Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5

This Arbcom case has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: Debbie Weiss (December 4, 2024). "Wikipedia's Quiet Revolution: How a Coordinated Group of Editors Reshaped the Israeli-Palestinian Narrative". Algemeiner Journal. Retrieved December 5, 2024. After Rindsberg's report was published, Ïvana was "summoned" — in her words — by Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee and is reportedly facing a potential lifetime ban from the platform. Rindsberg told The Algemeiner that other investigations have also been launched as a result of the article. Aaron Bandler (January 18, 2025). "Wikipedia's Supreme Court On the Verge of Topic Banning 8 Editors from Israel-Palestine Area". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved January 19, 2025. Another editor told me that they are both "pleased by this result and more frustrated than ever." "Anti-Israel Wikipedia editors face bans after spreading hate, misinformation". The Jerusalem Post. January 20, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025. The users have been under investigation by the Wikipedia arbitration board following 'disruptive behavior' surrounding their edits on the discussion of Israel and Palestine, according to the Jewish Journal. Zev Stub (January 20, 2025). "ADL: Wikipedia bans several editors for spreading antisemitic rhetoric, misinformation on Gaza war". The Times of Israel. Retrieved January 20, 2025. An arbitration committee for the collaborative online encyclopedia banned the users ... from the Israel-Palestine discussion for operating in bad faith, the watchdog says. Asaf Elia-Shalev (January 23, 2025). "Edit wars over Israel spur rare ban of 8 Wikipedia editors — from both sides". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved January 24, 2025. Of the editors banned from the topic area by the Arbitration Committee, often referred to as Wikipedia's "supreme court," six are from the pro-Palestinian camp and two from the pro-Israel camp. "Wikipedia bans eight editors, six of them anti-Israel". Jewish News Syndicate. January 28, 2025. Retrieved January 28, 2025. The Arbitration Committee is a panel of Wikipedia editors whose decisions are binding. The committtee has been described in the media as "quasi-judicial" and the "Wikipedian High Court." Stephen Harrison (February 5, 2025). "Project 2025's Creators Want to Dox Wikipedia Editors. The Tool They're Using Is Horrifying". Slate. Retrieved February 5, 2025. On Jan. 23, ArbCom issued a verdict in the PIA5 case, a virtual trial in which it examined the conduct of 14 highly prolific editors in this topic area. After hearing preliminary statements from the parties and issuing findings of facts (including that some editors were using deceptive sock puppet accounts), ArbCom ultimately banned multiple pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli editors for "non-neutral editing." Margi Murphy (March 7, 2025). "Wikipedia Roiled With Internal Strife Over Page Edits About the Middle East". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 7, 2025. In January, Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee found that fake online accounts used for deception, known as sock pockets, among the pages relating to Palestine and Israel are "an ongoing issue" which was "causing significant disruption." "Editing for Hate: How Anti-Israel and Anti-Jewish Bias Undermines Wikipedia's Neutrality". Anti-Defamation League. March 18, 2025. Retrieved March 18, 2025. Recently ArbCom banned multiple editors from the Israeli-Palestinian topic area (known as a topic ban, rather than a more comprehensive site-wide ban).

This case is now closed and pages relating to it may no longer be watched To request an amendment or clarification of an arbitration decision, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. To report a violation of an arbitration decision, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To request the assistance of an arbitration clerk, see Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks.

Wikipedia Arbitration
About arbitration Talk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appeals Report
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics (Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss + Contact Members Procedures Elections Talk History Clerks + Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk Statistics Talk Reports (pre-2016)
Track related changes
v t e

Behaviour on this page: Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at a fair, well-informed decision. You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being rude or hostile, and to respond calmly to allegations against you. Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all). Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator or clerk, without further warning, by being banned from further participation in the case, or being blocked altogether. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or clerks, will be met with sanctions. Behaviour during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.