Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles: Difference between revisions

Case Opened on 21:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Case Closed on 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Case Amended by by motion on 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Involved parties

• Ryan Postlethwaite (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (initiating party)
• Jaakobou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• PalestineRemembered (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Tiamut (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Eleland (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Pedro Gonnet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• ThuranX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Suladna (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• CJCurrie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• RolandR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Armon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• G-Dett (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Itzse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Tewfik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Statement by Ryan Postlethwaite

The battles that are going on at Palestine/Israel articles are now getting out of hand and the community is no longer able to handle them. The history of Saeb Erekat is an ideal example of the problems we’re faced with here. Despite there being discussion on talk pages, the parties insist on edit warring with Jaakobou continually changing the article to his version – despite it being arguably a BLP violation (Jaakobou has basically been trying to label Erekat a liar). Other articles paint a similar picture (Definitions of Palestine and Palestinian, Palestinian Fedayeen, Second Intifada, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Allegations of Israeili apartheid, Islam: What the West Needs to Know, Media coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, Arab citizens of Israel, Pallywood (Note:This is not an exhaustive list)). What it boils down to is severe ownership issues from certain members of the dispute, and an unwillingness for parties to make compromises and stick with consensus. I realise there are no user RfC’s in this dispute, the problem is, who to create an RfC for? We’ve had many previous threads on AN/I about this, a previous arbitration case which was closed without action and now all parties seem resigned to getting their point across through edit warring and other disruption. A quick look at the block logs of a number of the participants show that they have no respect for some of our editing policies and guidelines. Any further efforts at attempting to stop the dispute other than arbitration are simply going to add gasoline to the fire and will act solely as a stepping stone to arbitration at a later date. I hope the arbitrators will accept this case to look at remedies including editing restrictions and/or article/topic probations. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by PalestineRemembered

• Nobody need be intimidated by this case, because it's not really so complex. In my humble opinon, all the problems come down to just two three factors:

1. One or two semi-literate editors, who cannot process the information in front of them properly.
2. Occasional cases of straight-forward cheating, deliberate insertion of falsehoods - or removing good material on frivolous grounds, to the severe aggravation of scholarly editors.
3. "Disciplinary cases" that have been poisoned by malice aimed at witnesses, and evidence been interfered with. A severe chill has been induced by an expectation of victimising.

• These problems will not be difficult to identify and score/judge. Unless we need barristers to demand answers for straightforward questions like this:
• Question to Jaakobou - have you ever operated any sock-puppet accounts, and, if so, have you operated them abusively? PR^talk 19:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Eleland

I urge ArbCom to accept this request. While it stems primarily from good-faith content disputes, the manner in which these disputes have been conducted has been seriously disruptive across literally dozens of Wikipedia articles. Admins recognize the problem and the problem users, but generally don't go beyond brief 3RR blocks because the subject matter is so touchy, and they don't want to be seen as favouring one side. Actually, that's the problem here; we're clearly thinking in terms of sides. Normal dispute resolution has succeeded occasionally (the lists of Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada, finally removed from their politicized context as an Israeli-only List of massacres committed during the al-Aqsa Intifada, being a case in point) but more commonly failed miserably (Saeb Erekat, the never-resolved Battle of Jenin slugfest, etc, etc.) The buck has to stop somewhere, and ArbCom is it. <eleland/talkedits> 19:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, in addition, there may be some parties who ought to be named additionally. Offhand:

Armon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

G-Dett (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Itzse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Tewfik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

And surely others. <eleland/talkedits> 20:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by ThuranX

Not really sure why I'm considered an involved party. I watch AN/I and I like reading through some of the cases and chiming in when I think that wider community input is useful, or the opinion of a third party editor can help. I've got all of three article space edits to any of the relevant articles (two to The Palestinian Fedayeen, one to the definitions of Palestinian). I'm not particularly into edit warring about these articles, but I have acted in these few instances when I think I can help. One was corrected (the Def. of Palest-ine/ian), and the other two probably got lost in the edit warring there fast. For me, wider involvement in Wikipedia, via AN/I, has just been a way of expanding my awareness here, by getting me into new subject areas. Although it's possible some here think I've got a 'side' going because i happen to be Jewish, not the case. I've been reading the cases and reviewing them, and anyone who looks at my contribs to AN/I will see I kibbitz in lots of cases, sometimes to some particular help, other times, it goes silently ignored. Either way, fine by me. I've got no particular interest in this entire situation beyond being frustrated watching the project resources being squandered on the cyclical fighting, and in noting who I think has been responsible for violations of policy and creating problems. Do I have opinions about the topic? yes. I keep them out of the cited facts, because frankly, I suspect most of the editors of these articles write more from personal assumptions and POV, and I'd rather see cited facts I disagree with than not. Cited facts make me rethink my own attitudes.) Do I have opinions about who is at fault here? Yes, and they're already stated in the relevant AN/I threads about Jaakobou and Eleland. In summary, no clue why I'm here, not an edit warrior on here, just an uninvolved third party. ThuranX (talk) 21:32, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by G-Dett

I'm glad this has been brought forward; many thanks to Ryan for doing so. Two other editors who might be included here are 6SJ7 and of course Jayjg.

I have two suggestions and will keep them both brief. One is that User:HG be included somehow. He is a very unusual editor in that he's widely trusted by both sides. I'm sure he has real-life views but they are no more detectable in his Wikipedia presence than is his body odor. He seems to be drawn to resolving intractable debates, as if they were 10,000 piece jigsaw puzzles and he some kind of savant.

Ideally we could have a mini-cabal but frankly I don't know who else would be on it (Durova?). Part of HG's success has been that he never tells anyone they're talking balderdash, even when they are; he's more of a facilitator of mildly Socratic dialogue. There are many other intelligent and non-aligned editors, who however through very occasional and understandable flashes of intellectual impatience have been branded partisan.

My second suggestion is that we have some sort of moderated ME-related forum where inter-article balance issues could be discussed as they arise, and loose working principles formulated. There are certain policy-interpretation memes that come up regularly in editing disputes, and even when they're semi-resolved there's no take-away. I know "other stuff" isn't supposed to exist on Wikipedia, but it certainly does exist on ME pages, and the fact that we're not supposed to talk about it has just forced it underground into "strategy," often of a passive-aggressive sort.--G-Dett (talk) 22:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by CJCurrie

Arbcomm intervention on this file is long overdue. The controversies on pages having to do with Israel/Palestine can no longer be described as simply "content disputes"; many of these pages have become completely dysfunctional, due in large part to the reasons identified by Ryan and others.

Further comments:

• The list of involved participants seems to have been chosen in an arbitrary fashion. User:Jayjg strikes me the most noteworthy omission, though I'm certain that others have been left out as well.
• I would recommend that this ArbComm case be restructured so as to encompass pages that do not specifically address the Israel/Palestine conflict, but rather address related matters and involve many of the same participants. New antisemitism strikes me as a particularly relevant example, in light of ongoing discussions on its talk page.
• I do not accept Ryan's assertion that "all parties seem resigned to getting their point across through edit warring and other disruption". While it's undeniably true that both "sides" in this dispute are guilty of edit-warring, there are some participants who have tried to persuade "the other side" with rational arguments ... the difficulty is that this approach seldom leads to discernable results.
• While it may prove necessary to admonish or sanction certain editors for their behaviour on these pages, this will not solve the underlying problem. It could even be counter-productive, if editors who are not sanctioned (or like-minded editors who are not named in this particular RfA) continue the larger pattern of tendentious editing once arbitration is finished. Wikipedia's articles on Israel/Palestine have been an embarrassment for some time, in no small part because meaningful debate on substantive editing issues has become almost impossible. We need is method of ensuring that future disputes can be resolved in an open and civil manner -- anything short of this will just be window dressing on one of the project's most serious problems. (The suggestion of appointing an ombudsman has its advantages, though I wonder if this task could prove too large for any one editor to take.)

CJCurrie (talk) 00:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC), with 02:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Please allow me to reiterate my view that this RfA should be expanded to address relevant articles that do not specifically address the Israel/Palestine conflict, and should address the larger problem of a poisoned atmosphere on all of these pages.

If this RfA only addresses issues of behaviour on a small number of pages, I'm quite concerned that it could (i) selectively punish some participants while allowing equally culpable parties in the larger dispute to escape sanction, (ii) further poison the atmosphere on these pages by creating the appearance of selective prosecution, and (iii) do nothing to resolve the larger and more pressing problem of factionalism on these pages.

By the way, I think 6SJ7 has raised an interesting point regarding the time frame. I'm a bit concerned that this RfA could have the unintended consequence of allowing tendentious editors who've kept a low profile in recent months, but were prominently involved in past POV disputes, to re-emerge if and when restrictions are placed on their "opponents". I don't believe this (plausible, if remote) turn of events would create either the appearance or reality of fairness.

To improve the quality of these pages, this RfA must take a proactive role in establishing terms of behaviour for articles on Middle East issues. We don't need to examine every dispute, but we most certainly do need to ensure the situation on these pages improves. User:Sm8900's "general comment" was well-intentioned, but I fear it his/her remedy would take this process in entirely the wrong direction, and focus on minutiae rather than the bigger picture. CJCurrie (talk) 23:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Pedro Gonnet

I am listed as a party to the edit-war on Israeli-Palestinian conflict. My last edit to the page (here) or to the talk page (here) predate the page-protection by 12 and 14 days respectively, which makes me an unlikely candidate for that war (I am, however, involved in Gilad Shalit, where a nice solution was found, and on Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt, which went stale). The discussions on that Talk:Israeli-Palestinian conflict (the wildest one is regarding the use of the term "occupied" when referring to the Israeli-occupied territories) are symptomatic of the way certain editors work: insert POV/unsourced/tendentious material or delete sourced material, start a revert war, call for an RfC, flame anybody who participates in it, drop out of the discussion and when a compromise is reached between other editors, block and/or ignore it.

As I have mentioned on the WP:AN/I thread, this is not about a content dispute, but about the willingness to start literally hundreds of content disputes based on bogus material, simply to deadlock or seriously degrade most -- if not all -- articles related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The main protagonists are not interested in verifiability, NPOV, avoiding undue weight and such, but in inserting their own, generally anti-Palestinian WP:POV at any cost. For these editors , there is never a compromise, never a mutually agreed solution and as such, never an end to an edit-war.

As you may have guessed, my main problem is with User:Jaakobou, with whom I have locked horns on several occasions. I have yet to see him end an edit-war, accept a compromise or back down from any of his positions or edits. This is not about tough discussions -- I have had many with User:GHcool and User:Sm8900 and in most cases reached a solution and/or compromise, of which I am somewhat proud -- but about fruitless discussions being used as a mere pretext to drag an issue on an wear out all participants. This kind of behaviour is extremely disruptive, time-consuming and just plain annoying -- and does not contribute to the encyclopaedia.

Please, accept this RfA so that we can all get back to normal editing. pedro gonnet - talk - 09.01.2008 08:02

Statement by RolandR

I welcome the fact that ArbCom is to look at this area, and I hope that they will come up with some helpful guidelines. In particular, I support the suggestion by CarolMooreDC above for a style guide or naming convention. As Pedro Gonnet notes, there is constant dispute over the use of the term "occupied" to describe the territories which came under Israeli rule in 1967. There are also disputes over the term "guerilla"/"terrorist", over the placing of an "Antisemitism" category tag on many articles, and other similar issues. This could all usefully be addressed.

However, I question my own inclusion, and indeed that of most editors named above (including some with whom I have clashed in the past), on this list. The problem is not, in most cases, the individual editors, but the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the absence of clear guidelines here. Some of us may have been guilty of occasional tendentious editing, and there is one editor above whom I have recently accused of incivility; but these are issues which can be -- and indeed are being -- dealt with by regular procedures. They do not amount to disruptive editing, and do not in themselves require the involvement of ArbCom.

If there is to be a named list of editors to be looked at by ArbCom, then there are several more who should be included. For a start:

Amoruso (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Andyvphil (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Screen stalker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Zeq (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hertz1888 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

6SJ7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

and I'm sure there are many more. If Isarig was not currently under a one-year topic ban, he also would be included. In short, it is invidious to pick out just the editors named above, since there are countless others acting in a very similar manner.

Having said that, I do think that there should be a specific inquiry into the behaviour of Jaakobou, identified by several editors above and elsewhere as a particularly problematic and uncooperative editor. My history with him includes an ANI regarding his use of racist language and another following his posting of libellous comments about me on a talk page. On that occasion, Jaakobou so thoroughly angered other editors (not previously involved in this area) that he was extremely lucky to avoid a lengthy community block. RolandR (talk) 11:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Jaakobou

My own conduct hasn't been ideal, I realize and I took upon myself to change my editing habits since my recent block (arguing on a number of articles and 3RR breach on one of them) and have obtained mentorship to address that and help diffuse problematic cases.

I ask the committee to defer arbitration at this time in favor of some communal observation resolutions/declaration of intent.

I also believe there is a serious need for formal mediation on Second Intifada and Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I believe full blown arbitration should always be a last resort and that my suggestions will help everyone involved to improve their policy understanding and conduct and will also open the door for new editors who'd be kicked out in the current state of affairs. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 11:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

If the Committee does decide to accept this case, then I request that the following names be added to the list - Nishidani, Stingray86, NSH001, Sanguinalis, Gatoclass, Timeshifter, Ian Pitchford, Nickhh, ChrisO, Abu_Ali, Paul kuiper NL, Timb0h, RomaC, Editor54321, JaapBoBo, Burgas00, Bless sins, Liftarn, and 70.109.223.188, who are certainly involved in these conflicts as much as anyone else, and some moreso than the listed or suggested parties.

My apologies if I forgot someone. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 18:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorted for comfort:

• Special mentions:
  • Eleland, PalestineRemembered, G-Dett, Bless sins, CJCurrie, Liftarn.
• Nishidani (talk · contribs),
• Stingray86 (talk · contribs),
• NSH001 (talk · contribs),
• Sanguinalis (talk · contribs),
• Gatoclass (talk · contribs),
• Timeshifter (talk · contribs),
• Ian Pitchford (talk · contribs),
• Nickhh (talk · contribs),
• ChrisO (talk · contribs),
• Abu_ali (talk · contribs),
• Paul kuiper NL (talk · contribs),
• Timb0h (talk · contribs),
• RomaC (talk · contribs),
• Editor54321 (talk · contribs),
• JaapBoBo (talk · contribs),
• Burgas00 (talk · contribs),
• Bless sins (talk · contribs),
• Liftarn (talk · contribs),
• 70.109.223.188 (talk · contribs)
• 146.115.58.152 (talk · contribs) / 67.98.206.2 (talk · contribs) (same user)

-- Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 23:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC) , added another on 02:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Statement by Tiamut

First off, I would like to thank Ryan Postlewaithe for being bringing this case to the attention of Arbcomm. The problems besetting Palestine-Israel articles are chronic, long-term problems that have not received the attention required to resolve them.

I second Number 57's suggestion that Beit Or (talk · contribs) be added to the list and the suggestion of other editors above that Jayjg (talk · contribs) also be included. The former has a habit of pile-on reverting and even wikistalked me to five different articles one day, just to revert my additions. (See related discussion here, here, and here). The latter, while having taken a brief sabbatical between August and November, was (and still is) deeply involved in editing Palestine-Israel articles, and as an admin, set the example to many of us on how to approach editing at such articles (for better or worse - arbcomm can decide that). Though his involvement is recent, I would also add Eternalsleeper (talk · contribs) here as well, since he jumped into the dispute at Second Intifada to drive-by revert twice, before even engaging in any discussion.

Having learned a lot over the last year and half about Wikipedia policies, I like to think that the quality of my editing contributions and my ability to work with others with vastly differing viewpoints has greatly improved. This is of course not true across the board. There are some editors who engage in tendentious and disruptive editing with whom I have not been able to construct a satisfactory, collaborative editing relationship. I often get the sense that the goal of these editors is simply to disrupt a page where sourced edits representing a viewpoint they don't like are being added, until the page is protected and no further additions can be made.

Regarding my own block log, I have been blocked four times for 3RR. The first block was placed SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) for editing at Arab citizens of Israel, where in the midst of multi-participant edit war over how (or for some whether) to include a piece of sourced information regarding the status of Palestinians in Israel as an "indigenous people", involving many of the editors listed here, Isarig reported me for 3RR and I was blocked. Many fellow editors took issue with the block, which they believed was unfair, given my involvement in discussion in the talk page and the attempt in my edits to find alternate phraseology acceptable to everyone. The subsequent two blocks were placed after reports filed (again) by Isarig (who in all three cases was edit-warring with me at the time, but was not himself sanctioned). These two were lifted before they expired after Isarig's own history of edit-warring was brought to the attention of admins by other editors. It was around this time that I began to see how detrimental edit warring was to the project. I am certainly not making excuses for my behaviour, only outlining an evolution. The last block was placed by Tariqabjotu (talk · contribs) after I filed a report against Egyegy (talk · contribs). While I had not violated 3RR and had not lowered myself to responding to Egygey uncivil and personal attacks on me, I admit that I was edit warring, and Tariqabjotu blocked me for a lengthy period. The block was overturned by Mangojuice (talk · contribs) long before it expired after I recognized that fact. (Note that Tariqabjotu refused to lift the block when I requested that he do so by email). That was my last block (in September 2007) and I have had no blocks since.

I do try to avoid edit-warring. It is however, deeply challenging. Particularly when you spend days working to add reliable sourced and relevant scholarly material to an article, only to have someone come by and mass blank your additions, and then have someone else come and drive-by revert them away again after they are restored by you or others. I think Arbcomm needs to know that this is not about a content dispute. It's about a style of editing that centers on disruption to do away with facts that cannot argued away. It's about some editors letting WP:IDONTLIKEIT be the key determinant to whether an addition remains in an article, rather than adibing by core Wiki policies like WP:NPOV and WP:CONSENSUS. I don't think I am one of those editors. Though I do have a strong POV on the issues which no doubt influences what information I add to these articles, I do try to be self-conscious about it and I don't delete relevant reliably sourced information representing opposing viewpoints, even when I think it's a total load of crap.

I think the arbcomm should focus on identifying specific behaviours that are unhelpful here (e.g. drive-by reverting to delete sourced material without sufficient engagement in talk) and the editors who use them. Without a specific work agenda here, this arbcomm is likely to end up unfocused and end without resolving anything (as did the previous one on Allegations of Israeli apartheid). Tiamut 12:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

PS. Regarding Tariqabjotu's statement that Tewfik (talk · contribs) (among others) shouldn't be lsited in this case, I have to disagree (about tewfik specificially). Tewfik regularly engages in the kind of behaviour I have described above. His mass blanking of material Second Intifada after one version enjoyed stability for two weeks, prompted a series of edit wars that led to the page being protected. In my opinion and that of other editors at the page, he did not sufficiently explain these edits. Tiamut 12:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Isarig is no longer with us

This is to inform all involved parties here that Isarig (talk · contribs) have exercised their right to vanish and are no longer active as a Wikipedia contributor. It should be noted that both their mentors (User:Avraham and myself) have agreed to that according to WP:RTV. The user have been explained not to come back editing again as per WP:RTV, a thing they agreed to. The 'right to vanish' request has been accepted by OTRS members and a notice has been sent to the ArbCom mailing list. As a consequence, all edits by User:Isarig have been deleted from their main account and transfered to an account place holder known to the ArbCom, OTRS members and their mentors. This same notice has been cross posted to WP:AN. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 15:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Preliminary decisions

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

• Accept, primarily to consider the overall situation in this topic area. Kirill 17:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
• Accept per Kirill. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 17:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
• Accept to look out the best way to handle heated conflicts related to this topic and examine involved parties disruptive conduct. FloNight (talk) 16:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Accept. There's no doubt this case must be accepted but the scope needs to be kept fairly tightly defined and this case has already started to sprawl. The decision is not going to have any effect on the balance of views present in articles about the Israel/Palestine conflict. The committee will only be looking at user conduct issues. The wide number of users involved is likely either to make this case among the most protracted ever seen, or to a deliberate decision to pass enforcement to uninvolved admins. The latter is the more likely. Can I make a plea for brevity in the evidence? Generally the pithier a submission, the more impact it makes. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Final decision

Principles

Purpose of Wikipedia

1) Wikipedia is a project to create a neutral encyclopedia. Use of the site for other purposes, such as advocacy or propaganda, furtherance of outside conflicts, publishing or promoting original research, and political or ideological struggle, is prohibited.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Decorum

2) Wikipedia users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as personal attacks, incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system, is prohibited.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Editorial process

3) Wikipedia works by building consensus. This is done through the use of polite discussion—involving the wider community, if necessary—and dispute resolution, rather than through disruptive editing. Editors are each responsible for noticing when a debate is escalating into an edit war, and for helping the debate move to better approaches by discussing their differences rationally. Edit-warring, whether by reversion or otherwise, is prohibited; this is so even when the disputed content is clearly problematic, with only a few exceptions. Revert rules should not be construed as an entitlement or inalienable right to revert, nor do they endorse reverts as an editing technique.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

4) Users should not respond to inappropriate behavior in kind, or engage in sustained editorial conflict or unbridled criticism across different forums. Editors who have genuine grievances against others are expected to avail themselves of the dispute resolution mechanism.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Findings of fact

Area of conflict

1) The disputes presented in this case, while focusing specifically on issues related to Palestinian-Israeli conflict, are part of a broader set of conflicts prevalent over the entire range of articles concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict (see, in particular, the prior Arbitration cases regarding Allegations of apartheid, PalestineRemembered, Deir Yassin massacre, Israel-Lebanon, Israeli apartheid, Zeq, and Yuber). Many of these conflicts are grounded in matters external to the project; deep-seated and long-standing real world conflicts between the peoples of Palestine and Israel have been transferred to Wikipedia. The area of conflict in this case shall be considered to be the entire set of Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

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.

Discretionary sanctions

1.1) Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.

Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.

In determining whether to impose sanctions on a given user and which sanctions to impose, administrators should use their judgment and balance the need to assume good faith and avoid biting genuinely inexperienced editors, and the desire to allow responsible contributors maximum freedom to edit, with the need to reduce edit-warring and misuse of Wikipedia as a battleground, so as to create an acceptable collaborative editing environment even on our most contentious articles. Editors wishing to edit in these areas are advised to edit carefully, to adopt Wikipedia's communal approaches (including appropriate conduct, dispute resolution, neutral point of view, no original research and verifiability) in their editing, and to amend behaviors that are deemed to be of concern by administrators. An editor unable or unwilling to do so may wish to restrict their editing to other topics, in order to avoid sanctions.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Superseded by an alternate sanction passed 14 to 0, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Appeal of discretionary sanctions

2) Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee. Administrators are cautioned not to reverse such sanctions without familiarizing themselves with the full facts of the matter and engaging in extensive discussion and consensus-building at the administrators' noticeboard or another suitable on-wiki venue. The Committee will consider appropriate remedies including suspension or revocation of adminship in the event of violations.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Superseded by an alternate sanction passed 14 to 0, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Working group

3) The Committee shall convene a working group, composed of experienced Wikipedians in good standing, and task it with developing a comprehensive set of recommendations for resolving the pervasive problem of intractable disputes centered around national, ethnic, and cultural areas of conflict. The membership, structure, and procedures of the group shall be subject to the approval of the Committee. The working group shall be free to develop recommendations of any form, including those requiring Committee action and those requiring community adoption of new or changed policies, at its discretion. The group shall be appointed within two weeks from the closure of this case, and shall present its recommendations to the Committee no later than six months from the date of its inception.

Passed 10 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Editors reminded

4) Editors are reminded that when editing in subject areas of bitter and long-standing real-world conflict, it is all the more important to comply with Wikipedia policies such as assuming good faith of all editors including those on the other side of the real-world dispute, writing with a neutral point of view, remaining civil and avoiding personal attacks, utilizing reliable sources for contentious or disputed assertions, and resorting to dispute resolution where necessary. Wikipedia cannot solve the dispute between the Israeli and Palestinian people or any other real-world ethnic conflict. What Wikipedia can do is aspire to provide neutral, encyclopedic coverage about the areas of dispute and the peoples involved in it, which may lead to a broader understanding of the issues and the positions of all parties to the conflict. The contributions of all good-faith editors on these articles who contribute with this goal in mind are appreciated.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Editors counseled

5) Editors who find it difficult to edit a particular article or topic from a neutral point of view and adhere to other Wikipedia policies are counseled that they may sometimes need or wish to step away temporarily from that article or subject area. Sometimes, editors in this position may wish devote some of their knowledge, interest, and effort to creating or editing other articles that may relate to the same broad subject-matter as the dispute, but are less immediately contentious. For example, an editor whose ethnicity, cultural heritage, or personal interests relate to Side X and who finds himself caught up in edit-warring on an article about a recent war between Side X and Side Y, may wish to disengage from that article for a time and instead focus on a different aspect of the history, civilization, and cultural heritage of Side X.

Passed 10 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Standard discretionary sanctions

6) All Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted, are placed under discretionary sanctions. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.

Passed 14 to 0 by motion, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Enforcement

Logging of sanctions

1) All sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Log of blocks and bans.

Passed 11 to 0 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Uninvolved administrators

2) For the purpose of imposing sanctions under the provisions of this case, an administrator will be considered "uninvolved" if he or she has not previously participated in any content disputes on articles in the area of conflict. Enforcing the provisions of this decision will not be considered to be participation in a dispute. Any doubt regarding whether an administrator qualifies under this definition is to be treated as any other appeal of discretionary sanctions.

Passed 8 to 2 01:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Further remedies

General 1RR restriction

• All articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict falls under 1RR. When in doubt, assume it is related.
  • Clear vandalism, or edits by anonymous IP editors, may be reverted without penalty.
  • Editors who violate this 1RR restriction may be blocked without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

The template {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}} may be employed on the talk page of Arab-Israeli conflict related articles.

Per community discussion and decision at Wikipedia:WikiProject Arbitration Enforcement/Israel-Palestine articles

Log of notifications

List here editors who have been placed on notice of the remedies in place in this case (including the diff of the notification). For convenience, the template {{subst:Palestine-Israel enforcement}} may be used, or an individual message containing the same information.

• 70.109.223.188 (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [1] Thatcher 22:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
• 75.72.88.121 (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [2] Addhoc (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  • For purposes of Arbitration enforcement, Adnanmuf (talk · contribs) and 75.72.88.121 (talk · contribs) should be treated as a single user. Thatcher 21:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
• Radical-Dreamer (talk · contribs) notified of the case and cautioned for racially motivated edits and copyright violations. [3] -- ChrisO (talk) 20:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
• Kahmed (talk · contribs) notified of case and warned re: edit-warring on Council on American-Islamic Relations. ([4]) MastCell ^Talk 23:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
• ForeverFreeSpeech (talk · contribs) warned about abusive edit summaries and edit-warring on Council on American-Islamic Relations ([5]). MastCell ^Talk 23:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
• Zeq (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [6] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zeq also still applies. GRBerry 15:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
• Danielleb32 (talk · contribs) notified of this case in relation to repeated additions of original research and unreliable sources, and advised of related policies. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
• Canadian Monkey (talk · contribs) notified of the case [7]. Addhoc (talk) 08:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
• Nishidani (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [8] PhilKnight (talk) 20:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• Maha Pizza (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [9] -- ChrisO (talk) 23:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
• Michael Safyan (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [10] PhilKnight (talk) 12:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• Mass notification on arbitration enforcement thread. See: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement/Archive21#Eleland issues persist. Vassyana (talk) 02:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
• Julia1987 (talk · contribs) [11] and Tundrabuggy (talk · contribs) [12] notified of the case. -- ChrisO (talk) 08:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
• Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) notified of this case.[13] -- ChrisO (talk) 00:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
• ChrisO (talk · contribs) formally notified, based on disruptive behavior at Muhammad al-Durrah.[14] --Elonka 01:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
• Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [15] PhilKnight (talk) 14:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
• Gilabrand (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [16] PhilKnight (talk) 15:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
• Notika (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [17] GRBerry 04:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
• Amoruso (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [18] PhilKnight (talk) 00:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
• Lapsed Pacifist (talk · contribs) formally notified.[19] --Elonka 01:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
• Shevashalosh (talk · contribs) notified of the case. [20] PhilKnight (talk) 20:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
• Liftarn (talk · contribs) notified.[21] --Elonka 01:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
• Nickhh (talk · contribs) notified.[22] --Elonka 19:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
• Einsteindonut (talk · contribs) notified [23] Jehochman ^Talk 05:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
• Fipplet (talk · contribs) notified here HG | Talk 22:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
• Puttyschool (talk · contribs) notified: [24] east718 // talk // email // 05:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
• MeteorMaker (talk · contribs) notified: [25] — Coren ^(talk) 05:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
• NoCal100 (talk · contribs) notified. [26] PhilKnight (talk) 15:34, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
• Ceedjee (talk · contribs) notified. [27] PhilKnight (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
• Ashley Y (talk · contribs) Notified [28] Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Truth-mn (talk · contribs) Notified [29] Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Ani medjool (talk · contribs) Notified [30] Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• 71-abe (talk · contribs) Notified [31] Spartaz ^Humbug! 13:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Keverich1 (talk · contribs) Notified [32] PhilKnight (talk) 19:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
• All users at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008-09 Israel–Gaza Foreign involvement notified [33] Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
• John Hyams (talk · contribs) [34] PhilKnight (talk) 17:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
• Cerejota (talk · contribs) formally notified. [35] PhilKnight (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• Brewcrewer (talk · contribs) formally notified. [36] PhilKnight (talk) 16:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
• AgadaUrbanit (talk · contribs) Notified. [37] PhilKnight (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
• Ilana81 (talk · contribs) Notified of spamming external opinion piece links [38]. Black Kite 11:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Yamanam (talk · contribs) Notified. [39] PhilKnight (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Vexorg (talk · contribs) Notified. [40] CIreland (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
• Dream Focus (talk · contribs) notified of the case. Specifically noted for 'decorum and the purpose of the project'.[41] Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
• Drsmoo (talk · contribs) Notified. [42] PhilKnight (talk) 13:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
• No More Mr Nice Guy (talk · contribs) Notified. [43]. PhilKnight (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
• Harlan wilkerson (talk · contribs) Notitfied. [44] PhilKnight (talk) 22:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Drork (talk · contribs) Notified: [45] CIreland (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
• Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) Notified: [46] [47]. Oren0 (talk) 19:48, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
• Halfacanyon (talk · contribs) notified: [48]. Mangojuice^talk 04:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) notified. [49] PhilKnight (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Historicist (talk · contribs) notified. ([50]) MastCell ^Talk 20:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
• Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) notified. ([51]). Looie496 (talk) 01:50, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
• Mr Unsigned Anon (talk · contribs) notified. ([52]) Looie496 (talk) 01:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
• Shuki (talk · contribs) notified. ([53]) CIreland (talk) 16:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
• Stellarkid (talk · contribs) placed on notice for edit warring. AGK 01:46, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
• Barcelona.women (talk · contribs) notified[54] --NW (Talk) 21:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
• Breein1007 (talk · contribs) notified [55] Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
• Ravpapa (talk · contribs) notified [56] Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
• Soledad22 (talk · contribs) notified [57] by User:ChrisO at 20:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
• NSH001 (talk · contribs) notified at [58].  Sandstein  06:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
• Mbz1 (talk · contribs) notified at [59].  Sandstein  06:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
• NickCT (talk · contribs) notified. [60] PhilKnight (talk) 13:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
• Factsontheground (talk · contribs) notified. [61] PhilKnight (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC) (Now called Factomancer (talk · contribs))
• Lanternix (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) notified.  Sandstein  18:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
• Plot Spoiler (talk · contribs) Warned by User:Sandstein per [62]. EdJohnston (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
• Inspect All Information (talk · contribs) notified. Tim Song (talk) 21:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
• Accipio Mitis Frux (talk · contribs) notified. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• RomaC (talk · contribs) notified: [63] CIreland (talk) 04:30, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
• ElUmmah (talk · contribs) notified: [64] CIreland (talk) 16:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
• Momma's Little Helper (talk · contribs) notified: [65] by ChrisO (logged by Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC))
• Roshhahetz (talk · contribs) notified: [66] PhilKnight (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
• Marokwitz (talk · contribs) notified: [67]. CIreland (talk) 15:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
• Gilisa (talk · contribs) notified: [68] -- ChrisO (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC) / confirmed by admin — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Lev Reitblat (talk · contribs) notified: [69] -- ChrisO (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC) / confirmed by admin — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Jonund (talk · contribs) notified: [70] -- ChrisO (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC) / confirmed by admin — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Editors notified in relation to the Richard Goldstone article, which is placed under indefinite 1RR]:
  • ChrisO (talk · contribs) [71]
  • Off2riorob (talk · contribs) [72]
  • Nableezy (talk · contribs) [73]
  • Crotalus horridus (talk · contribs) [74]
  • Gilisa (talk · contribs) [75]
  • No More Mr Nice Guy (talk · contribs) [76]
  • Johnuniq (talk · contribs) [77]
  • E. Ripley (talk · contribs) [78]
  • Nomoskedasticity (talk · contribs) [79]
  • Pexise (talk · contribs) [80]
  • Nomoskedasticity (talk · contribs) [81]
  • Greenman (talk · contribs) [82]
  • Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) [83]
  • Brewcrewer (talk · contribs) [84]
  • Breein1007 (talk · contribs) [85]
  • Tallicfan20 (talk · contribs) [86]
  • Quantpole (talk · contribs) [87]
  • Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) [88]
  • RolandR (talk · contribs) [89]

--HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

• 72.145.151.235 (talk · contribs) - Notified [90]. -- Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
• 98.233.73.108 (talk · contribs) - Notified [91]. -- Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
• 208.54.7.175 (talk · contribs) - Notified [92]. -- Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
• Reenem (talk · contribs) - Notified [93]. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 03:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
• Alexb@cut-the-knot.com (talk · contribs) - Notified [94] --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 04:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
• Sagi_Nahor (talk · contribs) Notified [95]] Toddst1 (talk) 07:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
• Physchim62 (talk · contribs) notified at [96]. T. Canens (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
• Jalapenos do exist (talk · contribs) notified at [97]. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
• 386-DX (talk · contribs) notified at [98]. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
• Posted at Talk:Helen Thomas. Fences&Windows 21:53, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
• Abisharan (talk · contribs) notified at [[99]]. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
• Ewawer (talk · contribs) notified at [100]. Fences&Windows 02:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
• Pantherskin (talk · contribs) notified at [101].  Sandstein  15:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
• Muzicalb (talk · contribs) notified at [102]. EdJohnston (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
• JRHammond (talk · contribs) notified: [103] by CIreland (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
• Cryptonio (talk · contribs) notified: [104] by CIreland (talk) 03:44, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
• 195.50.69.30 (talk · contribs) notified [105] by CIreland (talk) 01:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
• MUCHERS22 (talk · contribs) notified [106] by Fences&Windows 22:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
• Unomi (talk · contribs) notified [107] by WGFinley (talk) 14:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
• Epeefleche (talk · contribs) notified [108] by WGFinley (talk) 14:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC).
• 208.54.7.139 (talk · contribs) notified [109] by WGFinley (talk) 13:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
• Unicorn76 (talk · contribs) notified [110] by Chaser (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
• Ynhockey (talk · contribs) notified. [111] PhilKnight (talk) 21:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
• 79.180.18.59 (talk · contribs) notified[112] by WGFinley (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
• DePiep (talk · contribs) notified [113] by LessHeard vanU (talk) 04:04, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
• LibiBamizrach (talk · contribs) notified. [114]. PhilKnight (talk) 17:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
• Andycarr78 (talk · contribs) notified. [115] PhilKnight (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
• Ledenierhomme (talk · contribs) notified. [116] CIreland (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
• Typesupper2 (talk · contribs) notified. [117] Looie496 (talk) 04:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
• Prunesqualer (talk · contribs) notified: [118] CIreland (talk) 21:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) notified: [119] Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
• WookieInHeat (talk · contribs) notified: [120] Nableezy 21:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC) (Notification certified after review by uninvolved administrator [121] Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:47, 29 October 2010 (UTC) )
• Ezzex (talk · contribs) notified: [122]--Mkativerata (talk) 00:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
• Razorback216 (talk · contribs) notified. [123] PhilKnight (talk) 15:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
• Rangeview (talk · contribs) notified. [124]. EdJohnston (talk) 01:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
• AndresHerutJaim (talk · contribs) notified. [125] PhilKnight (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
• Sherif9282 (talk · contribs) notified. [126] PhilKnight (talk) 20:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Dnkrumah (talk · contribs) notified. [127] PhilKnight (talk) 20:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
• Ronda2001 (talk · contribs) notified at 20:25, 3 December 2010 (UTC). [128]. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:25, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
• 82.213.38.2 (talk · contribs) notified of possible sanction at 16:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC). [129] J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
• RT101798 (talk · contribs) notified [130] Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
• ‎אֶפְרָתָה (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 19:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

2011

• Koakhtzvigad (talk · contribs) notified.[131] --Slp1 (talk) 14:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
• GHcool (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 15:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
• Noisetier (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
• 190.105.51.116 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
• 69.86.233.94 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
• Anna O'Leary (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
• TFighterPilot (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
• AnonMoos (talk · contribs) placed on notice. AGK [•] 12:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
• PopularMax (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
• Passionless (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
• NPz1 (talk · contribs) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
• Crotalus horridus (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
• Becritical (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
• 2ko (talk · contribs) warned of discretionary sanctions: [132] Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:58, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
• Eliko (talk · contribs) warned of discretionary sanctions: [133]. Dougweller (talk) 11:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
• Avaya1 (talk · contribs) formally notified. Courcelles 03:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
• Israelish (talk · contribs) notified. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
• Shrike (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
• 213.6.29.226 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) notified (latest in a series of close IPs going back many months. DMacks (talk) 17:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• The Sham (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
• Validuz (talk · contribs) [134]Slp1 (talk) 01:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
• HOOTmag (talk · contribs) notified. T. Canens (talk) 22:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
• Lisa (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
• Rym torch (talk · contribs) notified. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
• Talknic (talk · contribs) notified. --EdJohnston (talk) 02:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
• AFolkSingersBeard (talk · contribs) notified. -- EdJohnston (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
• Dlabtot (talk · contribs) notified. -- EdJohnston (talk) 05:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
• Tgandz (talk · contribs) notified. - 2/0 (cont.) 07:24, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
• Owain the 1st (talk · contribs) notified - Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
• JonathanGo (talk · contribs) notified (was already warned regarding 1RR). - 2/0 (cont.) 16:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
• Debresser (talk · contribs) [135] - Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 07:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
• Lutrinae (talk · contribs) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
• Kazvorpal (talk · contribs) notified here. — EdJohnston (talk) 01:15, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
• JerryDavid89 (talk · contribs) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
• Floccinauci (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 21:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
• Frederico1234 (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 15:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
• Someone35 (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 02:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
• ShmuelGoldstein (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
• Dalai lama ding dong (talk · contribs) notified here due to an apparent 1RR violation at Textbooks in Israel. EdJohnston (talk) 17:40, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
• Modinyr (talk · contribs) notified. T. Canens (talk) 18:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
• Hearfourmewesique (talk · contribs) notified. T. Canens (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
• Mideastunity (talk · contribs) notified [136]. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
• George45646 (talk · contribs) notified here, following an AE block for a 1RR violation at Ariel University Center of Samaria. EdJohnston (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC).
• David9991 (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
• Greg Comlish (talk · contribs) notified here. EdJohnston (talk) 20:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
• YehudaTelAviv64 (talk · contribs) warned here, per the result of a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 04:01, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
• HajAminHusseini (talk · contribs) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
• JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk · contribs) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
• Soosim (talk · contribs) notified here, following an AE block for 1RR violation at New Israel Fund. EdJohnston (talk) 02:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
• 173.238.69.86 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) notified here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
• Israelite1 (talk · contribs) notified here after an AN3 complaint about editing at Israelis. EdJohnston (talk) 12:20, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• WiPhi (talk · contribs) notified here after making article edits at Deir Yassin massacre and Plan Dalet that seemed to be inserting a strong POV in Wikipedia's voice. EdJohnston (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
• MichaelNetzer (talk · contribs) notified per this AE report. --WGFinley (talk) 02:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Log of blocks and bans

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

2008

• Jewish lobby placed on a one-revert-only rule due to recent edit-warring. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 21:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Following a request, this sanction is removed, because it no longer seems necessary. PhilKnight (talk) 19:38, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
• Nagle (talk · contribs) placed on 1RR per week limit, expires in 30 days [137]. Thatcher 02:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
• Armon (talk · contribs) placed on 1RR per week limit, expires in 30 days [138]. Thatcher 02:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
• Yahel Guhan (talk · contribs) placed on 1RR per week limit, expires in 30 days [139]. Thatcher 02:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
• Jgui (talk · contribs) placed on 1RR per week limit, expires in 30 days [140]. Thatcher 02:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
• Paul kuiper NL (talk · contribs) placed on 1RR per week limit for thirty days due to recurring edit-warring at Six-Day War [141]. -- tariqabjotu 04:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
• Pallywood placed on 1RR/week limit to expire in 30 days. ~Kylu (u|t) 01:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Pallywood restriction lifted [142]. -- tariqabjotu 22:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
• Eleland (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours. See [143] and his talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Radical-Dreamer (talk · contribs) placed on various editing restrictions: see here for details. Moreschi ^{If you've written a quality article...} 09:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
• Adnanmuf (talk · contribs) blocked for 48 hours [144]. Thatcher 21:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Block extended to one year, by Future Perfect at Sunrise, for "disruptive editing on Palestinian people and related topics"; see [145] RolandR (talk) 15:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

• ForeverFreeSpeech (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours by Jersyko for repeated personal attacks, inappropriate edit summaries, etc. following multiple warnings (e.g. [146], [147], [148]). MastCell ^Talk 18:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
• Kahmed (talk · contribs) and 71.17.164.88 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked for 24 hours apiece for being used in conjunction to edit-war and violate 3RR, despite warnings, on Council on American-Islamic Relations. MastCell ^Talk 07:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
• Jaakobou (talk · contribs) is banned from Palestine-Israel articles for a week for disruptive talk page conduct. Addhoc (talk) 14:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
• Gni (talk · contribs) is restricted from editing the article Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America due to problematic editing behavior in the context of an apparent conflict of interest ([149]). The restriction applies to the article only; he may post freely on the associated talk page. MastCell ^Talk 16:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
• Zeq (talk · contribs) has been blocked for one week, and banned from all articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict for a period of one year, for serious breaches of WP:Sockpuppetry and for attempting to coordinate organised disruption of the project. Full details at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Wikilobby campaign. RolandR (talk) 08:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Too light. I've extended the block of Zeq to one year and am extending the topic-ban from all articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict to indefinite. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 18:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Still too light. :-) I've extended this to a full ban for absolutely flagrant and egregious violations of policy that have come to light from the full e-mail archive. -- ChrisO (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
• Gni (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely, see here for details. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 08:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Jamesegarner (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely as a meatpuppet of Gni (talk · contribs). Moreschi (talk) (debate) 18:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
• Dajudem (talk · contribs) banned for a year from all articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Background and details at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Wikilobby campaign. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 08:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
• Judadem (talk · contribs) blocked for a week by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and banned for two months from all Israel/Palestine-related articles per general disruptive editing. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 10:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
• Screen stalker (talk · contribs) blocked for a month by ChrisO (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and banned for six months from all articles relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict. See here for more details. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 10:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
• Jaakobou (talk · contribs) blocked for one week by FayssalF (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) - Details -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 14:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
• PalestineRemembered (talk · contribs) blocked for one week by FayssalF (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Details -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 14:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
• Tundrabuggy (talk · contribs) banned from editing Muhammad al-Durrah or Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah for a period of three months. (See diff for more info.) --MZMcBride (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • After three-way discussion between Elonka, MZMcBride, and Jayvdb, talkpage ban lifted. --Elonka 16:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Editing ban also lifted, on June 29 2008. Tundrabuggy now has full rights to edit the article. --Elonka 20:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
• ChrisO (talk · contribs) banned from participating at Talk:Muhammad al-Durrah for one week, and banned from editing the article for 30 days. See [150] for more details. --Elonka 02:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
• Julia1987 (talk · contribs) banned from editing the lead section of Muhammad al-Durrah for one month.[151] --Elonka 15:28, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
• Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) banned from editing the Muhammad al-Durrah article and talkpage for one week.[152] He is still allowed to participate at mediation. --Elonka 22:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
• G-Dett (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours due to incivility, per "Decorum" section. Khoikhoi 06:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
• Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours for disruptive editing. PhilKnight (talk) 20:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
• Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked for 12 hours for disruptive editing. PhilKnight (talk) 02:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) blocked for 48 hours for disruptive editing. PhilKnight (talk) 02:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours for a personal attack. [153] PhilKnight (talk) 18:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• ChrisO (talk · contribs) banned from editing the Muhammad al-Durrah article for one month. He may still participate at talk and mediation, and work on a draft article in his userspace.[154] --Elonka 19:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
• G-Dett (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours (again) due to incivility, per "Decorum" section. Khoikhoi 18:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
• Nickhh (talk · contribs) banned from editing Nahum Shahaf for 60 days (not including the associated talk page). [155] — Coren ^(talk) 18:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
• 68.37.255.64 (talk · contribs) and Blindjustice (talk · contribs) blocked for 2 weeks for disruption and sockpuppetry, edit warring on Battle of Jenin. Blindjustice being placed on topic ban for Israeli-Palestine articles for 60 days from the cessation of his block.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 01:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
• Einsteindonut (talk · contribs) blocked for one year for disruptive editing, per this discussion. Jehochman ^Talk 10:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
• Puttyschool (talk · contribs) blocked for one year for disruptive editing, per this discussion. Jehochman ^Talk 10:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
• Nickhh (talk · contribs) blocked 31 hours for incivility. Block note wrong forum - has been unblocked and warned. Xavexgoem (talk) 18:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
• Eleland (talk · contribs) by Toddst1 for incivility for 1 week, then raised to indef, then decreased to 3 months and later to 1 week per rough consensus on ANI. [156] Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 13:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
• Ceedjee (talk · contribs) blocked for 1 week by Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk). Blocked for posting personal information, specifically full name and email address, of RolandR (talk · contribs). See ANI note and user's talk page. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
• Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) is banned from the Banias article and talkpage for 30 days.[157] --Elonka 18:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Ban extended to also include the Ma'ale Akrabim massacre article and talkpage, until January 19, 2009.[158] --Elonka 22:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Extended to general topic ban from Israeli-Palestine articles for 60 days. [159] Shell ^babelfish 11:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

2009

• Tundrabuggy (talk · contribs) banned from 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict until March 1, 2009, because of edit warring. PhilKnight (talk) [160] 19:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• MeteorMaker (talk · contribs) banned from making Samaria-related reverts, or removing citations to reliable sources, for 90 days.[161] --Elonka 17:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  • The above ban was lifted without prejudice at this discussion, pending arbitration of the underlying dispute. Jehochman ^Talk 11:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) blocked one year for disruptive editing, per discussion at WP:ANI. Jehochman ^Talk 13:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

• In an edit conflict with the above: Ashley kennedy3 (talk · contribs) topic-banned from all Arab-Israeli conflict articles for one month, per the same ANI thread, independent of the block.  Sandstein  13:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

• Nishidani (talk · contribs) blocked one week for this gem. Jehochman ^Talk 13:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

• This block was shortened upon WP:ANI review. Check the discussion here. Jehochman ^Talk 22:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

• Malcolm Schosha (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 h for violating WP:NPA as described at [162].  Sandstein  09:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
• Historicist (talk · contribs) banned indefinitely from editing any Wikipedia page related to Israeli-Palestinian issues, broadly construed ([163]). MastCell ^Talk 16:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Modified to 1RR on any article relating to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, broadly defined, with a prohibition against any more alternative accounts (see [164]). MastCell ^Talk 05:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Topic Ban reapplied after violation of 1RR [165]. SirFozzie (talk) 22:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Historicist (talk · contribs) blocked 72 hours for violation of topic ban. SirFozzie (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
• Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) banned from editing any article or article talk page related to Israel, the Palestinean territories, or nearby Arab countries, broadly construed, for the remainder of the 2009 calendar year. [166] PhilKnight (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
• Rm125 (talk · contribs) on civility parole and 1 revert per week restriction. [167]. Previous warning not logged; can be found here: [168]. Mangojuice^talk 20:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
• Cptnono (talk · contribs) prohibited for 6 months from commenting on a contributor in the course of content discussions (ie., in the article talk space). Sanction passed further to this AE thread. AGK 00:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) topic banned for 4 months from all pages within subject areas relating to this arbitration case. Sanction passed further to this AE thread. AGK 21:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC) Adjusted upon discussion to:

• Nableezy banned for 2 months from all pages within subject areas relating to this arbitration case, except article talk pages, from which he is banned for 1 month. AGK 19:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
• Nableezy topic-banned from all I-P-related edits and pages for two months per AE request.  Sandstein  19:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

• Blocked for 24 h for violation of the topic ban through edits to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NoCal100.  Sandstein  06:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
• Topic ban lifted following appeal and discussion at WP:AE (permalink).  Sandstein  18:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

2010

• Stellarkid (talk · contribs) topic banned for 2 months from all pages within subject areas relating to this arbitration case. Sanction passed further to this AE thread. AGK 23:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
• Barcelona.women (talk · contribs) placed on an indefinite 0RR on UN Watch and an indefinite 1RR on all other Israel-Palestine articles. Sanction applied pursuant to this AE thread. NW (Talk) 21:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
• Drork (talk · contribs) is is restricted to 1RR/day for six months on all Israel-Palestine articles. Sanction applied pursuant to this thread at WP:AN3. This sanction may be appealed at WP:AE. EdJohnston (talk) 18:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
• Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked 48hrs warned for disruptive WP:POINT editing at Israeli art student scam [169]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: Block was intended but accidentally wasn't actually carried out. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
    • For the same conduct, Gilabrand is instead topic-banned from the topic of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the duration of three months as noted at ANI.  Sandstein  22:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Blocked 48 hrs on 8 March for breach of topic ban on Israel-Zimbabwe relations. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:52, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Blocked 7 days today for breach of topic ban at Hurva Synagogue and Foreign relations of Israel; see [170]. Stifle (talk) 11:10, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Blocked for 2 weeks for yet another ban violation and three months topic ban reset to begin anew today, see AN* report.  Sandstein  14:49, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Blocked 1 month, and topic ban extended to 6 months, to start to run after the block expires or is lifted, for another ban violation, per AE thread. Tim Song (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
        • Discussion at ANI archived without consensus to lift the ban.  Sandstein  07:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
      • Blocked 3 months and topic ban reset, to begin anew upon the expiration or lifting of the block, for yet another topic ban violation, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
        • On appeal, block lifted as of 12:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC) conditioned upon (1) a 30-day voluntary topic restriction from all content and discussion related to Israel and/or Palestine, broadly construed, followed by (2) a 30-day topic ban from all content and discussions related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, broadly construed. 6-month topic ban will be lifted if terms of unblock is completely complied with. See [171]. T. Canens (talk) 12:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) blocked 48h and made subject to a 1R/page restriction in the area of conflict for 3 months for edit-warring per AN3 report.  Sandstein  14:38, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

• Mbz1 (talk · contribs) topic-banned for three months as per this AE discussion.  Sandstein  06:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

• Blocked thrice for violating ban, see block log.  Sandstein  22:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• RolandR (talk · contribs) is restricted from using Commons:File:No Israel.svg or substantially similar images (i.e., crossed-out flags of countries involved in the Israeli-Arab conflict) in his user space. See discussion.  Sandstein  10:38, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

• Shuki (talk · contribs) is limited to one revert per page per day for three months as described in this AE thread.  Sandstein  16:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Amoruso (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from the area of conflict per this BLPN thread.  Sandstein  19:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

• Appeal declined by consensus at WP:AE.  Sandstein  19:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

• Drork (talk · contribs) topic banned indefinitely from the area of conflict, per AE thread. Tim Song (talk) 00:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• Twice blocked briefly by myself and Tim Song for ban violations, see block log, then blocked for six months in reaction to his evasion of his block and his topic ban as Gderot (talk · contribs), see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drork.  Sandstein  11:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

• Nableezy (talk · contribs) banned from editing articles related to the Arab-Israeli conflict for two months, as described in this AE thread.  Sandstein  19:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
• Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) topic banned for 30 days across all namespaces for edits involving the names, origins, or visual depiction of places and things within the Levant region, or until Supreme Deliciousness fulfills certain other conditions. details here--Tznkai (talk) 00:38, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
• Breein1007 (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hrs for disruption. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation and personal attack. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
• NickCT (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for personal attacks. PhilKnight (talk) 22:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
• 98.233.73.108 (talk · contribs) hard blocked 24 hrs for edit warring on Richard Goldstone - transparently one of our regulars who logged out to try and avoid 1RR limit Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
  • ...and 208.54.7.175 (talk · contribs) who did the same thing edit warring it back the other way, also 24 hrs hard block. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
• Lev Reitblat (talk · contribs), ChrisO (talk · contribs) and Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) banned from editing Richard Goldstone and associated talk page for 14 days following Wikipedia:AE#Wikifan12345_et_al. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:18, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
• Gaza flotilla clash placed on WP:1RR; required warning given via edit notice. NW (Talk) 01:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Kslotte (talk · contribs) blocked 12 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 15:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • UplinkAnsh (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 19:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Zuchinni one (talk · contribs) blocked 12 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 20:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Unblocked less than an hour later. -- tariqabjotu 20:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Ccson (talk · contribs) blocked 12 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 06:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Plot Spoiler (talk · contribs) blocked 12 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 06:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Kslotte (talk · contribs) blocked 36 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 15:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • IANVS (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 20:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Maashatra11 (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 23:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Cs32en (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 07:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
  • IANVS (talk · contribs) blocked 5 days for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 07:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Avaya1 (talk · contribs) blocked 12 hours by NuclearWarfare for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 07:18, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
  • 386-DX (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violating 1RR. -- tariqabjotu 21:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • ValenShephard (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for 1RR violation. -- tariqabjotu 07:38, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
• Breein1007 (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for edit-warring on Gaza flotilla clash (independent of 1RR restriction above). -- tariqabjotu 02:34, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
• Achird (talk · contribs) prohibited from using images that advocate against any party involved in the Israeli-Arab conflict on their user page.  Sandstein  22:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Blocked 24 h for violating the restriction.  Sandstein  22:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Physchim62 (talk · contribs) topic-banned from the area of conflict for one month, per this AE request.  Sandstein  10:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
• Shuki (talk · contribs) and Nableezy (talk · contribs) topic-banned until end of August from articles about towns, cities, settlements, and other places or locations in Israel and neighbouring countries. Stifle (talk) 08:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Both users further banned from reporting each other for alleged violations of the topic ban, or taking any action to bring the attention of another user to any such alleged violation. Stifle (talk) 08:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
• Cryptonio (talk · contribs) is topic banned from the area of conflict indefinitely, see [172]; Cryptonio may appeal to the Committee or the community at any time, but no appeal to me will be entertained until three months have elapsed. T. Canens (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Blocked 31h for topic ban violation. T. Canens (talk) 04:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
• Gaza War placed on 1RR/24h for 2 weeks, per AN3 report; required warning given via editnotice. T. Canens (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • AgadaUrbanit (talk · contribs) blocked twice, 24h and 1 week respectively, for 1RR violation. T. Canens (talk) 00:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
  • AnotherRealOne (talk · contribs) blocked 48h for 1RR violation. T. Canens (talk) 00:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
  • 1RR extended to run indefinitely, per AN3 report. Timotheus Canens (talk) 08:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
• Six-Day War set to Level 2 Pending Changes protection following edit warring. All editors on article have been warned WP:GS applies to this article. --WGFinley (talk) 06:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC). Pending Changes removed as had no effect on the edit warring. --WGFinley (talk) 16:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Article also placed on 1RR for one week as some of the involved editors have reviewer status. 1RR now indefinite. --WGFinley (talk) 05:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Article set to protected for one month due to edit warring. --WGFinley (talk) 05:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) is article-banned from Six-Day War for 48 hours. --WGFinley (talk) 05:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
  • JRHammond (talk · contribs) is article-banned from Six-Day War for 48 hours. --WGFinley (talk) 16:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
  • JRHammond (talk · contribs) for willful violation of his article ban has been blocked for 7 days and is article-banned from Six-Day War for two weeks. --WGFinley (talk) 02:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
  • JRHammond (talk · contribs) is article-banned from Six-Day War indefinitely for continued disruption, abuse of {{editprotected}} template and repeated tedentious editing. --WGFinley (talk) 04:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
• Per AN3 report:
  • AgadaUrbanit (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from Gaza War, and all related articles, discussions, and other content, for three months.
  • Nableezy (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from Gaza War, and all related articles, discussions, and other content, for six weeks. Timotheus Canens (talk) 08:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
• Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely, for off-wiki meatpuppetry and personal attacks regarding this area. See AE thread. -- tariqabjotu 01:42, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Technically, since the ArbCom ruling only allows blocks up to a year, only the block up to the first year falls under the purview of ArbCom sanctions (i.e. the remainder of the block can be overturned per normal rules). -- tariqabjotu 09:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) unblocked, based on reason stated in block log. Also removed from the scope of ARBPIA per this comment. -- tariqabjotu 01:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
• Golan Heights put on 1RR/24 for two weeks for edit warring, notification on talk and via edit notice. --WGFinley (talk) 05:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
  • 79.181.9.231 (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violation of 1RR/24. --WGFinley (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
  • 79.179.37.18 (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for violation of 1RR/24. --WGFinley (talk) 20:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Article protected 7 days due to edit warring. --WGFinley (talk) 14:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Article semi-protected indefinitely as it appears IP accounts are being used to sock for banned users. --WGFinley (talk) 20:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Nableezy (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for reverting without discussion contrary to 1RR probation on article. --WGFinley (talk) 02:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
• Eric1985 (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely, for off-wiki meatpuppetry regarding this area, with the intent to do the same in other areas of Wikipedia as well. See AE thread (even though the thread was started to deal with different users. Technically, since the ArbCom ruling only allows blocks up to a year, only the block up to the first year falls under the purview of ArbCom sanctions (i.e. the remainder of the block can be overturned per normal rules). -- tariqabjotu 11:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Action removed from here, as it technically falls without the bounds stipulated by the ArbCom ruling, and per this comment by myself confirming its removal. -- tariqabjotu 01:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
• Bakunin1969 (talk · contribs) Blocked for 31 hours for edit warring on Gaza Strip. Page also semi-protected for three days due to IP vandalism, following a request at RfPP. GedUK  14:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
• Due to an ongoing dispute, Nableezy (talk · contribs) and Shuki (talk · contribs) restricted to 1RR until December 31 for all articles which relate to Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Golan Heights. [173] [174] PhilKnight (talk) 22:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
• LibiBamizrach blocked 48 hours for disruptive editing. [175] PhilKnight (talk) 14:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
• Historicist (talk · contribs) (and sockpuppets) blocked indefinitely for recurrent sockpuppetry, topic-ban evasion, and violation of previous discretionary sanctions. MastCell ^Talk 00:04, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
• Unicorn76 (talk · contribs) 1RR per day on all articles in topic area [176].--Chaser (talk) 05:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) blocked one day [177] for violation of 1RR restriction [178].--Chaser (talk) 22:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
• Prunesqualer (talk · contribs) blocked 1 day for violation of 1RR restriction at Gaza War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Concurrently article-banned from Gaza War for 14 days. [179] CIreland (talk) 02:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
• Due to an ongoing dispute Chesdovi (talk · contribs) is restricted to 1RR per day for the entire set of Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted, until the end of January 2011. PhilKnight (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
• Due to an ongoing dispute Nableezy (talk · contribs) is restricted to 1RR per day for the entire set of Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted, until the end of December 2010. PhilKnight (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) blocked for one month for disruptive and tendentious editing of large numbers of articles. Looie496 (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

• Unblocked by Looie496 on 30 October 2010. PhilKnight (talk) 17:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Factomancer (talk · contribs) blocked for 1 month due to making personal attacks. PhilKnight (talk) 15:00, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
• Prunesqualer (talk · contribs) blocked 21 days for violating article ban, and placed on an indefinite topic ban over the entire area of conflict. Courcelles 19:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC) (NB: This was intended as an article-space measure. Courcelles)
• Due to an ongoing dispute Shuki (talk · contribs) is restricted to 1RR per day for the entire set of Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles, broadly interpreted, until the end of December 2010. PhilKnight (talk) 18:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• Per AE thread, Gilabrand (talk · contribs) is limited to one revert per rolling 24-hour period per article on all articles within the area of conflict, as defined in WP:ARBPIA#Area of conflict, until 00:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC). Furthermore, they are required to discuss any reverts they do make on the talk page, in English, within 30 minutes of the revert, excepting reverts of obvious (as in, obvious to someone who has no knowledge of the subject) vandalism, as defined in WP:VAND. T. Canens (talk) 21:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked 1 week for violation of above restriction, per AE thread. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked three months for violation of above restriction. See AE thread and violating edits. This is Gilabrand's seventh block in ten months. Above restriction set to expire on 00:00, 1 May 2011 (UTC), or two months after the block is lifted, whichever is first. -- tariqabjotu 04:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
• Cptnono (talk · contribs) blocked 3 hours for incivility. PhilKnight (talk) 18:00, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Ronda2001 (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for 1RR violation and use of IP sock to avoid same, per this AE report. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
• Dnkrumah (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR vio at Gaza War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). CIreland (talk) 11:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Per AE thread:
  • Shuki (talk · contribs) is banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict for six months.
  • Jaakobou (talk · contribs), Gilabrand (talk · contribs) and Cptnono (talk · contribs) are prohibited from commenting on or interacting with Nableezy (talk · contribs) anywhere on Wikipedia, as defined in WP:IBAN.
  • Nableezy (talk · contribs) is prohibited from commenting on or interacting with Jaakobou (talk · contribs), Gilabrand (talk · contribs) and Cptnono (talk · contribs) anywhere on Wikipedia, as defined in WP:IBAN.
  • No party to an interaction ban imposed above may react to an alleged violation of the interaction ban by the other party except by the procedure specified in the AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 21:57, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Interaction ban between Nableezy (talk · contribs) and Cptnono (talk · contribs) lifted on appeal. T. Canens (talk) 22:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Nableezy's ban on commenting on or interacting with Gilabrand is lifted, for reasons stated here. T. Canens (talk) 08:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
• PatGallacher (talk · contribs) blocked for 24 hours for 1RR vio at 1948 Palestinian exodus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magog the Ogre (talk • contribs)

  Unblocked; the user was reverting an IP edit, which is an exception to the 1RR rule. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• Hmbr (talk · contribs) blocked for 8 hours for 1RR vio at 1948 Palestinian exodus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict for eight months, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 16:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• Shuki (talk · contribs) blocked for 6 months, for abusive sockpuppetry, confirmed by checkuser, per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shuki. Their topic ban imposed above is reset, to start to run when the block expires or is lifted. T. Canens (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• Per AE thread:
  • Nableezy (talk · contribs) is banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict, for four months.
  • Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) is banned from all articles, discussions, and other content within the area of conflict, for three months. T. Canens (talk) 08:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Topic ban of Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) lifted per appeal. T. Canens (talk) 23:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
• RT101798 (talk · contribs) blocked for a period of 24 hours for edit warring at 1948 Palestinian exodus. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

  RT101798 (talk · contribs) a.k.a. Ntbiabt (talk · contribs) (cf. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RT101798) blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry and general trolling. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• Ronda2001 (talk · contribs) blocked for three weeks for a second violation of I/P 1RR restriction per this AE thread. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) blocked for five days for 1RR violation on International law and Israeli settlements. -- tariqabjotu 00:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
• Jalapenos do exist (talk · contribs) placed on 1rr restriction on any edit concerning Israel or Israelis, Palestine or Palestinians, or the Arab-Israeli conflict broadly construed. Details found [180], diff.--Tznkai (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
• 74.198.164.139 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)/74.198.9.161 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - blocked 24 hours for violation at Rujm el-Hiri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

2011

• Koakhtzvigad (talk · contribs) - blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation at Israel and the apartheid analogy and B'Tselem Slp1 (talk) 14:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
• Semi-protected Hummus for 1 year due to frequent disruption and POV-pushing by new/anonymous accounts. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
• GHcool (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation at Hezbollah, per this action at WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 14:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) blocked 2 weeks for 1RR violation at Rachel's Tomb per report at AN3 noticeboard. -- Cirt (talk) 19:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
• Noisetier (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for 1RR violation at Israeli settlement per report at AN3, announced here. EdJohnston (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
• TFighterPilot (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation on Hummus. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:54, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Blocked 1 week for a second violation, per a complaint at WP:ANEW. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
• Lihaas (talk · contribs) mandated to discuss all reverts to Hezbollah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) indefinitely with a review in one month as of this notification. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
• GHcool (talk · contribs) blocked 55 hours for second 1RR violation at Hezbollah. Courcelles 18:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Topic banned for two months from expiry of above block per consensus at AE. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Topic ban lifted after one month per request. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
• Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation at Hezbollah. Courcelles 18:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Topic banned for two months from expiry of above block per the same AE thread as GHcool above. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Topic ban lifted after one month per request. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
• NPz1 (talk · contribs) blocked 1 week for 1RR violation on Gaza War. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
• Koakhtzvigad (talk · contribs) topic-banned from the Israeli-Arab conflict for two weeks, per this AE request.  Sandstein  22:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
• NPz1 (talk · contribs) blocked 2 weeks [181] for 1RR violations on Ehud Barak and two other articles. --B (talk) 13:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
• Avaya1 (talk · contribs) blocked 36 hours for 1RR violation on Gilad Atzmon. Courcelles 03:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
• AndresHerutJaim (talk · contribs) blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation at Template:Arab-Israeli conflict engagements after warning (logged above). Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
• Shrike (talk · contribs) banned for 3 months from editing any P/I article, per this WP:AE thread. AGK [•] 00:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
• Passionless (talk · contribs) banned for 3 months from editing any P/I article, per this WP:AE thread. AGK [•] 00:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
  • The two sanctions above, with AGK's explicit agreement, are replaced with the following:
    • Shrike (talk · contribs):
      • is banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces, until 00:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC), and thereafter banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions and other content related to Refaat Al-Gammal, broadly construed across all namespaces;
      • is limited to one account (the account "Shrike"), and may not edit using any other account, or while logged out;
      • is indefinitely limited to one revert per page per 168 hours on all articles and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces.
    • Passionless (talk · contribs):
      • is banned from all articles, discussions and other content related to Refaat Al-Gammal, broadly construed across all namespaces, until 00:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC);
      • is limited to one revert per page per 168 hours on all articles and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces, until 00:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC). Superseded by topic ban, see below. - 2/0 (cont.) 05:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
  • See AE thread. The one-week blocks on Shrike (talk · contribs) and Passionless (talk · contribs) imposed by AGK remains in effect. T. Canens (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
    • The 1RR/week restriction and the topic ban on Shrike (talk · contribs) are lifted, effective immediately. T. Canens (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
• The Sham (talk · contribs) Blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation on List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2011. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
• Validuz (talk · contribs) - blocked 24 hours for 1RR violation at Allegations of Jewish control of the media--Slp1 (talk) 01:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
• Passionless (talk · contribs) blocked 72 hours for violating 1 revert per week on Jerusalem. Topic banned over the entire I-P area until 00001 UTC 2 July 2011 (4 months from block expiry) and (abrogated. Courcelles 06:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)) extended the revert parole (one revert per week) until the end of 2011. Courcelles 05:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
• Jiujitsuguy (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from the area of conflict for six months, per this AE thread.  Sandstein  13:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• Per this notice, Jiujitsuguy's existing topic ban is extended by two months under the original terms, which per WP:TBAN include talk pages. The revised expiry date is 4 November, 2011. EdJohnston (talk) 04:10, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• Emmanuelm (talk · contribs) is topic-banned from the area of conflict for two months, per this AE thread. The ban includes talk pages. EdJohnston (talk) 16:14, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
• Drsmoo (talk · contribs) blocked for 72 hours for move warring. - 2/0 (cont.) 18:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
• Jalapenos do exist (talk · contribs) is warned not to misrepresent sources, per this AE request.  Sandstein  16:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
• The Sham (talk · contribs) is banned from List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2011 for a period of one year per AE thread. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Blocked 1 week for violation of the above and ban reset. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
• Mbz1 (talk · contribs) ([182])
  • is topic banned until 2012-04-07;
  • is indefinitely interaction banned with respect to Passionless. - 2/0 (cont.) 05:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
  • is limited to 0RR and restricted from proposing articles to WP:DYK (see full text here). - 2/0 (cont.) 18:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
• Passionless (talk · contribs) ([183])
  • is topic banned until 2012-04-07;
  • is indefinitely interaction banned with respect to Mbz1. - 2/0 (cont.) 05:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
• RolandR (talk · contribs) - blocked by me for 48 hours for violation of 1RR at Juliano Mer-Khamis [184]. Unblocked within 18 hours by NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) with my consent [185] for showing clear understanding of reasons for block. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
• AFolkSingersBeard (talk · contribs) - blocked 72 hours for violation of 1RR at Juliano Mer-Khamis [186] (third block in 10 days). Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
• Tgandz (talk · contribs) - blocked 24 hours for personal attacks and battlegrounding. - 2/0 (cont.) 21:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
• Jaakobou (talk · contribs) is warned not to make clearly meritless requests for enforcement, especially requests that make obvious misrepresentations of fact. See AE thread.  Sandstein  06:09, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
• AndresHerutJaim (talk · contribs) is blocked 1 week for disruption and edit warring across a wide number of articles today. [187] Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 06:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
• JonathanGo (talk · contribs) blocked 48 hours for 1RR at Palestinian people and Palestinian nationalism. - 2/0 (cont.) 16:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
• Talknic (talk · contribs) blocked 31 hours for 1RR at 1948 Arab–Israeli War, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
• Talknic (talk · contribs) is banned for three months from the topic of the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed, including talk pages, per the result of an AE discussion. Notified. EdJohnston (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
• Debresser (talk · contribs) and Chesdovi (talk · contribs) are topic banned for 72 hrs due to disruption and edit warring. [188] [189] Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:22, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
• JonathanGo (talk · contribs) banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 05:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
• Passionless (talk · contribs) blocked one week for violation of interaction ban at [190], see AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 17:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) banned until 10 July 2011 from editing any P/I article, in connection with this AE thread. AGK [•] 20:41, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

• Topic-ban of Nableezy (talk · contribs) vacated by discussion, and replaced by a revert restriction with the terms set down here. This sanction expires at the same time as the vacated ban would have, so on 10 July 2011. AGK [•] 22:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

• Gilabrand (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely for persistent evasion of AE sanctions and continued disingenuous response; the first year of this block is an AE block made under the authority of #Discretionary sanctions. See AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 20:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
  • ArbCom motion provisionally suspends the AE block to Gilabrand as of Aug 25 2011. - Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 15:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
• Supreme Deliciousness (talk · contribs) banned until 00:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC) from editing any P/I article, in connection with this AE thread. AGK [•] 23:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

• Lutrinae (talk · contribs) banned until 11:21, 7 October 2011 (UTC) from editing any I/P page, and from then until 11:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC) from editing any I/P page from any account other than his primary account, in connection with this AE thread. AGK [•] 11:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

• Two rangeblocks issued here due to Lutrinae's violation of the above ban. EdJohnston (talk) 13:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
• Lutrinae went on to violate his topic ban using his registered account, so he's been blocked for one month. This block can be lifted if he agrees to follow all relevant policies and restrictions. EdJohnston (talk) 02:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• AgadaUrbanit (talk · contribs) banned until 19 December 2011 from editing any I/P page, in connection with this request for enforcement. AGK [•] 21:01, 19 June 2011 (UTC
  • The above ban on AgadaUrbanit is suspended indefinitely. AE thread--Tznkai (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs) prohibited until 27 December 2011 from interacting with Cptnono (talk · contribs), in connection with this request for enforcement. AGK [•] 22:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
• Cptnono (talk · contribs) prohibited until 27 December 2011 from interacting with Nableezy (talk · contribs), in connection with this request for enforcement. AGK [•] 22:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces, for one year, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 09:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
• Reenem (talk · contribs) banned from all articles and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all non-Talk namespaces, for three months. Reenem is allowed to participate in discussions related to the topic area. See AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
• Prideful (talk · contribs) blocked indefinitely by Zero0000 shortly after making first edits all changing "city" to "settlement" in the ledes of articles on Arab towns in the West Bank from account created two and a half years earlier. Daniel Case (talk) 03:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
• NickCT (talk · contribs) has been warned for incivility and personal attacks per a complaint at WP:AE. If he makes more comments about other editors like the ones cited in the complaint, he may be blocked or banned from I-P articles. EdJohnston (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
• Frederico1234 (talk · contribs) has been warned about 1RR and assuming bad faith per an AE complaint. EdJohnston (talk) 15:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
• Someone35 (talk · contribs) blocked three days for 1RR violation, as notified here per a complaint at AE. EdJohnston (talk) 02:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
• ZionistSufi (talk · contribs) blocked 1 month and topic-banned for 6 months, per this notice, after a discussion at AE. EdJohnston (talk) 17:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
• Someone35 (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Middle East, broadly construed across all namespaces, for a period of no less than 3 months. The ban may be appealed to AE every 3 months, or to the Arbitration Committee at any time, and will stay in place until it is successfully appealed or lifted by the Arbitration Committee. See AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 09:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

• Modified on appeal [191] - topic banned for three months fixed period from Arab-Israeli conflict anywhere on the project. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

• NoHasbaraHere (talk · contribs) blocked indef for username violation and clear POV-pushing in applicable articles. Daniel Case (talk) 16:23, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
• Hearfourmewesique (talk · contribs) blocked 2 weeks for 1RR violation, per AE thread. T. Canens (talk) 19:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
• Modinyr (talk · contribs) placed under a 1RR per week restriction from the topic of the Arab-Israeli conflict anywhere on the project, per an AE thread. They are warned that this could be extended to a full topic ban if they continue to make reverts without appropriate discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 02:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
• Chesdovi (talk · contribs) and Debresser (talk · contribs) are under a six month interaction ban, along with a six month ban on edits having to do with naming issues concerning Palestine or Palestinian in both articles and talk pages, broadly construed. Breaches of these bans will be followed by a block of one month, swiftly lengthening to indefinite for any later breaches. Please see [192] and [193] for the wordings of these bans as posted to each editor. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:24, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Both blocked a month for interaction ban violations. T. Canens (talk) 18:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
• Talknic (talk · contribs) - 48 hours for 1RR violation at 1948 Arab–Israeli War. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
• Golan Heights had a unique 1RR sanction placed on it in Aug 2010 which held the article to 1RR as well as required editors to discuss reverts. The talk page notice of this was inadvertently removed when the new P-I sanctions template was done per the Nov 2010 community decision on 1RR for P-I. This restriction is still in effect and I have reinstated the talk page notice for the restriction.[194] --WGFinley (talk) 18:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
• Irgun protected for 7 days due to edit warring, editors reminded of 1RR restriction on P-I articles.[195] --WGFinley (talk) 03:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
• Someone35 (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces for one year, expiry 10 Dec 2012 per this AE report. --WGFinley (talk) 06:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)}}
• Hearfourmewesique (talk · contribs) topic banned indefinitely[196] per AE report. NW (Talk) 01:03, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
• 173.238.69.86 (talk · contribs) Blocked for one month, for persistent disruptive and contentious editing and edit warring in relation to Palestine. Numerous efforts have been made to communicate with the user on this, and the user has previously been blocked for a short period. The user has made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of cooperating. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

  Increased block to indefinite as result of Checkuser verification of socking. --WGFinley (talk) 02:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

• Epf (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces indefinitely per this AE report, confirmation of socking via anonymous editing in P-I space. --WGFinley (talk) 02:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Talknic (talk · contribs) banned from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly construed across all namespaces for six months per this AE request, with expiry on 26 June 2012. EdJohnston (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)