User:Cailil/recall

User page

Talk page

Admin

Logs

Awards

Books

Requests for voluntary recall should be made on User talk:Cailil. Requests made anywhere else are invalid. Requests that do not meet the below criteria are invalid.

Initial request

Apart from a limited number of exceptions ^[1], any editor in good standing^[2] may initiate a recall request if an administrative action I have taken is incompatible with policy and is not a mistake. I will appoint a neutral clerk to handle the request. Any request not based on Wikipedia policy or on a non-administrative action, or deemed frivolous by the clerk can be removed by the clerk and the issue closed.

Once a recall request has been certified by the clerk, five uninvolved sysops (not including the original editor if they are a sysop)^[3] can request that I submit to a RFC/U, open an RFAR or resign.^[4] If three or more of the five agree that I should I will I submit to an RFC/U I will do so and if the wide consensus from that RFC/U is that I should resign I will do so. Whether they decide to recommend RFC/U, RFAR or nothing I will cease all Admin related actions until this process, and any follow-up, is concluded.

If the threshold is NOT met, then the recall attempt will be considered to have failed, and will be archived. No diffs or issues from a failed recall or a closed RFC/U can be used again, and any new attempts to recall for the same incident (ie, bring new "misbehavior" forward, not behavior covered by the previous request) will be removed by the clerk. The clerk will have discretionary powers to request this page be protected or blanked if in their opinion, this page is being used in bad-faith, or to make a point.

Evidence

Diffs may be no older than three months. Also, appropriate forms of dispute resolution must have been attempted by the requesting user before making this request.^[5] Matters handled by other fora already (ie ArbCom, ArbCom Enforcement, WP:AN3, WP:AN) and have been closed without action are not eligible for discussion - these matters have already been closed.

No offsite discussion

Any off-site commentary whatsoever on or about the recall will invalidate it immediately. The matter will be handed straight to ArbCom and if they refuse to take the case against me then I will not stand for reconfirmation or resign. However, if as above they accept the case I will cease all admin related activity until the case concludes and abide by whatever ruling the Committee gives.

No Double Jeopardy

Once this process concludes for matters raised by petitioners during an instance of this process, I will not honor a second recall request regarding the same matters. Moreover any issues resolved/closed in other dispute resolution attempts (WP:AN, WP:ANi, WP:RFAR, mediation, WP:DRN etc) cannot be raised again via this process - those matters are closed and this page is not open to forum shopping. The only exception to this is if a closing admin has explicitly sent the issue here in order to initiate a recall.

References

^
I will not accept recall requests from the following users or categories of users:
- User:The Devil's Advocate, User:A Quest For Knowledge, User:Volunteer Marek, User:Elonka, User:Blackworm (all chosen not due to any misconduct but due to varying degrees of personal or personalized hostility directed at me or at the wider admin corp), and User:Salvio giuliano (whose judgement as an Arb I have publicly questioned).
- Any editor sanctioned or warned in relation to WP:MRMPS or WP:TROUBLES or WP:GS/BI, any editor I have blocked, or editor who I have blocked or sanctioned (via community or ArbCom procedures).
- Not named in an ongoing ArbCom case
^
In "Good Standing" is defined for the purposes of this process as:
- Having at least 500 mainspace edits and 3 Months of editing
- Not party to any ArbCom sanction related to the topic to which the complaint relates
- Not acting as a proxy
- Never abused sockpuppets
- Not having previously being sanctioned for harassment
- Not being involved in any off-site commentary on or about the issue
^ User:Cailil will have the right to select 2 of the 5.
^ At all times an RFAR can be filed by me or the complaint or an other party and will supersede this process and will render this recall moot, resulting in an immediate end to this. If the RFAR is declined this process will remain closed (see: "No double jeopardy")
^ Attempts at dispute resolution are defined as a mediation attempt, an RfC, an ArbCom case (or WP:AE thread), or an AN/ANI thread. If such processes are closed without action being taken against User:Cailil, or there is general consensus supporting his actions, these diffs are not eligible for presentation as evidence. Any action that in that User:Cailil's view attempts to wikilawyer this clause will result in the immediate closure of the recall and the matter being handed to ArbCom.

Proforma request

I wish to request that User:Cailil be recalled from sysop duties

Recall Request Reason:

Sign Here:

Clerk Response:

[1] I will not accept recall requests from the following users or categories of users:
User:The Devil's Advocate, User:A Quest For Knowledge, User:Volunteer Marek, User:Elonka, User:Blackworm (all chosen not due to any misconduct but due to varying degrees of personal or personalized hostility directed at me or at the wider admin corp), and User:Salvio giuliano (whose judgement as an Arb I have publicly questioned).

Any editor sanctioned or warned in relation to WP:MRMPS or WP:TROUBLES or WP:GS/BI, any editor I have blocked, or editor who I have blocked or sanctioned (via community or ArbCom procedures).

Not named in an ongoing ArbCom case

[2] User:The Devil's Advocate, User:A Quest For Knowledge, User:Volunteer Marek, User:Elonka, User:Blackworm (all chosen not due to any misconduct but due to varying degrees of personal or personalized hostility directed at me or at the wider admin corp), and User:Salvio giuliano (whose judgement as an Arb I have publicly questioned).

[3] Any editor sanctioned or warned in relation to WP:MRMPS or WP:TROUBLES or WP:GS/BI, any editor I have blocked, or editor who I have blocked or sanctioned (via community or ArbCom procedures).

[4] Not named in an ongoing ArbCom case

[2] In "Good Standing" is defined for the purposes of this process as:
Having at least 500 mainspace edits and 3 Months of editing

Not party to any ArbCom sanction related to the topic to which the complaint relates

Not acting as a proxy

Never abused sockpuppets

Not having previously being sanctioned for harassment

Not being involved in any off-site commentary on or about the issue

[6] Having at least 500 mainspace edits and 3 Months of editing

[7] Not party to any ArbCom sanction related to the topic to which the complaint relates

[8] Not acting as a proxy

[9] Never abused sockpuppets

[10] Not having previously being sanctioned for harassment

[11] Not being involved in any off-site commentary on or about the issue

[3] User:Cailil will have the right to select 2 of the 5.

[4] At all times an RFAR can be filed by me or the complaint or an other party and will supersede this process and will render this recall moot, resulting in an immediate end to this. If the RFAR is declined this process will remain closed (see: "No double jeopardy")

[dispute_resolution-5] Attempts at dispute resolution are defined as a mediation attempt, an RfC, an ArbCom case (or WP:AE thread), or an AN/ANI thread. If such processes are closed without action being taken against User:Cailil, or there is general consensus supporting his actions, these diffs are not eligible for presentation as evidence. Any action that in that User:Cailil's view attempts to wikilawyer this clause will result in the immediate closure of the recall and the matter being handed to ArbCom.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]