Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Monitoring

Welcome to Mattisse's monitoring page, where her advisors/mentors help Mattisse follow her plan.

Active advisors/mentors

Salix alba - admin
John Carter - admin
Philcha
Geometry guy - admin
~~SilkTork - admin~~ Withdrawn
RegentsPark - admin

Mattisse's plan

References to arbitration

Monitoring record

2010 Haiti earthquake contributions and indefinite ban from the article

Summary: A summary of events (by User:SilkTork) can be found here. Commenting advisors have agreed that Mattisse had made excellent contributions to the article and was working well in collaboration with other editors when a minor comment suggesting article ownership escalated into several threads in which Mattisse engaged in inappropriate behaviour contrary to her Plan: [1][2][3][4]. This also led to an Alert being raised by SandyGeorgia here.

Outcome: Mattisse is banned indefinitely from editing 2010 Haiti earthquake and its talk page. Advice for Mattisse related to this issue has been provided on her talk page by Geometry guy. The ban may be lifted by any advisor/mentor on request from Mattisse, or following discussion on the monitoring talk page, provided it is clear that Mattisse has understood how and where her behaviour became problematic and that she will avoid such behaviour in the future.

Talkpage comments

It was brought to my attention that Mattisse was making provocative comments on Malleus's talkpage. She was advised to stop - User_talk:Mattisse#Suggestion - which she did. However, she has been specifically warned against making such comments. I had given her a warning two months ago, after an incident involving Malleus, in which I stated that if she made comments on another Wikipedia I would block her for 24 hours.

I think we need to talk further about this incident and its implications. SilkTork *^YES! 10:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In this incident Mattisse comments at 3 discusions but a lot of posts, see the contribs.

As I said to Mattisse, I thought I'd seen a cycle that could be used to avert trouble, but this incident is only 9 dates since the last one (April Fool TFA). Does any other advisors have ideas on how to avert trouble?

If no, I suggest we recommend that Mattisse compiled a list of incidents from (?) the start of Sep 2009 (i.e. after the lynch mob when goes away) and objective described what happened and why. If that is compiled, I suggest it be send to advisors via email, and the only other parties who should have access is ArbCom members, and then only by email. --Philcha (talk) 15:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right when you say that Mattisse is the only person who can predict when she is going to get into trouble. We cannot prevent her. We can offer advise as what to do when stressed - such as consult with an advisor, and we can impose sanctions for when she goes against her Plan. But we cannot prevent her from making inappropriate comments. It concerns me that with all the warnings she has received that she continues to repeat the behaviour that has got her into trouble. SilkTork *^YES! 15:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have withdrawn from the Plan. I will be available to discuss the implications of dissolving the Plan, and have suggested to Mattisse that such a discussion should take place Monday week, that is Monday 22nd Feb. I will also be available to comment if requested if the ArbCom case is reopened. But other than that I am no longer part of the Plan, nor am I a mentor or advisor to Mattisse; though I am still available to her as a friend and fellow editor. I will leave a notice about this on my talkpage, but do not feel that a formal notification to ArbCom need take place until the final decision is made regarding the future of the Plan. SilkTork *^YES! 11:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]