all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.

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

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, 4 Arbitrators are recused (James, Jayjg, and Fennec automatically, Nohat explictly) and 2 (Theresa, Mav) are inactive, so 4 votes are a majority.

For all items

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

Motions and requests by the parties

Place those on the discussion page.

Proposed temporary injunctions

Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template

1) {text of proposed orders}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Advocacy

1) Wikipedia is not a forum for issue advocacy, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:50 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Sockpuppets

2) While a Wikipedia user may edit under more than one account, misuse of Sockpuppets is not allowed.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:50 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Disruptive users

1) Disruptive users may be banned for a limited period from Wikipedia.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:50 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Background

1) Conflict between the Greek and Turkish people dates back to the Turkish conquest of the Byzantine Empire, but has in modern times resulted from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following its defeat in the First World War and the territorial and demographic adjustments which followed it. Recently the Cyprus dispute has been in the forefront.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:20 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

if we have jurisdiction over the Turko-Greek conflict, I vote to ban them both for a year ➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Atrocities

1.1) It is uncontested that both peoples, in their struggles with one another, have from time to time committed atrocities against each other, factual information which finds a proper place in a general reference work such as Wikipedia.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:20 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose:

Abstain:

sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC) I have no opinion on this content issue[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC) - I have no idea what this is supposed to mean
Content issue. Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Argyrosargyrou

2) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) has since May 7, 2005 focused his attention on articles which involve the Cyprus dispute, see early edits: [1], [2]. As he speaks of restoring a section, it is likely he edited the article previously as an anonymous editor.

Support:

Fred Bauder 15:39, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC) Although I disagree with the interpretation of "restore" - this does not mean that he is restoring his own content - can we remove this?[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Argyrosargyrou's perspective

3) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) takes a Greek nationalist point of view, expressing the effect of his editing as removing Turkish bias, see [3] and its comment, "E.A stop trying to sabotage this page and turn it into a Turkish propaganda site"

Support:

Fred Bauder 15:52, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Opponents and other significant editors

E.A

3.1) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) has been opposed by E.A (talk · contribs), a Turkish Cypriot, see [4] comment "Again re-instated neutral" and [5].

Support:

Fred Bauder 16:24, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

ChrisO

3.2) ChrisO (talk · contribs) contested Argyrosargyrou's edits to Cyprus reunification referendum, 2004: Argyrosargyrou's first edit. Later edit warring: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] and using anon ip.

Support:

Fred Bauder 19:06, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Snchduer

3.3 Snchduer (talk · contribs) has played peacemaking role at times, attempting to advance compromise versions, see Talk:Civilian casualties and displacements during the Cyprus conflict. Personal attack on Snchduer by Argyrosargyrou

Support:

Fred Bauder 18:32, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Scimitar

3.4) Scimitar (talk · contribs)

Support:

Fred Bauder 18:32, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

I'd like to see more explanation of this one ➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Eh? Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Parallel articles (POV forks)

4) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) has created several articles which are parallel to existing articles such as "Cyprus Issue" (deleted copyright violation, must be administrator to view). This article was deleted as a copyright violation, being a copy of this release of the Greek Cypriot government's Press and Information Office, see original post of copyright violation, viewable only by Wikipedia administrators. Another article which was created in this way Turkish Invasion of Cyprus, created while Cyprus dispute was protected survived Votes for deletion. See also Cyprus problem and recreation of deleted article "Hellenic Genocide" (viewable only by Wikipedia administrators), see Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Hellenic_Genocide

Support:

Fred Bauder 17:00, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Sockpuppets

5) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) has created a number of sockpuppets to advocate his positions. They are likely to include SaintJerome (talk · contribs), TheAmbassador (talk · contribs), EverAndForever (talk · contribs), TheCatandDog (talk · contribs), MorkandMindy (talk · contribs), Atriades (talk · contribs), TheEmpire (talk · contribs) and CaptainJack (talk · contribs).

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 12:40 (UTC)
some technical evidence would probably help this point ➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC) technical evidence is inconclusive - I've added "are likely to" above - the style and edits are enough for that imo[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Community reaction

6) Wikipedia editors are aware that Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) sometimes adds factual information and links to important resources, but his positive contributions are far outweighed by persistent aggressive point of view advocacy, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The pogroms in Istanbul. The net result is that due to Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs)"s activities viewed as a whole, whatever positive contributions he makes are of little significance or worth as compared to the disruption and prejudice which result from his activities.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:06 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed remedies

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.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Argyrosargyrou banned

1) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) and any sockpuppet he may create is banned from Wikipedia for one year.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:24 (UTC)
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC) - 2nd choice

Oppose:

a year seems harsh ➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Abstain:

1.1) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) and any sockpuppet he may create is banned from Wikipedia for six months.

Support:

sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC) - 1st choice
Fred Bauder 17:09, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 17:30, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Argyrosargyrou sockpuppets banned

2) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) shall edit under the username "Argyrosargyrou" and shall not create any others.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:24 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Article ban

3) Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) and any sockpuppet he may create is banned from all articles relating to Cyprus for six months. To start after the successful completion of any other ban.

Support:

sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Fred Bauder 17:09, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 17:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Support:

Oppose:

Abstain:

Outlawed

1) Any edit made during the period of his ban by Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) or any user or anonymous editor reasonably believed to be Argyrosargyrou may be reverted by any editor of Wikipedia without limit.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:41 (UTC)
➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Editing during ban

2) Should Argyrosargyrou (talk · contribs) attempt to edit Wikipedia anonymously or with any new user account during his ban, the account he uses may be blocked indefinitely (if practical) by any administrator including those who have previously been in conflict with him. Each such block shall reset the ban.

Support:

Fred Bauder June 28, 2005 13:41 (UTC)
(deleted the "one year" specification to make it applicable to any ban) ➥the Epopt 21:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sannse (talk) 11:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
→Raul654 04:25, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:37, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Discussion by Arbitrators

General

Motion to close

Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support")
24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

Move to close.

➥the Epopt 17:31, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fred Bauder 18:20, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
→Raul654 19:30, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
Neutrality^talk 04:35, August 21, 2005 (UTC)