This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
That was quite nice of you. Thanks.-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 18:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello,sorry to disturb with a question as this is not something wich has to see with the wiki.en. And very sorry about my english too. I'm sysop on a little wiki and faced with an user who ist cutting article's text to put them on another page just to avoid other noticing his dids and to write them as he wants, destroying like that he page history. I was wondering wich would be done on a big wiki, knowing he is not at his first wrongdoing. -- Kadwalan ( talk) 16:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Tenmei created this page as part of his inflammatory rhetoric against his opponents in the ArbCom. Maybe you should review this and decide if it is relevant enough to stay. -- Bobthefish2 ( talk) 23:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
This is a response to a question Newyorkbrad asked. It took time for me to craft it.
Do I need to ask your permission to add this at this time? If so, this is my request.
If permissible, where do I add this? -- Tenmei ( talk) 19:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the extended reply is far and beyond what was meant by a 'bit' (which was italicised in NYB's original request for emphasis). Secondly, as both drafting arbitrators and I have tried to convey to all parties concerned, the time for additional presentation, summarisation and discussion of this case is long passed. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 19:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can you advice me how to proceed with this dispute ( [1], when there's no higher instance at the Macedonian Wikipedia, and the administrator there are violating the pillars of Wikipedia, enforcing their own rules that have nothing to do with Wikipedia? -- StanProg ( talk) 10:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate if you could take the time to review what has been done to the page: Toyohara Chikanobu. I began this page (and continue to edit it) to provide as much information as I can to those interested about this comparatively unknown Meiji artist. I do not regard this page as "my baby"; I am open to any reasonable change and/or new, verifiable information. One of the editors has "changed/edited" it to make the page (in my opinion) far less comprehensible. Thank you. GaryD144 ( talk) 01:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello AlexandrDmitri, can I please ask you to chime in here? I declined Puffin's request for accountcreator and a long discussion has ensued; since I don't want to appear bullheaded, I'd welcome outside input. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
The Δ case was tentatively to be called "Review of Δ sanctions". With the improper titling, it is biasing the case against Δ. The point is to review the sanctions, not to lynch Δ. Please rename the case to what the ArbCom tentatively agreed to call it. Thank you, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 11:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Good Morning (Or whatever it may be, wherever you are.)
I was a user with ACC and had to focus on other responsibilities. I have 'come around' and am willing and able to come and help again.
Thank You. Fumitol| talk| cont 12:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Alexandr (I think we've never bumped into each other before), I just wanted to let you know that this popped up on my watchlist. You may want to hide the revisions. Thanks, Lynch 7 18:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm interested in getting involved in the Arbitration Committee by first starting as a Clerk. How do I go about doing this? -- Thehistorian10 ( talk) 17:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand this edit. Why is that on the talk page? I suspect that you intended it for the main page instead, but I'm not sure enough to change it. Regards, Looie496 ( talk) 17:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
If you don't like overspill, ask the arbitrators to accept of decline the case already. It is cruel to keep an editor (Malleus) hanging in limbo like they are doing. If the community wants to discuss the matter, let them. Closing the talk page discussion will only shunt it to other venues, which probably aren't as appropriate. What we really need are evidence and workshop pages... Jehochman Talk 18:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Apologies about that change, I didn't mean to remove important elements of the template. I saw the error explained in NW's edit summary. Just thought it was an easy fix. Won't happen again. :-/ Lord Roem ( talk) 07:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Some parties have yet to post any evidence. If large amounts of evidence are posted just before the evidence deadline, will appropriate parties be given an additional day or two to prepare a rebuttal? Thanks. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
As anticipated, Will Beback has posted his evidence 8 minutes before the evidence deadline. I therefore request an extension so that participants may prepare rebuttals. Also, Will Beback has circumvented the 500 word and 50 diff limit by linking to a sandbox with 63 diffs and yet another with 186 diffs. If this is permissible, then I will follow suit with sandboxes of my own, that contain additional diffs and additional evidence. Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 00:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
HI Dmitri, could you please have a look at this diff when you have a chance? Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dimitri, It seems that the content counter is missing in the evidence section of Doc James @ TimidGuy Appeal. James does not appear to be over the limit or anything, but it might be a good thing to correct in case he decides to add more content. Thank you. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 03:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to notify you there was a technical glitch here [2], which I now fixed. The previous poster had accidentally signed with four literal ("nowiki"ed) tildes [3], which accidentally turned into my signature in the next edit when I was merely trying to fix a broken html comment. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alex,
I recently looked for the permanent record of the motion you enacted here. I expected it at WP:ARBCC, like three other motions related to the case, but could not find it. It took some digging to get to the proper diffs. Is this an oversight?
Bye,
-- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 22:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
With 16 active Arbs, it takes 9 votes in favor to pass a remedy, right? ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 08:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Can't you take criticism of your actions? I am not a vandal. You have no right to just remove my statement without even the courtesy of leaving me a note. If you don't want to behave professionally, you should resign your position of arbitration clerk. Jehochman Talk 13:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
I was wondering if you might be able to help me with this. An article I wrote ("Pam-Crash") had an advert template placed on it in November that I believe is no longer necessary. I have since revised the article and eliminated (I think) any excessive use of the product name as well as any jargon and backlinks. When you have a chance, could you possibly look at the article and let me know if my changes have been sufficient to warrant removal of the template? Also, if you could do the same for the "Alkermes (company)" article, I would be very grateful. That article has a "close paraphrasing" template on it but I made changes to address that. Thank you! Michael Leeman ( talk) 23:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know it has been opened. Those of us who have commented on it (most of the parties) were aware it had been requested, however. JCScaliger ( talk) 19:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
It currently says "As this case is currently open, no changes to this page should be made and any unauthorised additions reverted." If it said "...any unauthorised additions will be reverted by the Case Clerks", that would avoid well-meaning-but-clumsy edits like mine. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
I am inexperienced in arbcom and policy proposals. As I understand it my proposal in the AT/MOS case (i.e. to end bold edits on policy/MOS pages) is not something that arbcom would decide. I am considering proposing such a change in an RfC at Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. In your opinion would it be appropriate make that proposal while this case is proceeding or better to wait until it is resolved? Or would you advise some other course of action/inaction? Joja lozzo 02:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
I need your help at the above mentioned article. We've had long discussions with
Львівське whose allegations seem to insinuate reputation of
Rinat Akhmetov, who is a living public person; recently I have thoroughly reviewed and restructured the article
Rinat Akhmetov, removed poorly sourced statements having put proven facts in chronological and logical order.
Львівське is now systematically restoring his version though it includes statements violating WIKI policies about
Verifiability,
Biographies of living persons and
gossip. Kindly assist on the matter. If you are interested, I'm open for discussion at my talk page --
Orekhova (
talk) 08:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I have used some three hundred words on a small aspect of the MOS case, but I do not think I have been verbose: Born2Cycle's account of the events at WP:TITLE alone is much more than 500 words, and is incomplete. How can we possibly describe these things, especially when the crux is a pattern of behavior, in 500 words? Subpages? Reference back to the opening statements? JCScaliger ( talk) 04:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, re the caps and title case, I am considering launching a new information poll at WT:TITLE, to get a better idea of where people stand on the changes that Born2cycle has proposed. I have drafted a poll in my user subpage at User:Dicklyon/Recognizability poll. I'd like to post this to WT:TITLE soon, if you think it won't be disruptive to the ongoing process. It might even solicit some opinions that people can cite in evidence. Does that seem productive? Do you think I should bother the arbs about saying if it's cool or not? Dicklyon ( talk) 06:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. There still seem to be a few errors in the final decision of Muhammad images. Should someone not have decided between the two versions of Tarc (conduct)? 5.1 does not appear to pass and the record of votes for 5 needs formatting. The header levels of many of the principles and some of the remedies are wrong. Discretionary sanctions 8.1 does not at the moment have a visible title. Should "Alternative" appear in the final decision for principle of least astonishment? Remedy 6.1 also appears to pass, since John Vanderbilt voted late (in fact he was voting while the final decision was being prepared.) Cheers, Mathsci ( talk) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
My name is Jonathan Obar
user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community
HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name
HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 06:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr.
Thanks for your work in setting up the ArbCom case Article titles and capitalisation.
It took me completely by surprise; and I have never been involved with such a thing before. My time is fully occupied in the real world (and will be for at least the next couple of months); but I have attempted to do what is required at this early stage. As you can see from the request page, I flagged my intention to post a statement. I was thinking what to put in it, when suddenly that page was closed and the contents were transferred to the main case page. I had no idea such a thing would happen. The result is that minutely detailed and prejudicial statements are made on the main page about me, yet it seems I have no way to make the short statement I was developing. So:
Also, I have had to work fast to see that certain parties are named who were excluded from the initial list. Sarek (the requester of the case) makes it clear: he had expected that more should be added. Let me stress that I am inexperienced in these matters, and I acted in good faith and for good reasons in augmenting that list. For example, some of the additional parties have been indirectly implicated by parties already named; so I wanted them explicitly named, even though I have nothing negative to say about them at all. So:
I appreciate your help with these matters. I am sure there will be many further procedural questions. Is this the right place to come for advice?
Noetica Tea? 13:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
←Noetica for the purposes of drafting a case decision only the evidence presented on the evidence page is looked at. You should make your points there. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 13:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, some of the editing at the workshop page has been chaotic, and certainly does not meet the need to confine evidence such as diffs to the evidence page. (I will need to ask you questions later about presentation on the evidence page later; it too is developing chaotically, to say the least. I don't want to add to that chaos!)
Of particular concern is a disruptive development that I have notified and summarised in this section at WP:ANI. The actions by, and triggered by, party JCScaliger affect the present ArbCom case in several ways. Can he be restrained, or at least admonished, about pointy and provocative edits in policy (or guidelines) that directly affect the case? Can you do something about this? It is unfair that I should embroil myself further, since I am already placed in a vulnerable position. Yet a core policy page is being manipulated in prosecuting the case. Please advise what can be done, and how, and by whom. Is an injunction concerning tampering with policy in order?
Thanks. I'll do nothing further till I am advised here.
Noetica Tea? 11:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I see that the Evidence page was closed and locked with edit summary, "contact a case clerk if you want to make a submission" [4]. I would like to make a submission, so I'm contacting you.
Prior to the page being closed and locked, my evidence area was hidden [5] for being late.
I'm sorry, but this is the first ARBCOM case in which I've ever participated and I didn't realize the deadline was so strict. Frankly, I figured it would be locked (as it eventually was) once no more edits were allowed. I spent hours of my Sunday getting that stuff in yesterday before midnight (midnight my time, PST). Besides, I had most of my evidence in before the GMT dead line (is that the official dead line?) in this version, except for paring that I had to do per what the bot said (as you and I discussed on the talk page). I promise I'll never make that mistake again! Can you please do something to allow my evidence section to be considered in the case? Thanks so much. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 22:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
It might be a good idea to archive the talk pages over there. At this point the continuation of dialogue on them is unlikely to be productive anymore, even if it's still quite polite. ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 13:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
who else would have written "Statement by Elen of the Roads"? Nobody Ent 19:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The Arbs who just voted to close the case seem kinda impatient and are doing it themselves. ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 20:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, I have posted this at AGK's talkpage (and cross-posted this at Worm's page):
AGK, it is distressing to me that this ArbCom Workshop page is still open. No one wants to suppress free discussion; but a new and irregular posting has now been made, interrupting my life yet again to answer it. I have conformed to all procedural requirements the best way I can, and it is unfair that others are permitted to take advantage of that (perhaps hoping to get the last word, I suppose).
Please close and protect the page now, since your revised deadline has long passed. Anyone can carry on discussion at the talkpages for the case, if they really must.
But perhaps the matter is for a clerk to deal with, so I draw your attention to it also.
Noetica Tea? 21:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I meant it generally, of course, and no reflection on you in any way. I had no wish to offend.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 22:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to revert this if it's inappropriate. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
There's a request to fix a link at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article_titles_and_capitalisation/Evidence#Link_update_request. I have no idea if I'm able to handle this or not, so I'm posting it here since you're the clerk that was active most recently. Tra (Talk) 23:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I just happened to notice this account in an article's history. Hand-ball. Alarbus ( talk) 15:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Alex, does it make sense to ping the arbs to look at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Proposed decision#Appeal already: "Locus of the dispute" finding? Or can I assume that they'll all see it, even if they've voted already? Is there some other process I should use to help this case come to a sensible conclusion? Dicklyon ( talk) 18:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
"Born2cycle is warned that his contributions to discussion must reflect a better receptiveness to compromise and a higher tolerance for the views of other editors."
What?
Where have I ever not reflected a receptiveness to compromise such that there is room for improvement in that area for me?
Whose views have I ever not been tolerant of? What were those views?
Totally lost. There was no evidence of any of this in this case. AFAIK, no evidence of this exists.
I don't know what to do with this except ignore it. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 23:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I'm struggling to understand why the user page and talk page of the sock of a banned user have not been deleted, and thus why it's been necessary to post a note about the ArbCom decision on that talk page (as though it's of a legitimate user). Tony (talk) 07:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Can you deal with this as appropriate? Ed Johnston suggested I ask you. Thanks. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 14:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
hi . Pls excuse my newbie attitude to wiki but I've only just joined as i feel i have a great deal of knowledge and information to offer in my field . I recently added a external link which i feel didn't break wiki policy's
but it has been edited and unfairly removed when links still remain to business's . We are a non-profit non-funded shooting team for the london ambulance service ( a large organisation ) and wiki appeared to have incomplete articles on shooting subjects (event though some are heavily externally linked so non have showed any benefit to wiki )
here is the ' talk in progress link ' ..... Talk:Clay_pigeon_shooting
can you help pls at all as i feel it isn't being edited fairly ... yes i admit i may have put a link in the wrong place but as I've said i am new to wiki and I'm not an IT guru (actually I'm a paramedic)
any help would be great and appreciated and i feel myself and some of the contacts within the team could benefit wiki and i am more than willing to spend time in finishing the incomplete articles related to shooting .. but not if they will be edited unfairly and business's allowed to provide external links which where over looked by the editor in the articles when our genuine links have been deleted.
the editor in question claims the links where 'spam' ... this i can't understand at all . we are not a business in making money, we are not a shooting ground making money, we are not trying to sell any product ... the links where provided to provide / promote further information into the sport in question to everyday people. if you have another questions pls ask. thank you .
the editor did inform me directly when the post was removed and suggested i ' talk' in the talk box before relinking .. which i did ... then the editor point blank refused again
once again
thankyou ( Jinxy72 ( talk) 17:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC))
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
hello, I would like to know what problems there are with the voice Cecilia Chailly, is the English translation of the Italian page, and on that I had no problem. please let me know, thank you, Cecilia Chailly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.12.56 ( talk) 22:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Alex, I see you added "nocaselink = true" I was working on getting it linked. Didn't know about that parameter. Mlpearc ( powwow) 18:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I see you archived the clarification request. Could you make sure I noted it correctly at ER? Thanks. MBisanz talk 02:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your notification to me about Lyncs ( talk · contribs), am I allowed to respond and make a statement at the Requests for Amendment page about this? — Cirt ( talk) 15:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. :) — Cirt ( talk) 15:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hey, AlexndrDmitri! I would love to be considered to become an Arbitration Clerk. How should I go about doing that? If there aren't any positions open or I don't have enough experience to qualify, I hope that you will keep me in mind when a position becomes available or when I gain more experience. Thanks! At32296 ( talk) 20:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Is this documented anywhere in case it gets forgotten again? If there is a place such things are documented, could that and another item (keeping Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Front matter updated) be added? I raised both at WT:AC/C, but that page maybe isn't watched by current clerks? Carcharoth ( talk) 07:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Proposed decision#Motion to close, there is at least one failed proposal marked as passed. Remedy 3 had a vote of 4 to 7, with one abstention. With one abstention, seven votes is a majority, so that should be marked as a fail. Also, the vote appears to be closed, and if so, the 5 to 6 vote on Remedy 1 is also a fail. I'm sure it's not my place to edit an Arb page, so I thought I'd bring to your attention as the clerk. - Rrius ( talk) 05:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello Alexander, I recently visited the Wikipedia article Syfy and I found extreme levels of vandalism by User:Syfail and he keeps vandilizing the page even though other users "undo" his changes. Because his/her name implies that he/she will not stop vandalizing the page, I think it would be a good method to block the users IP address to prevent any further vandalism.
...Now I have a question, where do I report exesive vandalism, because the help desk is only for questions and anyother place I look, there is no way to ask for the blocking of another user's IP address.
Thank you! James3167 ( talk) 19:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
I might have of exaggerated a bit but I do think that future vandalism will come out of that user. If you decide no to block him/her, at least keep an eye on the user and/or tell the user a warning to stop the vandalism or any future vandalism.
James3167 (
talk) 19:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the note just now. You may be aware that one of the monster AE cases filed was about me. I don't wish to engage in lengthy argumentation, but would like to respond to a number of the specific diffs or representations of my behavior where I believe they are misleading. Given that the AE was 5,000 words, and I didn't have the opportunity to respond before it was closed, this might take a bit of space. I'm wondering if my rebuttal counts against my 1,000 word limit? Any suggestions you might have would be appreciated. Regards, Homunculus ( duihua) 21:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi AlexandrDmitri; I realized I accidentally put the wrong diff on the Evidence page. The relevant sentence is about Ohconfucius (here [6]) The sentence says: "[42] [43] Belittling comments in edit summaries" That [43] is pointing to the wrong diff. The diff was supposed to be this one [7]. Can you replace that? If so, thank you. A mistake I hadn't noticed until recently. TheSoundAndTheFury ( talk) 18:55, 27 June 2012 (UTC) Done Changed. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 19:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. TheSoundAndTheFury ( talk) 20:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr
Can you clarify your hatting of the Arbom content at the ANI discussion please.
Cheers, Leaky Caldron 15:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Alexandr, I made a comment about statements in arbitration discussions at the Cracker92 ANI topic that may not be right. Could you shed some light on it for us? In looking at the
Guide to Arbitration, I thought that the 500-page word limit applied to statements by non-parties in the discussion. Someone else thinks that only applies to the submission of evidence. Rereading the guide, I can see why she thinks that, but it does get a bit muddled because the guide seems to blend evidence and "argumentation" together with many calls for "brevity". Can you clarify, either here or at ANI? If you do it here, I'll report it to ANI for you. Thanks.--
Bbb23 (
talk) 16:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there a reason Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests and its archives are being used to archive the full text of motions not associated with cases? It seems to duplicate what is done at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Motions. There are also lots of other random discussion and comments being mixed up with the non-case motions. It looks like it has been going on for a while now, but taking a recent archive page such as Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Archive 3, it seems strange that formal arbitration discussions are being placed on the same archive page as random stuff. And some of that stuff in those archives is really disconnected from its origins. It is not really clear what has come from where. Wouldn't a system like that in use at WP:AC/N and WT:AC/N work better? Carcharoth ( talk) 01:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Responded. I should be able to provide assistance in either case, anyway. - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 08:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you please remove the personal attack by Magog were he is calling me a bigot [9] I had redacted it but he has edit warred it back in and then filed a spurious EW [10] report against me. Darkness Shines ( talk) 11:58, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
There is a request for arbitration that needs to be removed as it is no longer possible for the case to be accepted.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 15:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr. I don't want to step into this, but would it be possible to post the same note to Ohconfucius's page? Seems it was reverted [11].... Regards, Homunculus ( duihua) 17:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I have placed templates on the following pages to nominate them for deletion according to the recent Falun Gong 2 ArbCom decision, but have been getting major timeout error signals for hours now. Would you be so kind to complete the nomination? The pages are:
I don't know wtf is happening here, but something keeps going wrong when I try. John Carter ( talk) 22:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr, and sorry to trouble you again. During the ARBFLG 2 case I had created a response to an AE filing in my userspace. I added a permalink to this content in the evidence page for ARBFLG 2, and it was an important part of my submission there. The material was not posted anywhere else. An administrator involved in the dispute has deleted my sandbox. He evidently believed that my blanking of the page after the case ended was tantamount to a deletion request (it was not). The page history is now inaccessible to posterity, and the material I linked to in evidence on ARBFLG cannot be found. Would it be possible to restore my sandbox (more importantly, the history), so that the link in ARBFLG 2 evidence works again? Thank you (and let me know if everything I've said here makes sense). Homunculus ( duihua) 14:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I e-mailed arbcom-l on 26 July 12 about, Saunaboy ( talk · contribs), another one of Fae's likely socks that as of this moment has still gone unblocked. Tarc ( talk) 00:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Can you modify the warning template at the top of Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles to include a link to the case, WP:ARBATC? A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 23:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
... please could you ensure that the arbitrators have actually seen Regents Park's suggestion on the latest farrago? I know you can't make them read or understand it, (as the original request for clarification has led to few attempts from them to clarify) but at least they could acknowledge that it exists; I think, as do others, that it is worthy of consideration. non-Wikipedian pablo 19:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Re WP: Arbitration/Guide to arbitration, the sentence immediately preceding the very last sentence in the Lead section of the Guide reads: "If a case is not opened, the arbitrators will often offer suggestions to resolve the dispute without arbitration, and these are often worth serious consideration; but in any event, they may remark that, or it may be appropriate to, arbitration may become necessary in the months ahead."
I feel the above sentence may be confusing. Would it be better if the sentence said the following (if indeed this is what it intends to say): If a case is not opened, the arbitrators will often offer suggestions to resolve the dispute without arbitration, and these are often worth serious consideration; but in any event, they may remark, or it may be appropriate to remark, that arbitration may become necessary in the months ahead.
Regards, IjonTichyIjonTichy ( talk) 19:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: this and similar
You should know that the old "teams" were deprecated some months ago, and things like a "technical" or "case management" team no longer exist. Some responsibilities were presumed to belong to the entire committee or one of the subcommittees, others are handled on an ad hoc basis by available arbitrators, and still others were deprecated because they are useless or directly counter-productive.
Perhaps you could re-phrase your question to ask what aspects of the committee's business the candidate intends to involve themselves in, which in any event may be a more revealing question than into which of the five rather clumsy teams the candidate would self-assign... Regards, AGK [•] 16:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabelldoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahfafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.
If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/
Best regards, Islahaddow
(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC))
Which one of the 4 candidates is not recused? Or was there an accident with the numbers? - jc37 21:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Miszabot doesn't operate until there are at least minthreadsleft + minthreadstoarchive sections present on the page. The default values of those parameters are 5 and 2 respectively. You only had six sections until today, but the addition of a seventh means it should run soon. And you can change those values by adding, e.g.,
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadstoarchive = 1
—WWoods ( talk) 19:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I've updated {{ ACMajority}} so you can include the abstained arbitrators in with the recused. See Template:ACMajority/testcases for how it looks. NE Ent 13:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for hatting Black Kite's posting on the Arbcom page. I had as well, but was encouraged not to do so. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 20:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
As an open case shouldn't it be listed as open (even though suspended)? Alanscottwalker ( talk) 21:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Considering that Hex expressed resentment at being told only on his talkpage that I had reopened the AN thread on 1 January ( my note here), I hardly think your note on his page is enough, Alexander. You'd better e-mail him, if you haven't already done so. Bishonen | talk 22:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC).
Hi, thanks for being active in the Jerusalem RfArb with the motion. Is it the intention of the motion that we can start the RFC on our own once we've more or less agreed on what the question will be, or should we seek guidance from ArbCom? Also, would ArbCom select the editors to close the discussion? Cheers, -- Dailycare ( talk) 19:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I've been seeking to get more involved with the backstage side of Wikipedia lately, of late I've been contributing to WP:DRN and offering my thoughts on the occational WP:ANI. Clerking seems like something that I'd be interested in helping out with. I thought I'd drop you a message enquiring about whether you'd take a look at my contributions/experience to let me know if I would be suitable to put my name forward for consideration.
Dear WikiProject Morocco member,
There is currently a proposal to ban articles concerning a large area of Northern Morocco from appearing on the Main Page of Wikipedia in the Did you know? section. This would affect a significant number of articles within the scope of WikiProject Morocco. If you have a view on this proposal, please see Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs#Proposal for one-year moratorium on Gibraltarpedia DYKs. Prioryman ( talk) 15:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I have been accused of edit warring and I simply didn't realize that a clerk had altered the headers and thought I neglected to add the "uninvolved" in the title. Since KC has taken it upon herself to make the accusation of bad faith I feel there is no further point in involving myself further in that case. Thanks.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 20:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Re the recent calc you just put up, does inactive = recused or does it even matter? Alanscottwalker ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Alexandr. I think it's excesssively pedantic to steamroll the comment headers into conformity on the Tea Party RFAR (and presumably other cases nowadays). What's the virtue of having the TOC look like it was written by a bot? My original header was part of my comment, and I only just noticed it had been changed and (after some research) by whom. But I appreciate that you at least turned it into Bishzillaspeak. I take that as a delicate attention. Bishonen | talk 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC).
User:Rodgau Philatelie is the promotional user name and owner of this website and publisher of the stamp catalog citation he edited and the spamlink he added. I think WP:CORPNAME applies. I suspect this is the same person. ww2censor ( talk) 17:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Instead of simply erasing part of the text, I hid it. Let me know me if that's enough or not. -- Lecen ( talk) 17:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Alex, regarding this talk page tag which appears on the Transcendental Meditation article: {{ discretionary sanctions}} At present it only appears on the talk page of the one, main article. Would it be proper and useful for me to add it to the talk pages of other articles in the topic area? I like to do it but don't know what the protocol is on this. I notice that the Abortion topic has it on multiple talk pages. any insight you can give is appreciated. Thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, AlexandrDmitri/Archive 3! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout ( T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Did you mean to make yourself inactive on the Sexology or the Tea party case? Your edit summary says Sexology, but you made yourself inactive on Tea party. Incidentally, if you are going to move yourself inactive, you also need to update the numbers in Casenav/data, or the majority calculations won't tally up. -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 11:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, can you give me a third opinion of this situation? The conversation is taking place on both of our talk pages, and tell me both ways if you think I am wrong or right and why. Thanks.-- Bogu Slav 17:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Bonjour AlexandrDmitri,
Pouvez-vous m'aider à résoudre un problème avec l'article "Marina Tchebourkina" (en anglais).
J'ai écrit cet article en anglais et il a été publié sur le site du Conservatoire Tchaïkovski de Moscou ( http://www.mosconsv.ru/en/person.aspx?id=46126). Par la suite, je l'ai publié sur Wikipédia — pensant que, en tant que son auteur, je pouvais le faire librement.
L'article a été marqué comme ayant un problème de copyright. Alors, j'ai accompli les formalités nécessaires (déclaration de cession des droit sur Talk:Marina Tchebourkina + mail envoyé à permissions-en at wikimedia).
N'ayant pas eu de réponse positive, j'ai réécrit entièrement l'article. Depuis le 20 novembre, cette nouvelle version se trouve sur /info/en/?search=Talk:Marina_Tchebourkina/Temp. Pouvez-vous, en tant qu'administrateur, faire le nécessaire pour que cette nouvelle version soit publiée sur la page principale "Marina Tchebourkina" et le "Copyvio" y soit enlevé?
Je vous en remercie d'avance.
MFJE ( talk) 09:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Bonjour AlexandrDmitri !
Merci pour vos contributions sur les articles relatifs au Maroc.
Toute l'équipe du Wikimedia MA User Group vous invite à vous inscrire pour nous rejoindre, afin de prendre part aux discussions et de coopérer avec d'autres personnes qui sont, elles aussi, intéressées par le Maroc et sa culture.
Cordialement. -- Reda benkhadra ( talk) 22:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 01:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello, AlexandrDmitri. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
That was quite nice of you. Thanks.-- Marshal Bagramyan ( talk) 18:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello,sorry to disturb with a question as this is not something wich has to see with the wiki.en. And very sorry about my english too. I'm sysop on a little wiki and faced with an user who ist cutting article's text to put them on another page just to avoid other noticing his dids and to write them as he wants, destroying like that he page history. I was wondering wich would be done on a big wiki, knowing he is not at his first wrongdoing. -- Kadwalan ( talk) 16:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Tenmei created this page as part of his inflammatory rhetoric against his opponents in the ArbCom. Maybe you should review this and decide if it is relevant enough to stay. -- Bobthefish2 ( talk) 23:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
This is a response to a question Newyorkbrad asked. It took time for me to craft it.
Do I need to ask your permission to add this at this time? If so, this is my request.
If permissible, where do I add this? -- Tenmei ( talk) 19:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the extended reply is far and beyond what was meant by a 'bit' (which was italicised in NYB's original request for emphasis). Secondly, as both drafting arbitrators and I have tried to convey to all parties concerned, the time for additional presentation, summarisation and discussion of this case is long passed. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 19:26, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, can you advice me how to proceed with this dispute ( [1], when there's no higher instance at the Macedonian Wikipedia, and the administrator there are violating the pillars of Wikipedia, enforcing their own rules that have nothing to do with Wikipedia? -- StanProg ( talk) 10:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
I would greatly appreciate if you could take the time to review what has been done to the page: Toyohara Chikanobu. I began this page (and continue to edit it) to provide as much information as I can to those interested about this comparatively unknown Meiji artist. I do not regard this page as "my baby"; I am open to any reasonable change and/or new, verifiable information. One of the editors has "changed/edited" it to make the page (in my opinion) far less comprehensible. Thank you. GaryD144 ( talk) 01:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello AlexandrDmitri, can I please ask you to chime in here? I declined Puffin's request for accountcreator and a long discussion has ensued; since I don't want to appear bullheaded, I'd welcome outside input. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
The Δ case was tentatively to be called "Review of Δ sanctions". With the improper titling, it is biasing the case against Δ. The point is to review the sanctions, not to lynch Δ. Please rename the case to what the ArbCom tentatively agreed to call it. Thank you, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 11:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Good Morning (Or whatever it may be, wherever you are.)
I was a user with ACC and had to focus on other responsibilities. I have 'come around' and am willing and able to come and help again.
Thank You. Fumitol| talk| cont 12:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Alexandr (I think we've never bumped into each other before), I just wanted to let you know that this popped up on my watchlist. You may want to hide the revisions. Thanks, Lynch 7 18:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm interested in getting involved in the Arbitration Committee by first starting as a Clerk. How do I go about doing this? -- Thehistorian10 ( talk) 17:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand this edit. Why is that on the talk page? I suspect that you intended it for the main page instead, but I'm not sure enough to change it. Regards, Looie496 ( talk) 17:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
If you don't like overspill, ask the arbitrators to accept of decline the case already. It is cruel to keep an editor (Malleus) hanging in limbo like they are doing. If the community wants to discuss the matter, let them. Closing the talk page discussion will only shunt it to other venues, which probably aren't as appropriate. What we really need are evidence and workshop pages... Jehochman Talk 18:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Apologies about that change, I didn't mean to remove important elements of the template. I saw the error explained in NW's edit summary. Just thought it was an easy fix. Won't happen again. :-/ Lord Roem ( talk) 07:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Some parties have yet to post any evidence. If large amounts of evidence are posted just before the evidence deadline, will appropriate parties be given an additional day or two to prepare a rebuttal? Thanks. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
As anticipated, Will Beback has posted his evidence 8 minutes before the evidence deadline. I therefore request an extension so that participants may prepare rebuttals. Also, Will Beback has circumvented the 500 word and 50 diff limit by linking to a sandbox with 63 diffs and yet another with 186 diffs. If this is permissible, then I will follow suit with sandboxes of my own, that contain additional diffs and additional evidence. Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 00:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
HI Dmitri, could you please have a look at this diff when you have a chance? Thank you.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 02:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Dimitri, It seems that the content counter is missing in the evidence section of Doc James @ TimidGuy Appeal. James does not appear to be over the limit or anything, but it might be a good thing to correct in case he decides to add more content. Thank you. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 03:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, just wanted to notify you there was a technical glitch here [2], which I now fixed. The previous poster had accidentally signed with four literal ("nowiki"ed) tildes [3], which accidentally turned into my signature in the next edit when I was merely trying to fix a broken html comment. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alex,
I recently looked for the permanent record of the motion you enacted here. I expected it at WP:ARBCC, like three other motions related to the case, but could not find it. It took some digging to get to the proper diffs. Is this an oversight?
Bye,
-- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 22:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
With 16 active Arbs, it takes 9 votes in favor to pass a remedy, right? ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 08:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Can't you take criticism of your actions? I am not a vandal. You have no right to just remove my statement without even the courtesy of leaving me a note. If you don't want to behave professionally, you should resign your position of arbitration clerk. Jehochman Talk 13:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
I was wondering if you might be able to help me with this. An article I wrote ("Pam-Crash") had an advert template placed on it in November that I believe is no longer necessary. I have since revised the article and eliminated (I think) any excessive use of the product name as well as any jargon and backlinks. When you have a chance, could you possibly look at the article and let me know if my changes have been sufficient to warrant removal of the template? Also, if you could do the same for the "Alkermes (company)" article, I would be very grateful. That article has a "close paraphrasing" template on it but I made changes to address that. Thank you! Michael Leeman ( talk) 23:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for letting me know it has been opened. Those of us who have commented on it (most of the parties) were aware it had been requested, however. JCScaliger ( talk) 19:37, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
It currently says "As this case is currently open, no changes to this page should be made and any unauthorised additions reverted." If it said "...any unauthorised additions will be reverted by the Case Clerks", that would avoid well-meaning-but-clumsy edits like mine. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
I am inexperienced in arbcom and policy proposals. As I understand it my proposal in the AT/MOS case (i.e. to end bold edits on policy/MOS pages) is not something that arbcom would decide. I am considering proposing such a change in an RfC at Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. In your opinion would it be appropriate make that proposal while this case is proceeding or better to wait until it is resolved? Or would you advise some other course of action/inaction? Joja lozzo 02:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
I need your help at the above mentioned article. We've had long discussions with
Львівське whose allegations seem to insinuate reputation of
Rinat Akhmetov, who is a living public person; recently I have thoroughly reviewed and restructured the article
Rinat Akhmetov, removed poorly sourced statements having put proven facts in chronological and logical order.
Львівське is now systematically restoring his version though it includes statements violating WIKI policies about
Verifiability,
Biographies of living persons and
gossip. Kindly assist on the matter. If you are interested, I'm open for discussion at my talk page --
Orekhova (
talk) 08:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I have used some three hundred words on a small aspect of the MOS case, but I do not think I have been verbose: Born2Cycle's account of the events at WP:TITLE alone is much more than 500 words, and is incomplete. How can we possibly describe these things, especially when the crux is a pattern of behavior, in 500 words? Subpages? Reference back to the opening statements? JCScaliger ( talk) 04:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, re the caps and title case, I am considering launching a new information poll at WT:TITLE, to get a better idea of where people stand on the changes that Born2cycle has proposed. I have drafted a poll in my user subpage at User:Dicklyon/Recognizability poll. I'd like to post this to WT:TITLE soon, if you think it won't be disruptive to the ongoing process. It might even solicit some opinions that people can cite in evidence. Does that seem productive? Do you think I should bother the arbs about saying if it's cool or not? Dicklyon ( talk) 06:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. There still seem to be a few errors in the final decision of Muhammad images. Should someone not have decided between the two versions of Tarc (conduct)? 5.1 does not appear to pass and the record of votes for 5 needs formatting. The header levels of many of the principles and some of the remedies are wrong. Discretionary sanctions 8.1 does not at the moment have a visible title. Should "Alternative" appear in the final decision for principle of least astonishment? Remedy 6.1 also appears to pass, since John Vanderbilt voted late (in fact he was voting while the final decision was being prepared.) Cheers, Mathsci ( talk) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk)
Dear AlexandrDmitri,
My name is Jonathan Obar
user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community
HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name
HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 06:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr.
Thanks for your work in setting up the ArbCom case Article titles and capitalisation.
It took me completely by surprise; and I have never been involved with such a thing before. My time is fully occupied in the real world (and will be for at least the next couple of months); but I have attempted to do what is required at this early stage. As you can see from the request page, I flagged my intention to post a statement. I was thinking what to put in it, when suddenly that page was closed and the contents were transferred to the main case page. I had no idea such a thing would happen. The result is that minutely detailed and prejudicial statements are made on the main page about me, yet it seems I have no way to make the short statement I was developing. So:
Also, I have had to work fast to see that certain parties are named who were excluded from the initial list. Sarek (the requester of the case) makes it clear: he had expected that more should be added. Let me stress that I am inexperienced in these matters, and I acted in good faith and for good reasons in augmenting that list. For example, some of the additional parties have been indirectly implicated by parties already named; so I wanted them explicitly named, even though I have nothing negative to say about them at all. So:
I appreciate your help with these matters. I am sure there will be many further procedural questions. Is this the right place to come for advice?
Noetica Tea? 13:04, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
←Noetica for the purposes of drafting a case decision only the evidence presented on the evidence page is looked at. You should make your points there. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs( talk) 13:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, some of the editing at the workshop page has been chaotic, and certainly does not meet the need to confine evidence such as diffs to the evidence page. (I will need to ask you questions later about presentation on the evidence page later; it too is developing chaotically, to say the least. I don't want to add to that chaos!)
Of particular concern is a disruptive development that I have notified and summarised in this section at WP:ANI. The actions by, and triggered by, party JCScaliger affect the present ArbCom case in several ways. Can he be restrained, or at least admonished, about pointy and provocative edits in policy (or guidelines) that directly affect the case? Can you do something about this? It is unfair that I should embroil myself further, since I am already placed in a vulnerable position. Yet a core policy page is being manipulated in prosecuting the case. Please advise what can be done, and how, and by whom. Is an injunction concerning tampering with policy in order?
Thanks. I'll do nothing further till I am advised here.
Noetica Tea? 11:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
I see that the Evidence page was closed and locked with edit summary, "contact a case clerk if you want to make a submission" [4]. I would like to make a submission, so I'm contacting you.
Prior to the page being closed and locked, my evidence area was hidden [5] for being late.
I'm sorry, but this is the first ARBCOM case in which I've ever participated and I didn't realize the deadline was so strict. Frankly, I figured it would be locked (as it eventually was) once no more edits were allowed. I spent hours of my Sunday getting that stuff in yesterday before midnight (midnight my time, PST). Besides, I had most of my evidence in before the GMT dead line (is that the official dead line?) in this version, except for paring that I had to do per what the bot said (as you and I discussed on the talk page). I promise I'll never make that mistake again! Can you please do something to allow my evidence section to be considered in the case? Thanks so much. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 22:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
It might be a good idea to archive the talk pages over there. At this point the continuation of dialogue on them is unlikely to be productive anymore, even if it's still quite polite. ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 13:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
who else would have written "Statement by Elen of the Roads"? Nobody Ent 19:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
The Arbs who just voted to close the case seem kinda impatient and are doing it themselves. ASCIIn2Bme ( talk) 20:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Alexandr, I have posted this at AGK's talkpage (and cross-posted this at Worm's page):
AGK, it is distressing to me that this ArbCom Workshop page is still open. No one wants to suppress free discussion; but a new and irregular posting has now been made, interrupting my life yet again to answer it. I have conformed to all procedural requirements the best way I can, and it is unfair that others are permitted to take advantage of that (perhaps hoping to get the last word, I suppose).
Please close and protect the page now, since your revised deadline has long passed. Anyone can carry on discussion at the talkpages for the case, if they really must.
But perhaps the matter is for a clerk to deal with, so I draw your attention to it also.
Noetica Tea? 21:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
I meant it generally, of course, and no reflection on you in any way. I had no wish to offend.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 22:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to revert this if it's inappropriate. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
There's a request to fix a link at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article_titles_and_capitalisation/Evidence#Link_update_request. I have no idea if I'm able to handle this or not, so I'm posting it here since you're the clerk that was active most recently. Tra (Talk) 23:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I just happened to notice this account in an article's history. Hand-ball. Alarbus ( talk) 15:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Alex, does it make sense to ping the arbs to look at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation/Proposed decision#Appeal already: "Locus of the dispute" finding? Or can I assume that they'll all see it, even if they've voted already? Is there some other process I should use to help this case come to a sensible conclusion? Dicklyon ( talk) 18:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
"Born2cycle is warned that his contributions to discussion must reflect a better receptiveness to compromise and a higher tolerance for the views of other editors."
What?
Where have I ever not reflected a receptiveness to compromise such that there is room for improvement in that area for me?
Whose views have I ever not been tolerant of? What were those views?
Totally lost. There was no evidence of any of this in this case. AFAIK, no evidence of this exists.
I don't know what to do with this except ignore it. -- Born2cycle ( talk) 23:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I'm struggling to understand why the user page and talk page of the sock of a banned user have not been deleted, and thus why it's been necessary to post a note about the ArbCom decision on that talk page (as though it's of a legitimate user). Tony (talk) 07:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Can you deal with this as appropriate? Ed Johnston suggested I ask you. Thanks. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 14:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
hi . Pls excuse my newbie attitude to wiki but I've only just joined as i feel i have a great deal of knowledge and information to offer in my field . I recently added a external link which i feel didn't break wiki policy's
but it has been edited and unfairly removed when links still remain to business's . We are a non-profit non-funded shooting team for the london ambulance service ( a large organisation ) and wiki appeared to have incomplete articles on shooting subjects (event though some are heavily externally linked so non have showed any benefit to wiki )
here is the ' talk in progress link ' ..... Talk:Clay_pigeon_shooting
can you help pls at all as i feel it isn't being edited fairly ... yes i admit i may have put a link in the wrong place but as I've said i am new to wiki and I'm not an IT guru (actually I'm a paramedic)
any help would be great and appreciated and i feel myself and some of the contacts within the team could benefit wiki and i am more than willing to spend time in finishing the incomplete articles related to shooting .. but not if they will be edited unfairly and business's allowed to provide external links which where over looked by the editor in the articles when our genuine links have been deleted.
the editor in question claims the links where 'spam' ... this i can't understand at all . we are not a business in making money, we are not a shooting ground making money, we are not trying to sell any product ... the links where provided to provide / promote further information into the sport in question to everyday people. if you have another questions pls ask. thank you .
the editor did inform me directly when the post was removed and suggested i ' talk' in the talk box before relinking .. which i did ... then the editor point blank refused again
once again
thankyou ( Jinxy72 ( talk) 17:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC))
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
hello, I would like to know what problems there are with the voice Cecilia Chailly, is the English translation of the Italian page, and on that I had no problem. please let me know, thank you, Cecilia Chailly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.12.56 ( talk) 22:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Alex, I see you added "nocaselink = true" I was working on getting it linked. Didn't know about that parameter. Mlpearc ( powwow) 18:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I see you archived the clarification request. Could you make sure I noted it correctly at ER? Thanks. MBisanz talk 02:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your notification to me about Lyncs ( talk · contribs), am I allowed to respond and make a statement at the Requests for Amendment page about this? — Cirt ( talk) 15:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. :) — Cirt ( talk) 15:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hey, AlexndrDmitri! I would love to be considered to become an Arbitration Clerk. How should I go about doing that? If there aren't any positions open or I don't have enough experience to qualify, I hope that you will keep me in mind when a position becomes available or when I gain more experience. Thanks! At32296 ( talk) 20:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Is this documented anywhere in case it gets forgotten again? If there is a place such things are documented, could that and another item (keeping Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Front matter updated) be added? I raised both at WT:AC/C, but that page maybe isn't watched by current clerks? Carcharoth ( talk) 07:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay/Proposed decision#Motion to close, there is at least one failed proposal marked as passed. Remedy 3 had a vote of 4 to 7, with one abstention. With one abstention, seven votes is a majority, so that should be marked as a fail. Also, the vote appears to be closed, and if so, the 5 to 6 vote on Remedy 1 is also a fail. I'm sure it's not my place to edit an Arb page, so I thought I'd bring to your attention as the clerk. - Rrius ( talk) 05:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello Alexander, I recently visited the Wikipedia article Syfy and I found extreme levels of vandalism by User:Syfail and he keeps vandilizing the page even though other users "undo" his changes. Because his/her name implies that he/she will not stop vandalizing the page, I think it would be a good method to block the users IP address to prevent any further vandalism.
...Now I have a question, where do I report exesive vandalism, because the help desk is only for questions and anyother place I look, there is no way to ask for the blocking of another user's IP address.
Thank you! James3167 ( talk) 19:36, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
I might have of exaggerated a bit but I do think that future vandalism will come out of that user. If you decide no to block him/her, at least keep an eye on the user and/or tell the user a warning to stop the vandalism or any future vandalism.
James3167 (
talk) 19:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the note just now. You may be aware that one of the monster AE cases filed was about me. I don't wish to engage in lengthy argumentation, but would like to respond to a number of the specific diffs or representations of my behavior where I believe they are misleading. Given that the AE was 5,000 words, and I didn't have the opportunity to respond before it was closed, this might take a bit of space. I'm wondering if my rebuttal counts against my 1,000 word limit? Any suggestions you might have would be appreciated. Regards, Homunculus ( duihua) 21:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi AlexandrDmitri; I realized I accidentally put the wrong diff on the Evidence page. The relevant sentence is about Ohconfucius (here [6]) The sentence says: "[42] [43] Belittling comments in edit summaries" That [43] is pointing to the wrong diff. The diff was supposed to be this one [7]. Can you replace that? If so, thank you. A mistake I hadn't noticed until recently. TheSoundAndTheFury ( talk) 18:55, 27 June 2012 (UTC) Done Changed. Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 19:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. TheSoundAndTheFury ( talk) 20:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr
Can you clarify your hatting of the Arbom content at the ANI discussion please.
Cheers, Leaky Caldron 15:24, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Alexandr, I made a comment about statements in arbitration discussions at the Cracker92 ANI topic that may not be right. Could you shed some light on it for us? In looking at the
Guide to Arbitration, I thought that the 500-page word limit applied to statements by non-parties in the discussion. Someone else thinks that only applies to the submission of evidence. Rereading the guide, I can see why she thinks that, but it does get a bit muddled because the guide seems to blend evidence and "argumentation" together with many calls for "brevity". Can you clarify, either here or at ANI? If you do it here, I'll report it to ANI for you. Thanks.--
Bbb23 (
talk) 16:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there a reason Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests and its archives are being used to archive the full text of motions not associated with cases? It seems to duplicate what is done at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Motions. There are also lots of other random discussion and comments being mixed up with the non-case motions. It looks like it has been going on for a while now, but taking a recent archive page such as Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Archive 3, it seems strange that formal arbitration discussions are being placed on the same archive page as random stuff. And some of that stuff in those archives is really disconnected from its origins. It is not really clear what has come from where. Wouldn't a system like that in use at WP:AC/N and WT:AC/N work better? Carcharoth ( talk) 01:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Responded. I should be able to provide assistance in either case, anyway. - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 08:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you please remove the personal attack by Magog were he is calling me a bigot [9] I had redacted it but he has edit warred it back in and then filed a spurious EW [10] report against me. Darkness Shines ( talk) 11:58, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
There is a request for arbitration that needs to be removed as it is no longer possible for the case to be accepted.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 15:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr. I don't want to step into this, but would it be possible to post the same note to Ohconfucius's page? Seems it was reverted [11].... Regards, Homunculus ( duihua) 17:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I have placed templates on the following pages to nominate them for deletion according to the recent Falun Gong 2 ArbCom decision, but have been getting major timeout error signals for hours now. Would you be so kind to complete the nomination? The pages are:
I don't know wtf is happening here, but something keeps going wrong when I try. John Carter ( talk) 22:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alexandr, and sorry to trouble you again. During the ARBFLG 2 case I had created a response to an AE filing in my userspace. I added a permalink to this content in the evidence page for ARBFLG 2, and it was an important part of my submission there. The material was not posted anywhere else. An administrator involved in the dispute has deleted my sandbox. He evidently believed that my blanking of the page after the case ended was tantamount to a deletion request (it was not). The page history is now inaccessible to posterity, and the material I linked to in evidence on ARBFLG cannot be found. Would it be possible to restore my sandbox (more importantly, the history), so that the link in ARBFLG 2 evidence works again? Thank you (and let me know if everything I've said here makes sense). Homunculus ( duihua) 14:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I e-mailed arbcom-l on 26 July 12 about, Saunaboy ( talk · contribs), another one of Fae's likely socks that as of this moment has still gone unblocked. Tarc ( talk) 00:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Can you modify the warning template at the top of Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles to include a link to the case, WP:ARBATC? A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 23:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
... please could you ensure that the arbitrators have actually seen Regents Park's suggestion on the latest farrago? I know you can't make them read or understand it, (as the original request for clarification has led to few attempts from them to clarify) but at least they could acknowledge that it exists; I think, as do others, that it is worthy of consideration. non-Wikipedian pablo 19:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Re WP: Arbitration/Guide to arbitration, the sentence immediately preceding the very last sentence in the Lead section of the Guide reads: "If a case is not opened, the arbitrators will often offer suggestions to resolve the dispute without arbitration, and these are often worth serious consideration; but in any event, they may remark that, or it may be appropriate to, arbitration may become necessary in the months ahead."
I feel the above sentence may be confusing. Would it be better if the sentence said the following (if indeed this is what it intends to say): If a case is not opened, the arbitrators will often offer suggestions to resolve the dispute without arbitration, and these are often worth serious consideration; but in any event, they may remark, or it may be appropriate to remark, that arbitration may become necessary in the months ahead.
Regards, IjonTichyIjonTichy ( talk) 19:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: this and similar
You should know that the old "teams" were deprecated some months ago, and things like a "technical" or "case management" team no longer exist. Some responsibilities were presumed to belong to the entire committee or one of the subcommittees, others are handled on an ad hoc basis by available arbitrators, and still others were deprecated because they are useless or directly counter-productive.
Perhaps you could re-phrase your question to ask what aspects of the committee's business the candidate intends to involve themselves in, which in any event may be a more revealing question than into which of the five rather clumsy teams the candidate would self-assign... Regards, AGK [•] 16:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabelldoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahfafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.
If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/
Best regards, Islahaddow
(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC))
Which one of the 4 candidates is not recused? Or was there an accident with the numbers? - jc37 21:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Miszabot doesn't operate until there are at least minthreadsleft + minthreadstoarchive sections present on the page. The default values of those parameters are 5 and 2 respectively. You only had six sections until today, but the addition of a seventh means it should run soon. And you can change those values by adding, e.g.,
|minthreadsleft = 4 |minthreadstoarchive = 1
—WWoods ( talk) 19:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I've updated {{ ACMajority}} so you can include the abstained arbitrators in with the recused. See Template:ACMajority/testcases for how it looks. NE Ent 13:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for hatting Black Kite's posting on the Arbcom page. I had as well, but was encouraged not to do so. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 20:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
As an open case shouldn't it be listed as open (even though suspended)? Alanscottwalker ( talk) 21:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Considering that Hex expressed resentment at being told only on his talkpage that I had reopened the AN thread on 1 January ( my note here), I hardly think your note on his page is enough, Alexander. You'd better e-mail him, if you haven't already done so. Bishonen | talk 22:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC).
Hi, thanks for being active in the Jerusalem RfArb with the motion. Is it the intention of the motion that we can start the RFC on our own once we've more or less agreed on what the question will be, or should we seek guidance from ArbCom? Also, would ArbCom select the editors to close the discussion? Cheers, -- Dailycare ( talk) 19:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I've been seeking to get more involved with the backstage side of Wikipedia lately, of late I've been contributing to WP:DRN and offering my thoughts on the occational WP:ANI. Clerking seems like something that I'd be interested in helping out with. I thought I'd drop you a message enquiring about whether you'd take a look at my contributions/experience to let me know if I would be suitable to put my name forward for consideration.
Dear WikiProject Morocco member,
There is currently a proposal to ban articles concerning a large area of Northern Morocco from appearing on the Main Page of Wikipedia in the Did you know? section. This would affect a significant number of articles within the scope of WikiProject Morocco. If you have a view on this proposal, please see Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs#Proposal for one-year moratorium on Gibraltarpedia DYKs. Prioryman ( talk) 15:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I have been accused of edit warring and I simply didn't realize that a clerk had altered the headers and thought I neglected to add the "uninvolved" in the title. Since KC has taken it upon herself to make the accusation of bad faith I feel there is no further point in involving myself further in that case. Thanks.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 20:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Re the recent calc you just put up, does inactive = recused or does it even matter? Alanscottwalker ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Alexandr. I think it's excesssively pedantic to steamroll the comment headers into conformity on the Tea Party RFAR (and presumably other cases nowadays). What's the virtue of having the TOC look like it was written by a bot? My original header was part of my comment, and I only just noticed it had been changed and (after some research) by whom. But I appreciate that you at least turned it into Bishzillaspeak. I take that as a delicate attention. Bishonen | talk 16:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC).
User:Rodgau Philatelie is the promotional user name and owner of this website and publisher of the stamp catalog citation he edited and the spamlink he added. I think WP:CORPNAME applies. I suspect this is the same person. ww2censor ( talk) 17:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Instead of simply erasing part of the text, I hid it. Let me know me if that's enough or not. -- Lecen ( talk) 17:03, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Alex, regarding this talk page tag which appears on the Transcendental Meditation article: {{ discretionary sanctions}} At present it only appears on the talk page of the one, main article. Would it be proper and useful for me to add it to the talk pages of other articles in the topic area? I like to do it but don't know what the protocol is on this. I notice that the Abortion topic has it on multiple talk pages. any insight you can give is appreciated. Thanks, -- — Keithbob • Talk • 22:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, AlexandrDmitri/Archive 3! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout ( T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Did you mean to make yourself inactive on the Sexology or the Tea party case? Your edit summary says Sexology, but you made yourself inactive on Tea party. Incidentally, if you are going to move yourself inactive, you also need to update the numbers in Casenav/data, or the majority calculations won't tally up. -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 11:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, can you give me a third opinion of this situation? The conversation is taking place on both of our talk pages, and tell me both ways if you think I am wrong or right and why. Thanks.-- Bogu Slav 17:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Bonjour AlexandrDmitri,
Pouvez-vous m'aider à résoudre un problème avec l'article "Marina Tchebourkina" (en anglais).
J'ai écrit cet article en anglais et il a été publié sur le site du Conservatoire Tchaïkovski de Moscou ( http://www.mosconsv.ru/en/person.aspx?id=46126). Par la suite, je l'ai publié sur Wikipédia — pensant que, en tant que son auteur, je pouvais le faire librement.
L'article a été marqué comme ayant un problème de copyright. Alors, j'ai accompli les formalités nécessaires (déclaration de cession des droit sur Talk:Marina Tchebourkina + mail envoyé à permissions-en at wikimedia).
N'ayant pas eu de réponse positive, j'ai réécrit entièrement l'article. Depuis le 20 novembre, cette nouvelle version se trouve sur /info/en/?search=Talk:Marina_Tchebourkina/Temp. Pouvez-vous, en tant qu'administrateur, faire le nécessaire pour que cette nouvelle version soit publiée sur la page principale "Marina Tchebourkina" et le "Copyvio" y soit enlevé?
Je vous en remercie d'avance.
MFJE ( talk) 09:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Bonjour AlexandrDmitri !
Merci pour vos contributions sur les articles relatifs au Maroc.
Toute l'équipe du Wikimedia MA User Group vous invite à vous inscrire pour nous rejoindre, afin de prendre part aux discussions et de coopérer avec d'autres personnes qui sont, elles aussi, intéressées par le Maroc et sa culture.
Cordialement. -- Reda benkhadra ( talk) 22:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 01:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello, AlexandrDmitri. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)