8000, Azrel, and Malke 2010

2567:) as a trainee. Do any of the parties object to this? -- 4775:) blocked for a week for violating his topic ban per a 3963:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2

1547:, who had been accused of poor behavior (specifically, 4614: 1755:

the ANI sub-page thread, and there is activity there.

3872:) has ignored sound arguments about article content ( 3436:

regarding evidence of tendentious editing, North8000

3733:

nature in discussing related articles on Knowledge (

3485:

per twenty-four (24) hour period" (emphasis added).

2591:-Preliminary_decision-2013-02-25T06:04:00.000Z": --> 2587:-Preliminary_decision-2013-02-25T06:04:00.000Z": --> 2047:

And it is generally NOT at or about the TPM article.

4482:, each other anywhere on Knowledge (subject to the 3925:) other editors of the Tea Party movement article. 3828:) has been dismissive of other users' views (e.g. 3021:I'm still waiting for something to be resolved at 3154:to attempt to resolve the conflict regarding the 2368:, with whom I had had a long disagreement at the 2310:Typical exchange on the origins of the tea party. 4798: 4253: 4173: 3177:Further to the above, the Arbitration Committee 3058:. The community discussion has clearly stalled. 619:Once the case is closed, editors may add to the 4655:There having been no enforcement actions taken 3715:in an attempt to impose his preferred wording ( 2412:against some of the other proposed editors. — 1591:Tea Party movement; looking for community input 1543:. I was asked on 18 February to take a look by 549: 4555:Remedy 8.1 (Arthur Rubin topic banned) in the 1579:insulted Goethean again and misrepresented him 4599: 3613:and commenting on behaviour without evidence. 2553:I have volunteered to be the lead clerk with 1856:for me to be desysoped because of a dispute. 491: 4669:North8000 restrictions: Motion (August 2020) 4532:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4516:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4440:Passed 8 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4403:Passed 6 to 3, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4329:Passed 7 to 1, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4310:Passed 5 to 3, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4247:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4166:Passed 7 to 2, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4077:Passed 7 to 2, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4038:Passed 6 to 3, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3990:Passed 8 to 1, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3961:, discretionary sanctions authorised in the 3930:Passed 5 to 4, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3889:Passed 6 to 2, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3848:Passed 6 to 3, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3804:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3741:Passed 8 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3684:Passed 7 to 2, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3620:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3591:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3498:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3378:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3363:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3347:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3327:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3311:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3295:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3271:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3251:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3235:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 3211:Passed 9 to 0, 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 4719:was restricted by motion in December 2016 ( 4446:Snowded–Phoenix and Winslow interaction ban 3477:Inadequacies of current community sanctions 1583:basically told me I'm Goethean's meatpuppet 3181:proceedings for this case on 2 July 2013. 633:Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement 498: 484: 3634:) and has a history of acting uncivilly ( 2496:. There are a few editors who have been 2041:If this is about the current shit-storm, 4604:Xenophrenic interaction ban with Collect 4237:) anywhere on Knowledge (subject to the 4200:Xenophrenic interaction ban with Collect 3230:", is also contrary to this principle. 3167:Passed 8 to 0, 14:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 3152:Tea Party movement/Moderated discussion 3125:, it seems a full case is needed here. 2600:Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse/other) 2340:On 18 Feb, User:Xenophrenic and I were 631:, and report violations of remedies to 14: 4799: 4522:Enforcement of discretionary sanctions 3976:, broadly construed, are placed under 3027:increased sanctions are being proposed 1698:; I don't know if there is one. There 621:#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions 4742:Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions 3186:Announced on 22:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 629:Knowledge talk:Arbitration Committee 271:Clarification and Amendment requests 4607: 4478:) are indefinitely prohibited from 3726:during the suspension of the case ( 31: 4749:standardised enforcement provision 4480:interacting with, or commenting on 4221:interacting with, or commenting on 4219:) is indefinitely prohibited from 3718:) and was banned from editing the 2847:back to ArbCom. In the end, it is 2045:(looks like it may be over now) 32: 4818: 4502:Enforcement of decision sanctions 3999:, at 13:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC) 3369:Role of the Arbitration Committee 2445:Knowledge policies and guidelines 1653:he asked for sanctions against me 4409:Phoenix and Winslow topic-banned 3430:evaluate whether his own editing 3173:Interim decision: Reinstate case 543:on 07:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC) 178: 4431:from all pages relating to the 4394:from all pages relating to the 4357:from all pages relating to the 4301:from all pages relating to the 4156:from all pages relating to the 4118:from all pages relating to the 4067:from all pages relating to the 4029:from all pages relating to the 3913:) has been disparaging toward ( 1651:was added to this case because 573:on 13:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC) 563:on 07:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC) 4736:at 20:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC) 4648:, 07:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC) 4615:relevant enforcement provision 4260:, 07:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC) 4180:, 07:41, 4 December 2014 (UTC) 3146:Interim decision: Suspend case 583:on 21:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC) 553:on 18:45, 24 August 2014 (UTC) 13: 1: 4792:13:19, 14 December 2013 (UTC) 4269:, 00:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC) 4190:, 00:00, 1 January 2015 (UTC) 2820:11:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC) 2806:11:30, 28 February 2013 (UTC) 2785:19:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC) 2745:00:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 2706:19:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2656:12:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2618:06:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2487:20:22, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 2474:19:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 2458:19:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2438:10:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC) 2420:07:44, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2381:16:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2244:17:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2199:15:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 2108:20:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 2087:12:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1940:14:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC) 1919:12:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC) 1882:23:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1866:13:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1843:12:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1829:12:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1810:03:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1796:01:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1779:18:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1765:13:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1747:13:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1730:12:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1716:12:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1669:12:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1644:06:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1626:06:16, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 1490:05:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC) 3881:) about and condescending ( 3288:reliable sources noticeboard 2253:first comment by Malke 2010 2248:The whole exchange is here: 1475:Statement by KillerChihuahua 514:on 23:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 402:Conflict of interest reports 7: 4807:Knowledge arbitration cases 4721:Motion regarding North80000 4594:December 2014 (Xenophrenic) 4588:18:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC) 4322:current community sanctions 3353:Seeking community input (2) 3290:to broaden the discussion. 3141:Temporary injunction (none) 1605:Supplementaries and replies 1567:asking him to be more civil 627:, any general questions at 536:at 22:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 526:at 14:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC) 231:Search archived proceedings 10: 4823: 4543:August 2014 (Arthur Rubin) 4316:Community sanctions lifted 4081:Suspended for one year by 3972:1.1) Pages related to the 3632:KillerChihuahua's evidence 3434:an inconclusive discussion 1565:I posted on his talk page 589:Watchlist all case pages: 276:Arbitrator motion requests 35: 4279:Arthur Rubin topic-banned 4089:, the remedy will expire. 3729:). He has demonstrated a 3135:23:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 3118:14:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 3089:22:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 3071:10:30, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 3051:18:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 3013:19:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2993:18:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 2966:06:21, 2 March 2013 (UTC) 2946:01:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2915:16:39, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 2897:17:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2882:16:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2861:13:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2838:10:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2768:00:04, 5 March 2013 (UTC) 2723:22:48, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 2688:19:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2671:17:20, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2640:07:58, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 2580:01:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC) 2549:03:02, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2512:22:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2386:Statement by Arthur Rubin 2179:21:41, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 2142:15:55, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 2125:14:29, 1 March 2013 (UTC) 2021:14:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC) 2003:15:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC) 1986:19:11, 3 March 2013 (UTC) 1969:22:13, 2 March 2013 (UTC) 1450:at 14:39, 17 August 2013. 4600:Xenophrenic topic-banned 4133:Xenophrenic topic-banned 2395:, but there may be some 2064:involved until recently. 1593:) , now at the sub-page 1539:is on community article 4509:arbitration enforcement 4252:Suspended (see wording 4172:Suspended (see wording 4096:Malke 2010 topic-banned 3978:discretionary sanctions 3948:Discretionary sanctions 3884:) to other disputants. 3522:) has revert warred at 3487:Concern has been raised 3160:discretionary sanctions 2464:Talk:Tea Party movement 2268:link given by Goethean 2184:Statement by Malke 2010 1682:Talk:Tea Party movement 1393:at 00:17, 26 July 2013. 1336:at 00:17, 26 July 2013. 1279:at 17:11, 16 July 2013. 1222:at 17:11, 16 July 2013. 1165:at 17:11, 16 July 2013. 1108:at 17:11, 16 July 2013. 4751:applies to this case. 4044:North8000 topic-banned 3922:) and combative with ( 3722:article for 1 week by 2355:seems to agree with me 2055:tells 80% of the story 2053:and the one after it) 2032:Statement by North8000 1470:Preliminary statements 1051:at 18:39, 7 July 2013. 4007:Goethean topic-banned 3217:Neutral point of view 2328:Statement by Goethean 1693:Men's rights movement 1655:in this topic area - 472:Track related changes 332:Arbitration Committee 172:Knowledge Arbitration 18:Knowledge:Arbitration 4602:") and Remedy 7.2 (" 4538:Amendments by motion 4372:Collect topic-banned 4335:Ubikwit topic-banned 3957:Remedy rescinded by 3339:administrator policy 3202:Purpose of Knowledge 2517:Preliminary decision 2366:User:KillerChihuahua 2283:reply by Malke 2010 2273:reply by Malke 2010 2263:reply by Malke 2010 1575:told me I'm involved 1458:Requests for comment 281:Enforcement requests 209:Guide to arbitration 115:Drafting arbitrators 4549:Original discussion 4484:ordinary exceptions 4466:Phoenix and Winslow 4415:Phoenix and Winslow 4239:ordinary exceptions 4025:) is indefinitely 3696:Phoenix and Winslow 3690:Phoenix and Winslow 3636:Viriditas' evidence 3491:there are instances 3483:on the same content 3317:Tendentious editing 2494:WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS 2316:Behavior disputes: 2288:reply by North8000 2258:reply by North8000 2222:or anything else. 1991:Procedural question 1947:, not only is this 1751:Update: NE Ent has 1000:Phoenix and Winslow 4609:Tea Party movement 4557:Tea Party movement 4433:Tea Party movement 4427:) is indefinitely 4396:Tea Party movement 4359:Tea Party movement 4353:) is indefinitely 4303:Tea Party movement 4297:) is indefinitely 4158:Tea Party movement 4152:) is indefinitely 4120:Tea Party movement 4114:) is indefinitely 4069:Tea Party movement 4063:) is indefinitely 4031:Tea Party movement 3995:Amended 7 to 1 by 3974:Tea Party movement 3720:Tea Party movement 3659:Tea Party movement 3525:Tea Party movement 3420:Locus of dispute 2 3403:informal mediation 3399:Tea Party protests 3395:Tea Party movement 3389:Locus of dispute 1 3257:Consensus building 3224:synthesized claims 3156:Tea Party movement 2334:Tea Party Movement 2278:reply by Goethean 2147:Statement by Arzel 1497:Tea Party movement 519:Case suspended by 303:Contentious topics 201:Arbitration policy 4790: 4732:Passed 8 to 0 by 3985: 3984: 3944: 3228:original research 2601: 2028: 2027: 1581:, and Malke 2010 1452: 1395: 1338: 1281: 1224: 1167: 1110: 1053: 616: 508: 507: 475: 443: 313:General sanctions 261:All open requests 191:About arbitration 164: 153: 139: 128: 113: 96: 88:Proposed decision 85: 74: 63: 4814: 4789: 4787: 4780: 4718: 4691:deleted contribs 4585: 4580: 3953: 3952: 3940: 3578:on the talk page 3566: 3548: 3384:Findings of fact 3114: 3108: 3081: 3063: 3043: 3008: 2988: 2907: 2877: 2849:this Committee's 2830: 2798: 2763: 2740: 2637: 2625: 2622: 2614: 2599: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2577: 2571: 2546: 2540: 2448:editors' actions 2135: 2118: 2101: 2080: 2018: 2000: 1983: 1966: 1863: 1840: 1826: 1807: 1793: 1776: 1762: 1744: 1727: 1713: 1666: 1641: 1623: 1601: 1600: 1571:added a reminder 1538: 1520: 1487: 1445: 1443: 1416:deleted contribs 1388: 1386: 1359:deleted contribs 1331: 1329: 1302:deleted contribs 1274: 1272: 1245:deleted contribs 1217: 1215: 1188:deleted contribs 1160: 1158: 1131:deleted contribs 1103: 1101: 1074:deleted contribs 1046: 1044: 1017:deleted contribs 996: 969:deleted contribs 948: 894: 867:deleted contribs 846: 819:deleted contribs 798: 771:deleted contribs 750: 723:deleted contribs 701: 644:Involved parties 639:Case information 615: 614: 587: 578:Case amended by 568:Case amended by 558:Case amended by 548:Case amended by 524: 500: 493: 486: 474: 469: 462: 441: 397:Clerk procedures 389: 347: 318:Editor sanctions 295:Active sanctions 253:Open proceedings 223: 182: 168: 167: 158: 147: 133: 122: 107: 90: 79: 68: 57: 48: 4822: 4821: 4817: 4816: 4815: 4813: 4812: 4811: 4797: 4796: 4783: 4781: 4744: 4676: 4671: 4596: 4583: 4578: 4545: 4540: 4524: 4504: 4499: 4448: 4411: 4374: 4337: 4318: 4281: 4202: 4135: 4098: 4046: 4009: 3986: 3966: 3950: 3938: 3897: 3856: 3812: 3749: 3692: 3655: 3628: 3599: 3539: 3523: 3506: 3479: 3422: 3407:this discussion 3391: 3386: 3371: 3355: 3335: 3319: 3303: 3279: 3259: 3243: 3219: 3204: 3199: 3194: 3175: 3148: 3143: 3112: 3102: 3079: 3061: 3041: 3004: 2984: 2905: 2875: 2845:passed the buck 2828: 2796: 2761: 2738: 2633: 2610: 2594: 2575: 2569: 2543: 2536: 2524: 2519: 2388: 2362:User:SlimVirgin 2330: 2186: 2149: 2131: 2114: 2097: 2076: 2034: 2029: 2016: 1998: 1981: 1964: 1861: 1838: 1824: 1805: 1791: 1774: 1760: 1742: 1725: 1711: 1702:an editonotice 1664: 1639: 1630:Adding, I have 1621: 1606: 1511: 1495: 1485: 1477: 1472: 1460: 1455: 1401: 1344: 1287: 1230: 1173: 1171:The Four Deuces 1116: 1059: 1002: 954: 900: 852: 804: 756: 708: 653: 651:KillerChihuahua 646: 641: 617: 590: 588: 584: 574: 564: 554: 544: 537: 527: 520: 515: 504: 470: 464: 463: 458: 448: 447: 446: 435: 418: 408: 407: 406: 393: 385: 373: 348: 343: 334: 324: 323: 322: 297: 287: 286: 285: 255: 245: 242: 227: 219: 197: 166: 53: 52: 51: 44: 40: 30: 29: 28: 12: 11: 5: 4820: 4810: 4809: 4795: 4794: 4743: 4740: 4739: 4738: 4670: 4667: 4666: 4665: 4664: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4636:consensus view 4595: 4592: 4591: 4590: 4573: 4572: 4568: 4567: 4562: 4561: 4544: 4541: 4539: 4536: 4535: 4534: 4523: 4520: 4519: 4518: 4503: 4500: 4498: 4495: 4494: 4493: 4447: 4444: 4443: 4442: 4410: 4407: 4406: 4405: 4373: 4370: 4369: 4368: 4336: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4317: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4280: 4277: 4276: 4275: 4274: 4273: 4272: 4271: 4201: 4198: 4197: 4196: 4195: 4194: 4193: 4192: 4134: 4131: 4130: 4129: 4097: 4094: 4093: 4092: 4091: 4090: 4045: 4042: 4041: 4040: 4008: 4005: 4004: 4003: 4002: 4001: 3983: 3982: 3968: 3967: 3956: 3951: 3949: 3946: 3937: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3896: 3893: 3892: 3891: 3855: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3811: 3808: 3807: 3806: 3748: 3745: 3744: 3743: 3691: 3688: 3687: 3686: 3654: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3627: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3603:User:North8000 3598: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3505: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3478: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3421: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3390: 3387: 3385: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3370: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3354: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3334: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3318: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3302: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3278: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3258: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3242: 3239: 3238: 3237: 3218: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3203: 3200: 3198: 3195: 3193: 3192:Final decision 3190: 3189: 3188: 3174: 3171: 3170: 3169: 3147: 3144: 3142: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3120: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3073: 3036: 3031: 3030: 3018: 3017: 3016: 3015: 2996: 2995: 2968: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2930: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2788: 2787: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2593: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2551: 2531: 2530: 2523: 2520: 2518: 2515: 2490: 2489: 2441: 2440: 2393:WP:BATTLEFIELD 2387: 2384: 2346:User:North8000 2329: 2326: 2291: 2185: 2182: 2148: 2145: 2072: 2071: 2066: 2065: 2060: 2059: 2033: 2030: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2005: 1988: 1971: 1942: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1903: 1902: 1884: 1869: 1868: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1781: 1767: 1749: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1671: 1646: 1628: 1608: 1607: 1604: 1599: 1493: 1492: 1476: 1473: 1471: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1459: 1456: 1454: 1453: 1396: 1339: 1282: 1225: 1168: 1111: 1054: 997: 949: 895: 847: 799: 751: 703: 647: 645: 642: 640: 637: 586: 576: 575: 566: 565: 556: 555: 546: 545: 539: 538: 529: 528: 517: 516: 510: 506: 505: 503: 502: 495: 488: 480: 477: 476: 466: 465: 456: 454: 453: 450: 449: 445: 444: 436: 431: 426: 420: 419: 414: 413: 410: 409: 405: 404: 399: 394: 384: 379: 374: 369: 364: 359: 354: 349: 342: 336: 335: 330: 329: 326: 325: 321: 320: 315: 310: 299: 298: 293: 292: 289: 288: 284: 283: 278: 273: 268: 263: 257: 256: 251: 250: 247: 246: 244: 243: 238: 233: 228: 218: 211: 206: 198: 193: 187: 184: 183: 175: 174: 156:NuclearWarfare 55:Main case page 50: 49: 41: 36: 34: 33: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4819: 4808: 4805: 4804: 4802: 4793: 4788: 4786: 4778: 4777:WP:AE request 4774: 4771: 4768: 4764: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4756: 4750: 4737: 4735: 4730: 4729: 4728: 4726: 4722: 4716: 4713: 4710: 4707: 4704: 4701: 4698: 4695: 4692: 4689: 4686: 4683: 4680: 4675: 4660: 4658: 4653: 4652: 4651: 4650: 4649: 4647: 4642: 4641: 4640: 4637: 4632: 4630: 4627: 4624: 4620: 4616: 4612: 4610: 4605: 4601: 4598:Remedy 7.1 (" 4589: 4586: 4581: 4575: 4574: 4570: 4569: 4564: 4563: 4558: 4554: 4553: 4552: 4551: 4550: 4533: 4530: 4529: 4528: 4517: 4514: 4513: 4512: 4510: 4492: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4474: 4471: 4467: 4463: 4460: 4457: 4453: 4441: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4434: 4430: 4426: 4423: 4420: 4416: 4404: 4401: 4400: 4399: 4397: 4393: 4389: 4386: 4383: 4379: 4367: 4364: 4363: 4362: 4360: 4356: 4352: 4349: 4346: 4342: 4330: 4327: 4326: 4325: 4324:are lifted. 4323: 4311: 4308: 4307: 4306: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4293: 4290: 4286: 4270: 4268: 4263: 4262: 4261: 4259: 4255: 4250: 4249: 4248: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4240: 4236: 4233: 4230: 4226: 4222: 4218: 4215: 4212: 4208: 4191: 4189: 4184: 4183: 4182: 4181: 4179: 4175: 4169: 4168: 4167: 4164: 4163: 4162: 4161: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4148: 4145: 4141: 4128: 4125: 4124: 4123: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4110: 4107: 4103: 4088: 4084: 4080: 4079: 4078: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4072: 4070: 4066: 4062: 4059: 4056: 4052: 4039: 4036: 4035: 4034: 4032: 4028: 4024: 4021: 4018: 4014: 4000: 3998: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3988: 3987: 3981: 3979: 3975: 3970: 3969: 3964: 3960: 3955: 3954: 3945: 3943: 3931: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3924: 3921: 3918: 3915: 3912: 3909: 3906: 3902: 3890: 3887: 3886: 3885: 3883: 3880: 3877: 3874: 3871: 3868: 3865: 3861: 3849: 3846: 3845: 3844: 3842: 3839: 3836: 3833: 3830: 3827: 3824: 3821: 3817: 3805: 3802: 3801: 3800: 3798: 3795: 3792: 3789: 3786: 3782: 3779: 3776: 3773: 3770: 3767: 3764: 3761: 3758: 3754: 3742: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3735: 3732: 3728: 3725: 3724:User:SilkTork 3721: 3717: 3714: 3710: 3707: 3704: 3701: 3697: 3685: 3682: 3681: 3680: 3678: 3675: 3672: 3669: 3666: 3663: 3660: 3648: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3621: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3612: 3609: 3607: 3604: 3592: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3585: 3582: 3579: 3575: 3572: 3569: 3564: 3560: 3556: 3552: 3547: 3543: 3538: 3534: 3530: 3526: 3521: 3518: 3515: 3511: 3499: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3472: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3465: 3462: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3427: 3415: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3408: 3404: 3400: 3396: 3379: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3364: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3348: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3340: 3328: 3325: 3324: 3323: 3312: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3296: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3289: 3284: 3272: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3265: 3252: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3236: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3229: 3226:", or other " 3225: 3212: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3187: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3180: 3168: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3161: 3157: 3153: 3136: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3121: 3119: 3115: 3109: 3107: 3106: 3100: 3096: 3095: 3090: 3087: 3086: 3083: 3082: 3074: 3072: 3069: 3068: 3065: 3064: 3057: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3049: 3048: 3045: 3044: 3037: 3033: 3032: 3028: 3024: 3020: 3019: 3014: 3011: 3009: 3007: 3000: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2994: 2991: 2989: 2987: 2981: 2977: 2972: 2969: 2967: 2964: 2960: 2956: 2953: 2952: 2947: 2943: 2939: 2935: 2932: 2931: 2916: 2913: 2912: 2909: 2908: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2880: 2878: 2871: 2870: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2858: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2836: 2835: 2832: 2831: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2817: 2813: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2804: 2803: 2800: 2799: 2792: 2791: 2790: 2789: 2786: 2782: 2778: 2773: 2769: 2766: 2764: 2757: 2756: 2751: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2743: 2741: 2734: 2733: 2728: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2695: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2677: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2653: 2649: 2645: 2641: 2638: 2636: 2630: 2627: 2626: 2619: 2615: 2613: 2607: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2581: 2578: 2572: 2566: 2563: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2550: 2547: 2545: 2541: 2539: 2533: 2532: 2529: 2526: 2525: 2514: 2513: 2510: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2495: 2488: 2485: 2482: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2472: 2469: 2465: 2460: 2459: 2456: 2453: 2450:is wrong. — 2449: 2446: 2439: 2436: 2433: 2428: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2418: 2415: 2409: 2407: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2383: 2382: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2363: 2358: 2356: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2338: 2335: 2325: 2323: 2319: 2318: 2315: 2312: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2294: 2289: 2287: 2284: 2282: 2279: 2277: 2274: 2272: 2269: 2267: 2264: 2262: 2259: 2257: 2254: 2252: 2249: 2246: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2231: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2213: 2208: 2205: 2201: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2181: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2167: 2164: 2161: 2157: 2155: 2144: 2143: 2139: 2134: 2127: 2126: 2122: 2117: 2110: 2109: 2105: 2100: 2094: 2089: 2088: 2084: 2079: 2068: 2067: 2062: 2061: 2056: 2052: 2048: 2044: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2022: 2019: 2014: 2009: 2006: 2004: 2001: 1996: 1992: 1989: 1987: 1984: 1979: 1975: 1972: 1970: 1967: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1946: 1943: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1926: 1925: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1885: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1871: 1870: 1867: 1864: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1848: 1844: 1841: 1836: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1827: 1822: 1818: 1815: 1811: 1808: 1803: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1794: 1789: 1785: 1782: 1780: 1777: 1772: 1768: 1766: 1763: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1748: 1745: 1740: 1735: 1731: 1728: 1723: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1714: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1694: 1690: 1687: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1672: 1670: 1667: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1647: 1645: 1642: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1627: 1624: 1619: 1615: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1603: 1602: 1598: 1596: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1561: 1558: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1545:User:Goethean 1542: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1519: 1515: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1491: 1488: 1483: 1479: 1478: 1465: 1462: 1461: 1451: 1449: 1441: 1438: 1435: 1432: 1429: 1426: 1423: 1420: 1417: 1414: 1411: 1408: 1405: 1400: 1397: 1394: 1392: 1384: 1381: 1378: 1375: 1372: 1369: 1366: 1363: 1360: 1357: 1354: 1351: 1348: 1343: 1340: 1337: 1335: 1327: 1324: 1321: 1318: 1315: 1312: 1309: 1306: 1303: 1300: 1297: 1294: 1291: 1286: 1283: 1280: 1278: 1270: 1267: 1264: 1261: 1258: 1255: 1252: 1249: 1246: 1243: 1240: 1237: 1234: 1229: 1226: 1223: 1221: 1213: 1210: 1207: 1204: 1201: 1198: 1195: 1192: 1189: 1186: 1183: 1180: 1177: 1172: 1169: 1166: 1164: 1156: 1153: 1150: 1147: 1144: 1141: 1138: 1135: 1132: 1129: 1126: 1123: 1120: 1115: 1112: 1109: 1107: 1099: 1096: 1093: 1090: 1087: 1084: 1081: 1078: 1075: 1072: 1069: 1066: 1063: 1058: 1055: 1052: 1050: 1042: 1039: 1036: 1033: 1030: 1027: 1024: 1021: 1018: 1015: 1012: 1009: 1006: 1001: 998: 994: 991: 988: 985: 982: 979: 976: 973: 970: 967: 964: 961: 958: 953: 950: 946: 943: 940: 937: 934: 931: 928: 925: 922: 919: 916: 913: 910: 907: 904: 899: 896: 892: 889: 886: 883: 880: 877: 874: 871: 868: 865: 862: 859: 856: 851: 848: 844: 841: 838: 835: 832: 829: 826: 823: 820: 817: 814: 811: 808: 803: 800: 796: 793: 790: 787: 784: 781: 778: 775: 772: 769: 766: 763: 760: 755: 752: 748: 745: 742: 739: 736: 733: 730: 727: 724: 721: 718: 715: 712: 707: 704: 699: 696: 693: 690: 687: 684: 681: 678: 675: 672: 669: 666: 663: 660: 657: 652: 649: 648: 636: 634: 630: 626: 622: 613: 612: 607: 606: 601: 600: 595: 594: 585: 582: 581: 572: 571: 562: 561: 552: 551: 542: 535: 534: 525: 523: 513: 501: 496: 494: 489: 487: 482: 481: 479: 478: 473: 468: 467: 452: 451: 440: 437: 434: 430: 427: 425: 422: 421: 417: 412: 411: 403: 400: 398: 395: 392: 388: 383: 380: 378: 375: 372: 368: 365: 363: 360: 358: 355: 353: 350: 346: 341: 338: 337: 333: 328: 327: 319: 316: 314: 311: 308: 304: 301: 300: 296: 291: 290: 282: 279: 277: 274: 272: 269: 267: 266:Case requests 264: 262: 259: 258: 254: 249: 248: 241: 237: 234: 232: 229: 226: 222: 217: 215: 212: 210: 207: 205: 202: 199: 196: 192: 189: 188: 186: 185: 181: 177: 176: 173: 170: 169: 165: 162: 157: 151: 146: 143: 142:from Aug 2013 140: 137: 132: 126: 121: 116: 111: 106: 102: 98: 94: 89: 83: 78: 72: 67: 61: 56: 47: 43: 42: 39: 27: 23: 19: 4784: 4769: 4763:Arthur Rubin 4752: 4745: 4731: 4711: 4705: 4699: 4693: 4687: 4681: 4672: 4654: 4643: 4633: 4625: 4608: 4597: 4556: 4547: 4546: 4531: 4525: 4515: 4505: 4490: 4472: 4458: 4449: 4439: 4429:topic-banned 4421: 4412: 4402: 4392:topic-banned 4384: 4375: 4365: 4355:topic-banned 4347: 4338: 4328: 4319: 4309: 4299:topic-banned 4291: 4285:Arthur Rubin 4282: 4264: 4251: 4246: 4231: 4213: 4204: 4203: 4185: 4171: 4170: 4165: 4154:topic-banned 4146: 4137: 4136: 4126: 4116:topic-banned 4108: 4099: 4076: 4065:topic-banned 4057: 4048: 4047: 4037: 4027:topic-banned 4019: 4010: 3994: 3989: 3971: 3941: 3939: 3929: 3907: 3898: 3888: 3866: 3857: 3847: 3822: 3813: 3803: 3784: 3759: 3750: 3740: 3731:battleground 3702: 3693: 3683: 3656: 3653:Arthur Rubin 3646: 3629: 3619: 3600: 3590: 3516: 3507: 3497: 3482: 3480: 3470: 3464:contributors 3423: 3413: 3392: 3377: 3372: 3362: 3356: 3346: 3336: 3326: 3320: 3310: 3304: 3294: 3283:five pillars 3280: 3270: 3264:edit-warring 3260: 3250: 3244: 3234: 3220: 3210: 3205: 3185: 3176: 3166: 3149: 3122: 3104: 3103: 3098: 3084: 3077: 3066: 3059: 3055: 3046: 3039: 3005: 2985: 2970: 2954: 2933: 2910: 2903: 2872: 2868: 2848: 2833: 2826: 2801: 2794: 2758: 2754: 2749: 2735: 2731: 2710: 2675: 2635:Roger Davies 2634: 2628: 2612:Roger Davies 2611: 2605: 2595: 2561: 2544: 2537: 2527: 2506:Arthur Rubin 2491: 2481:Arthur Rubin 2468:Arthur Rubin 2461: 2452:Arthur Rubin 2447: 2444: 2442: 2432:Arthur Rubin 2426: 2414:Arthur Rubin 2410: 2405: 2400: 2389: 2373: 2359: 2339: 2331: 2320: 2309: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2293:@Count Iblis 2292: 2290: 2285: 2280: 2275: 2270: 2265: 2260: 2255: 2250: 2247: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2209: 2207:are not RS. 2202: 2187: 2168: 2165: 2162: 2158: 2152: 2150: 2132: 2128: 2115: 2111: 2098: 2090: 2077: 2073: 2054: 2046: 2042: 2035: 2007: 1990: 1973: 1956: 1948: 1944: 1927: 1890: 1886: 1849: 1816: 1783: 1699: 1673: 1656: 1649:Arthur Rubin 1648: 1613: 1590: 1494: 1446: 1436: 1430: 1424: 1418: 1412: 1406: 1389: 1379: 1373: 1367: 1361: 1355: 1349: 1332: 1322: 1316: 1310: 1304: 1298: 1292: 1285:ThinkEnemies 1275: 1265: 1259: 1253: 1247: 1241: 1235: 1218: 1208: 1202: 1196: 1190: 1184: 1178: 1161: 1151: 1145: 1139: 1133: 1127: 1121: 1104: 1094: 1088: 1082: 1076: 1070: 1064: 1047: 1037: 1031: 1025: 1019: 1013: 1007: 989: 983: 977: 971: 965: 959: 941: 935: 929: 923: 917: 911: 905: 898:Arthur Rubin 887: 881: 875: 869: 863: 857: 839: 833: 827: 821: 815: 809: 791: 785: 779: 773: 767: 761: 743: 737: 731: 725: 719: 713: 694: 688: 682: 676: 670: 664: 658: 618: 610: 604: 598: 592: 577: 567: 557: 547: 540: 530: 518: 511: 509: 118: 114: 100: 99: 97: 54: 4657:this motion 4619:Xenophrenic 4579:S Philbrick 4497:Enforcement 4267:same motion 4207:Xenophrenic 4188:same motion 4140:Xenophrenic 3753:Xenophrenic 3747:Xenophrenic 3333:Involvement 2715:Newyorkbrad 2698:Newyorkbrad 2522:Clerk notes 2332:My goal at 1817:Count Iblis 1686:Sarah Palin 1057:Xenophrenic 952:Darkstar1st 921:protections 702:(initiator) 674:protections 541:Case Closed 533:unsuspended 512:Case Opened 236:Ban appeals 214:Noticeboard 131:Newyorkbrad 4785:Sandstein 4709:block user 4703:filter log 4644:Passed by 4606:") of the 4102:Malke 2010 3640:Archive 22 3626:Malke 2010 3461:additional 3301:Talk pages 3197:Principles 3179:reinstated 3127:Carcharoth 2963:Courcelles 2570:Guerillero 2397:WP:TAGTEAM 2236:Malke 2010 2191:Malke 2010 2189:necessary. 1434:block user 1428:filter log 1377:block user 1371:filter log 1320:block user 1314:filter log 1263:block user 1257:filter log 1206:block user 1200:filter log 1149:block user 1143:filter log 1092:block user 1086:filter log 1035:block user 1029:filter log 987:block user 981:filter log 933:page moves 885:block user 879:filter log 837:block user 831:filter log 802:Malke 2010 789:block user 783:filter log 741:block user 735:filter log 686:page moves 442:(pre-2016) 429:Statistics 362:Procedures 101:Case clerk 4715:block log 4674:North8000 4051:North8000 3597:North8000 3438:commented 3426:commented 2938:T. Canens 2889:T. Canens 2853:T. Canens 2812:T. Canens 2777:T. Canens 2555:Callanecc 2374:genuinely 2160:comment. 2133:North8000 2116:North8000 2099:North8000 2078:North8000 2017:Chihuahua 1999:Chihuahua 1982:Chihuahua 1965:Chihuahua 1862:Chihuahua 1850:North8000 1839:Chihuahua 1825:Chihuahua 1806:Chihuahua 1792:Chihuahua 1775:Chihuahua 1761:Chihuahua 1743:Chihuahua 1726:Chihuahua 1712:Chihuahua 1678:probation 1665:Chihuahua 1640:Chihuahua 1622:Chihuahua 1541:probation 1486:Chihuahua 1440:block log 1383:block log 1326:block log 1269:block log 1212:block log 1155:block log 1098:block log 1041:block log 993:block log 927:deletions 891:block log 843:block log 795:block log 747:block log 706:North8000 680:deletions 367:Elections 105:Callanecc 46:WP:ARBTPM 4801:Category 4773:contribs 4685:contribs 4629:contribs 4611:decision 4476:contribs 4462:contribs 4425:contribs 4388:contribs 4351:contribs 4320:10) The 4295:contribs 4235:contribs 4217:contribs 4150:contribs 4112:contribs 4061:contribs 4023:contribs 4013:Goethean 3936:Remedies 3911:contribs 3870:contribs 3826:contribs 3763:contribs 3713:edit war 3706:contribs 3520:contribs 3510:Goethean 3504:Goethean 3277:Sourcing 3080:SilkTork 3062:SilkTork 3042:SilkTork 2906:SilkTork 2829:SilkTork 2797:SilkTork 2565:contribs 2502:WP:CIVIL 2378:goethean 1753:unclosed 1577:, Arzel 1410:contribs 1353:contribs 1296:contribs 1239:contribs 1182:contribs 1125:contribs 1068:contribs 1011:contribs 963:contribs 909:contribs 861:contribs 850:Goethean 813:contribs 765:contribs 717:contribs 662:contribs 120:SilkTork 77:Workshop 66:Evidence 38:Shortcut 24:‎ | 22:Requests 20:‎ | 4725:WP:ARCA 4452:Snowded 4378:Collect 4341:Ubikwit 4225:Collect 4087:WP:ARCA 3901:Snowded 3895:Snowded 3860:Ubikwit 3854:Ubikwit 3816:Collect 3810:Collect 3542:protect 3537:history 3241:Decorum 2976:in 2010 2971:Accept. 2606:Comment 2576:My Talk 2427:actions 2350:removed 2342:accused 2218:admin. 1569:and I 1514:protect 1509:history 1399:Snowded 1342:Ubikwit 1228:Collect 439:Reports 377:History 357:Members 352:Contact 340:Discuss 204:(CU/OS) 4734:motion 4646:motion 4584:(Talk) 4464:) and 4258:motion 4178:motion 4083:motion 3997:motion 3965:apply. 3959:motion 3785:Cheers 3546:delete 3446:opined 3442:warned 3123:Accept 3099:Accept 3056:Accept 2955:Accept 2934:Accept 2750:Accept 2711:Accept 2680:Risker 2676:Accept 2663:Risker 2648:Risker 2629:Accept 2624:": --> 2621:": --> 2617:": --> 2598:": --> 2509:(talk) 2484:(talk) 2471:(talk) 2455:(talk) 2435:(talk) 2417:(talk) 2013:Killer 1995:Killer 1978:Killer 1961:Killer 1928:NE Ent 1887:Arthur 1858:Killer 1854:called 1835:Killer 1821:Killer 1802:Killer 1788:Killer 1771:Killer 1757:Killer 1739:Killer 1722:Killer 1708:Killer 1674:Risker 1661:Killer 1636:Killer 1618:Killer 1586:faith" 1518:delete 1482:Killer 1114:WLRoss 939:rights 915:blocks 692:rights 668:blocks 580:motion 570:motion 560:motion 550:motion 522:motion 382:Clerks 240:Report 154:& 4390:) is 4283:8.1) 4256:) by 4205:7.2) 4176:) by 4138:7.1) 4100:6.1) 4049:4.2) 4011:3.1) 3563:views 3555:watch 3551:links 2498:WP:TE 2370:Human 2171:Arzel 2154:(UTC) 1957:three 1932:Puppy 1911:Puppy 1895:Puppy 1874:Puppy 1691:, or 1614:Roger 1549:WP:TE 1535:views 1527:watch 1523:links 1448:Added 1391:Added 1334:Added 1277:Added 1220:Added 1163:Added 1106:Added 1049:Added 754:Arzel 531:Case 416:Audit 16:< 4767:talk 4697:logs 4679:talk 4623:talk 4470:talk 4456:talk 4450:15) 4419:talk 4413:13) 4382:talk 4376:12) 4345:talk 4339:11) 4289:talk 4254:here 4229:talk 4211:talk 4174:here 4144:talk 4106:talk 4055:talk 4017:talk 3905:talk 3899:13) 3864:talk 3858:12) 3820:talk 3814:11) 3757:talk 3751:10) 3700:talk 3559:logs 3533:talk 3529:edit 3514:talk 3458:some 3222:on " 3131:talk 3113:talk 3105:Worm 2980:here 2959:this 2942:talk 2893:talk 2876:Talk 2857:talk 2816:talk 2781:talk 2762:Talk 2739:Talk 2719:talk 2702:talk 2684:talk 2667:talk 2652:talk 2559:talk 2364:and 2240:talk 2195:talk 2175:talk 2138:talk 2121:talk 2104:talk 2083:talk 1953:here 1936:talk 1915:talk 1899:talk 1878:talk 1704:here 1696:here 1689:here 1632:five 1595:HERE 1557:here 1553:here 1531:logs 1505:talk 1501:edit 1422:logs 1404:talk 1365:logs 1347:talk 1308:logs 1290:talk 1251:logs 1233:talk 1194:logs 1176:talk 1137:logs 1119:talk 1080:logs 1062:talk 1023:logs 1005:talk 975:logs 957:talk 903:talk 873:logs 855:talk 825:logs 807:talk 777:logs 759:talk 729:logs 711:talk 656:talk 433:Talk 424:Talk 391:Talk 371:Talk 225:Talk 195:Talk 161:Talk 150:Talk 136:Talk 129:and 125:Talk 110:Talk 93:Talk 82:Talk 71:Talk 60:Talk 26:Case 4486:). 3843:). 3799:). 3736:). 3694:9) 3679:). 3642:). 3601:5) 3586:). 3508:4) 3450:ANI 3006:AGK 2986:AGK 2631:, 2538:ΛΧΣ 2406:not 2344:by 2008:AGK 1974:AGK 1949:not 1945:AGK 1891:had 945:RfA 698:RfA 307:Log 145:AGK 4803:: 4779:. 4241:). 4223:, 3919:, 3916:, 3878:, 3840:, 3837:, 3834:, 3796:, 3793:, 3790:, 3787:, 3780:, 3777:, 3771:, 3768:, 3676:, 3670:, 3667:, 3664:, 3583:, 3573:, 3570:, 3561:| 3557:| 3553:| 3549:| 3544:| 3540:| 3535:| 3531:| 3133:) 3116:) 2982:. 2944:) 2895:) 2869:NW 2859:) 2818:) 2783:) 2755:NW 2752:. 2732:NW 2721:) 2704:) 2686:) 2678:. 2669:) 2654:) 2573:| 2401:my 2242:) 2197:) 2177:) 2140:) 2123:) 2106:) 2085:) 1938:) 1917:) 1880:) 1784:NW 1706:. 1700:is 1533:| 1529:| 1525:| 1521:| 1516:| 1512:| 1507:| 1503:| 1444:— 1387:— 1330:— 1273:— 1216:— 1159:— 1102:— 1045:— 635:. 608:, 602:, 596:, 117:: 103:: 86:— 75:— 64:— 4770:· 4765:( 4757:. 4717:) 4712:· 4706:· 4700:· 4694:· 4688:· 4682:· 4677:( 4626:· 4621:( 4473:· 4468:( 4459:· 4454:( 4422:· 4417:( 4385:· 4380:( 4348:· 4343:( 4292:· 4287:( 4232:· 4227:( 4214:· 4209:( 4147:· 4142:( 4109:· 4104:( 4058:· 4053:( 4020:· 4015:( 3908:· 3903:( 3867:· 3862:( 3823:· 3818:( 3760:· 3755:( 3703:· 3698:( 3661:( 3565:) 3527:( 3517:· 3512:( 3129:( 3110:( 2940:( 2891:( 2879:) 2873:( 2855:( 2814:( 2779:( 2765:) 2759:( 2742:) 2736:( 2717:( 2700:( 2682:( 2665:( 2650:( 2562:· 2557:( 2238:( 2193:( 2173:( 2136:( 2119:( 2102:( 2081:( 1934:( 1913:( 1901:) 1897:( 1876:( 1537:) 1499:( 1442:) 1437:· 1431:· 1425:· 1419:· 1413:· 1407:· 1402:( 1385:) 1380:· 1374:· 1368:· 1362:· 1356:· 1350:· 1345:( 1328:) 1323:· 1317:· 1311:· 1305:· 1299:· 1293:· 1288:( 1271:) 1266:· 1260:· 1254:· 1248:· 1242:· 1236:· 1231:( 1214:) 1209:· 1203:· 1197:· 1191:· 1185:· 1179:· 1174:( 1157:) 1152:· 1146:· 1140:· 1134:· 1128:· 1122:· 1117:( 1100:) 1095:· 1089:· 1083:· 1077:· 1071:· 1065:· 1060:( 1043:) 1038:· 1032:· 1026:· 1020:· 1014:· 1008:· 1003:( 995:) 990:· 984:· 978:· 972:· 966:· 960:· 955:( 947:) 942:· 936:· 930:· 924:· 918:· 912:· 906:· 901:( 893:) 888:· 882:· 876:· 870:· 864:· 858:· 853:( 845:) 840:· 834:· 828:· 822:· 816:· 810:· 805:( 797:) 792:· 786:· 780:· 774:· 768:· 762:· 757:( 749:) 744:· 738:· 732:· 726:· 720:· 714:· 709:( 700:) 695:· 689:· 683:· 677:· 671:· 665:· 659:· 654:( 611:4 605:3 599:2 593:1 499:e 492:t 485:v 387:+ 345:+ 309:) 305:( 221:+ 163:) 159:( 152:) 148:( 138:) 134:( 127:) 123:( 112:) 108:( 95:) 91:( 84:) 80:( 73:) 69:( 62:) 58:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement - Knowledge

Index