This 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 main page.

Can the Clerks please begin enforcing the 500-word limit on WP:RFAR statements? Any excessively long statement should be removed, and a note left for the user inviting them to submit a shorter one. Thanks! Kirill ^{( prof)} 05:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing; I'll keep an eye out for excessively-lengthy statements.

A number of statements have already been placed into collapse boxes—rather than delisted—by Ncmvocalist. I'm not sure that's something a non-clerk should be doing, but that's a topic for a different discussion.

AGK 13:48, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I've made some comments relating to this on Ncmvocalist's talk. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 21:11, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Me too. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

A decision has been made between the current and incoming Arbitrators that no case should be accepted or declined during the transition interval (from now to Jan 1), effectively "freezing time" for a few days. It would be appreciated if the clerks could make a note to that effect and be particularly vigilant during this period as the longer exposure on RFAr may lead to inappropriate argumentation in requests that are on hiatus. Thanks. —  Coren  ^(talk) 21:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I have posted a notice by means of an {{ Mbox}} on the WP:RfAr header, noting this suspension. AGK 21:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. —  Coren  ^(talk) 21:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Aiiie! No! We're just not going to accept or deny cases until after the delay, but new requests can still be made! Sorry I wasn't clear. I'll go tweak the message. —  Coren  ^(talk) 21:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I made a quick fix to the message to clarify the intent. Sorry again if I was being unclear. —  Coren  ^(talk) 21:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. :-) Thanks for the clarification; I'm with you now! AGK 21:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Concluding discussion, and will go ahead and ping the Committee. Further input is still welcome! AGK 13:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

There is little in the way of guidance for editors using Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. An edit notice—text which appears when editing a page (there's one in use on my talk page, see here, by way of an example).

Should we look into having some basic advice appear when editing RfAr? For what it's worth, it could adjust the head levels of the page downwards at least a notch of two.

I've prepared an example at User:AGK/A. Thoughts and comments on this proposal—and that specific example—welcome from clerks, arbitrators, and lurking/observing editors.

AGK 20:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I like it.-- Tznkai ( talk) 20:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

"; Response to [[User:Example|Example]] : Your response here. ~~~~" won't work because the : breaks down to a new line, unless that was intentional. Daniel ( talk) 00:07, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, by placing a colon between the response and the header, the response is placed on a new line and indented. It just looks a little prettier. :) AGK 13:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

It has the Win Nature. —  Coren  ^(talk) 04:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

• Ending: Thanks for the input, all. I'll go ahead and ping the Committee and offer to put this live. AGK 13:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I like it, too; I did just fix a typo and tweak a color. Web-wide, colours not listed here should be coded with numbers; not all useragents will support an extended set of names and the rendering may vary. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Such is the curse of being educated in British English. Damn Americani zation. ;-) AGK 14:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Noah Webster recast English for late eighteenth century farmers who stopped going to school at about 12.

The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. ( Learn how and when to remove this message)

See Web colors, too; for most cases, use numbers; {{Colour|darkred|'''Remain civil'''}} should be {{Colour|#8B0000|'''Remain civil'''}}

(sucks, I know)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Webster made sense—at the time. :-)

Would it be a huge problem if we used colour names rather than hex colour codes?

AGK 15:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Anything beyond those colors is non standard and doesn't pass validators, which look for invalid code; browsers try and make due with whatever shite they're thrown. Mainstream browsers support a lot of non-standard colors; no guarantee that they'll come up with the same color, though. Many in the developing world have old hardware and browsers that do rather worse. (nb: I'm on the latest version of Firefox and have all the usual browsers install; Chrome just got out of beta today). Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

←As Coren sated above, he has approached me and asked if I was interested in serving the Arbitration Committee as a clerk trainee. After a short period of thinking, I feel this could be a good opportunity to expand my areas of contribution along with knowledge base and accept his offer. Thanks Coren and the rest of the clerk team. I look forward to working with all of you! Tiptoety ^talk 02:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Great; I'll let the mailing list know. I expect we'll pull together final appointments of fresh trainees when the remaining editors in the handful we're approaching let us know whether they are willing to come on board or not. Watch this space. AGK 11:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I've been asked to chime in here. In a similar way to Tiptoey, I've been approached by Ryan Poslethwaite and asked if I would be interested in helping the Arbitration Committee as a trainee clerk. I've considered the offer carefully, and I'd be happy to lend support and assistance if desired. Many thanks, and I hope I can help out. Gazi moff 19:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear; thanks for getting back to us.

I expect we'll discuss appointing some trainees a week or two after the new Arbitrators have formally taken their seats.

AGK 12:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

That won't be a problem, just plan away. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

As stated on my talk page, I am currently on vacation (and will be until after the first of the year) and will not be online much (unless I can find an open computer like I have now). If anyone needs to get in contact with me, email is the best way to do so. Happy holidays, Tiptoety ^talk 22:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Gazimoff and Tiptoety for accepting this mostly boring job! John Vandenberg ^{( chat)} 23:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

• I've also been asked by Penwhale if I would be interested in helping out helping the Committee as a trainee clerk. I'm glad to be able to assist as much as I can, to the best of my ability. - Mailer Diablo 14:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

  Great! ty MD. John Vandenberg ^{( chat)} 15:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Yay. Daniel ( talk) 10:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, folks. I see you lost a few clerks recently ;) I'd like to help out in behind the scenes ways as described at WP:CLERKS#Helping out. I'm well aware of the sort of things to avoid and would focus on nuts and bolts type stuff. I've read the rather long thread nearby about acting like a clerk, and will certainly avoid that whole issue. I know my way around this family of pages and see needful things. I'm thinking non-public stuff like the template tweaks, not things like workshop pages; an AC:Gnome, if you will. I'll certainly keep leagues away from any cases where I have any history or perceived interest. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:04, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Jack, I appreciate your interest in helping out, and, um, I know you certainly have a familiarity with the workings of the arbitration pages and process, but I have to express my opinion that in light of your history with the project, a heavy involvement with ArbCom-related matters may not be the best role for you to aspire to right now. Template tweaks and the like are fine, I suppose, but your caveats are necessary, and verbum sap. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 09:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Clerks are people who have shown they are full of clue and have restraint in spades. I suggest you follow NYBs advice and steer clear of "helping out" which keeps you in the limelight where you will unavoidably find people annoyed with your involvement irrespective of how well-intended it was, due to past problems (e.g. the issue that was raised on my talk page recently). If the clerks need a hand, they know where to find you. If you do want to help, I recommend that you pick a case where you are completely uninvolved, and help as a community member in the Evidence and Workshop process. And during this year, try to have a mainspace:other ratio of 1:1. John Vandenberg ^{( chat)} 10:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

(ec w/John) Brad, I certainly understand the concern. I by no means intended to imply an interest in heavy involvement. It is things like the template tweaks I worked out with AGK that I have in mind. I will certainly not do things that bother the clerks or the AC (or spook the public or case parties). Maybe linking to the 'helping out' section was wrong; as discussed before, I'm not seeking to be a clerk or a trainee. I'd like to help fix things. This is the sort of tweak I mean; note the removed

{| class="toccolours" style="width: 100%; border-top: none;"

and the table-close, too; that was a low-level issue that simply needed to be fixed. See also;

MediaWiki talk:Common.css#captions are off-center

a change request that was accepted; it affected hundreds of thousands of pages (and still needs to be fixed on most other wikis).

Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

John, I'm really not talking about involvement in cases per se; I said 'behind the scenes'. And I'll work on that ratio ;)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

You did say "['I'd like to help out] in behind the scenes ways as described at WP:CLERKS#Helping out" (emphasis mine). ;-)

I think so long as the code of the pages works, it's fine as it is; we're not building a piece of commercial software here, which I suspect your skills would be equally as well-suited towards! If you'd like to do some improvements, I don't really have an objection; do try and balance those improvements with some backlog contributions or encyclopedia additions too, though.

Thanks for offering to help; I think your attitude has been great since your ban was released.

Regards, AGK 11:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I struck that a moment before you saved ;)

This is a world class site. MediaWiki is a complex, sophisticated piece of work. It is true that a lot of the content of the database leaves a lot to be desired; no one editor can fix that. I believe that issues should be fixed on sight if the editor is able to do so; it's a very wiki-concept. I know I have a history, and I opened this thread to get feedback. I should not have linked to that 'helping out' bit; it gave you all the wrong idea.

So, my take away from this, is to say way away from public things, but that tweaks to the workings of things are ok and that for anything beyond trivial tidying-up, I'll have a talk, first.

nb; 'behind the scenes' means out of sight ;)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The implications of that "helping out" link wasnt what concerned me, as I understood what the types of edits you would be doing. The problem is not so much with the helpful edits, it is with the "hovering", even if "out of sight" (which it wont be if you make helpful edits as a consequence of your hovering .. this is a wiki :P ). This will cause problems like the one on my talk and will cause a problem similar to the ones in the current request - i.e. I dont believe you that you can avoid the "acting like a clerk" problem - I've watched that develop over the last year; I dont want to watch you slowly dig a hole for yourself, like you are currently undertaking. This area of the project is far more social than it is technical, and it is highly charged - it would be better that it is technically below par than to have those template tweaks at the expense of allowing social issues to slowly develop. This is about the choices you make - where you wish to edit during this first 12 months, and the implications of that - your skills are needed everywhere; choose wisely. John Vandenberg ^{( chat)} 11:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'll leave this space be (I did just fix the weird margins). This is simply too high a profile an area. All the problem editors are here and dramas will ensue... FWIW, I thought NCM was a clerk; he was the the editor who tossed out some good tweaks to these very same templates; Reading the current bit clarified that.

I goez do Balinese art nowz... Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

('choose wisely' was used in one of the Indiana Jones movies; he did.)

Wow, all this while I was asleep. Well, Jack certainly knows his code. So far I've only seen Jack edit code on arbcom pages. I've not seen him updates votes, change case status in the templates etc. Those are things that would cause concern like Jayvdb is referring to. I think that if stays to code tweaks and helps someone with evidence in a case he's not involved in, it'd be okay. He should also work on content of mainspace articles. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:07, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I do get what John is saying; and I believe him when he says he sees problems with my doing much of this. If I see something serious, I'll talk to folks. I have other things to do, too (and I already got most of the issues I've noted in AC-land). See User talk:Swidagdo#an end to the image hassles? where I may have just gotten us photos of the collection of an art museum. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I would like to welcome KnightLago ( talk · contribs) and hmwith ( talk · contribs) to the clerk team! Tiptoety ^talk 04:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I already have this page watchlisted. I'll be lurking, maybe even commenting from time to time. :) hmwith τ 13:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks from me too! KnightLago ( talk) 13:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Tiptoety Clerked

The Committee would like to announce that Tiptoety is confirmed to now be a full clerk.

Our congratulations to him, and our thanks to you all for the work you put in.

—  Coren  ^(talk), for the Arbitration Committee, 16:27, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Mailer diablo and MBisanz clerked

It looks as though Mailer diablo and MBisanz were both fully clerked, as well ( Clerk page diff). Congrats! hmwith τ 23:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations to all three of you. Now get to work training!-- Tznkai ( talk) 23:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Congrats! KnightLago ( talk) 23:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

As announced I've been appointed to the Audit Subcommittee, so I think it is the right time for me to end my tenure as a clerk. I believe that its best to make a clean break between these roles if possible. More than that however, I have been impressed with the new group of clerk and clerk trainees who have volunteered to help out. I am confident in the dedication and ability in each and everyone of the clerks to do the job better and faster than I ever did. Effective immediately, I am resigning as a clerk. It has been a privilege.

-- Tznkai ( talk) 02:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Congratulations on your new appointment, and thanks for the long dedicated service in ArbCom clerking! - Mailer Diablo 04:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, congrats from me was well. I know you will thrive in this new position. Also, I want to thank you for all your work clerking for the committee. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 05:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, and we'll leave the light on for you. MBisanz ^talk 06:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Tznkai, thank you for your work as a Clerk, and welcome to the Auditing Subcommittee. :-) FloNight ♥♥♥ 10:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, Tznkai. You were a great mentor. Will anyone be able to pick up where TZ left off? I may need help with Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria. hmwith τ 17:01, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Congrats, Tznkai! Hmwith, I mentioned on the mailing list that I'm able to do it if you don't mind having a total newbie on board. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 17:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hersfold, I'm a newbie too. This is my first case, & I haven't really done much at all. hmwith τ 22:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, then, I'll add myself when I open the Abd/Jzg case later tonight. I've been reading up on it some already. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 23:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

There is a growing tendency to add irrelevant images to statements. These are attention seeking and serve only to reinforce the writer's POV. I've removed one just now. Please remove any others as and when they appear. Thanks,   Roger Davies ^talk 07:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I was perusing the arbcom case and noticed that the 1 year ban for piotrus ended up at 4 supports and 3 against, while 1 arb stated that they were abstaining. This means that there was one undeclared abstention (i.e. an arb didn't vote in any direction), meaning the motion passed (2 abstaining arbs means 4 is the magic number)? Or is a non response considered a vote against rather than abstaining? More a procedural question to further my own understanding than anything else. -- Narson ~ Talk • 19:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Not voting is the same as opposing since we tallying the number of supports to figure if a motion or proposal passes. An abstain vote must be actively noted by voting since it reduces the majority. FloNight ♥♥♥♥ 20:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Superb :) Thank you very much! -- Narson ~ Talk • 22:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Clerks, I am trying to copyedit the guide to arbitration for clarity. User:Penwhale asked that I place a notice here. The edits will concentrate on clarifying and simplifying the language; please let me know if I make inadvertent changes that you would consider a problem. Best, Kaisershatner ( talk) 16:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. There were two full copies of my last motion; one on the page and another on the talk page, and also duplicate copies of the prior motion in the intros to the new motion. I noticed that the motion had been moved per the discussion last month and went to tidy-up the link to it from my history page and I have cut the duplication for clarity. The only substantive change is a change of the word 'following' to 'above', as I made the second motion link to the original just above it instead of repeating it. I have linked to the copy of the votes and discussion on the talk page as was done for the prior motion and also added a link to the statements from my mentors and myself. It all seems much clearer to me this way.

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jack Merridew ban review motion#Motion to amend User:Jack Merridew's 2008 unban motion
• Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Jack Merridew ban review motion#Motion to amend User:Jack Merridew's 2008 unban motion
• User:Jack Merridew/History

Cheers, Jack Merridew 21:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Tothwolf, who's involved in an arbcom case with me, has decided to mark himself as retired in his user page. As a final bout of incivility, he's written a farewell post on his talk page which links to diff that includes a semi-attack on me. please see [ [1]]. I've tried to remove the wiki link to the attack, but he's come out of retirement to restore it. could someone remove the attack diff from his goodbye? the diff consists of uncivil language such as "Theserialcomma, you aren't fooling anyone here either." "due to your wikihounding, harassment, collusion, and gaming of the system." "considering that you've taken to harassing and wikihounding multiple editors (too many to name) and even administrators" and "heserialcomma, let me also be quite blunt with you: I'm not afraid of you or your bullying. Try as you did to find my identity and information about me to use to out, bully, and threaten me, you failed to find anything (although you certainly left quite a paper trail during your efforts)". i dont think he should be allowed to leave this soapbox, rambling nonsense personal attack against me as his 'farewell' to wikipedia message, since the arbcom results did not find anything he is claiming Theserialcomma ( talk) 23:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

This does not relate to the enforcement of guidelines for conduct on arbitration pages, so there is little a clerk could do for you. Might you have more luck at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents? AGK 00:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

The Arbitration clerks welcome the following users to the clerk team as trainees:

• AlexandrDmitri ( talk · contribs)
• Amorymeltzer ( talk · contribs)
• DoriSmith ( talk · contribs)
• MBK004 ( talk · contribs)

The clerk team as well as the committee would also like to congratulate the following clerks who have been confirmed as "full clerks":

• Dougweller ( talk · contribs)
• Lankiveil ( talk · contribs)
• Seddon ( talk · contribs)

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,

Tiptoety ^talk 04:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Discuss this

Just a note to the clerks, I believe there is an error with my time zone listing. I am not in the Pacific Time zone, but the Central Time Zone (Americas). I have been unsuccessful with getting the template to accurately work since it appears that I am the only person in this time zone currently. - MBK ₀₀₄ 04:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

 Fixed - I had to make a tweak to the time zone template because it appeared yours was not included. Anyways, welcome. Tiptoety ^talk 05:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations to the selected trainees. – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 05:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Seconding the congratulations. Perhaps there should be an official Arbitration Clerk Song Contest? :-) Proofreader77 ^{( interact)} 05:32, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations to the three trainees who have shown their mettle through challenging times, and are now full clerks: Good work!. And congratulations and welcome to the team to our four new clerk trainees. Glad to have you all aboard; I will look forward to working with all of you. Risker ( talk) 05:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

i was told that this was not an arbcom enforcement situation and to bring it to ANI instead; however, i believe it's crossed into arbcom enforcement territory. tothwolf, per the arbcom ruling, has been (or will be) warned not to make any further bad faith accusations against other editors. when the arbcom voting began, he decided to "retire" in order not to face the enforcement. however, his talk page consists of a vague, soapboxy personal attack against the editors who were found not to be harassing him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tothwolf he links a diff which is nothing but a direct attack on me [ [2]], and serves no purpose but to cast aspersions and negativity on me. i tried to remove only the diff, and tothwolf then came out of 'retirement' to start more drama. someone please look into this. the arbcom case filed against tothwolf is, if anything, going to admonish him for his bad faith accusations. they should not be allowed to continue as a soapbox on his talkpage. Theserialcomma ( talk) 17:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

it feels like tothwolf has "retired" because he didn't like the outcome of the arbcom situation. fair enough. but on the other hand, he wants to go out with as much drama as possible. is it really necessary for him to have his soapbox farewell message link to a diff stating "... Miami33139 and JBsupreme due to your wikihounding, harassment, collusion, and gaming of the system" and "Try as you did to find my identity and information about me to use to out, bully, and threaten me, you failed to find anything (although you certainly left quite a paper trail during your efforts)." this is craziness that does not help build the encyclopedia in anyway, and it undermines arbcom's proposed decision which is supposed to stop tothwolf's false allegations against others http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf/Proposed_decision#Allegations_against_other_editors . he's also been admonished for his decorum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf/Proposed_decision#Decorum . can a clerk please modify/remove his message so that it complies with arbcom's finding on decorum and false allegations? Theserialcomma ( talk) 00:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The case isn't closed yet (soon I believe), so your only recourse is in fact ANI as you asked on my talk page. You can also add it to the evidence. Dougweller ( talk) 20:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Could a clerk please place the current size and majority figures on the speed of light motions?-- Tznkai ( talk) 18:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I see the template and can fill it out. But what do I do with it then? I do not see where to file it. Regards, — mattisse ( Talk) 00:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean "where?" Are you seeing the full instructions in the edit notice when you click edit on Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification? ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 14:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Alansohn ( talk · contribs) has been notified about this but has not yet responded. Could someone remind them that their responses would be welcomed please? Thanks,   Roger Davies ^talk 23:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me as I learn my way around. If I have a question about process/protocol, may I ask it here? (I'd left a note for Ryan on his talk, but realized I should perhaps ask this to all the clerks.) Proofreader77 ^{( interact)} 04:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom remedies in Tang Dynasty imply a multi-step process, e.g., restrictions "... to begin when a mentor is located and approved by the Committee." However, no process was established.

In the absence of specifics, User:Mattisse/Plan seemed arguably relevant as a model. Tenmei's plan and list of proposed mentors was e-mailed to each ArbCom member. However, protocols for confirming ArbCom's approval of each mentor is unknown. The process will need to encompass notifying each ArbCom-approved mentor; and informing Tenmei will be essential as well.

Mentors have been located. Now what? If this is the wrong venue, what is the more appropriate one?

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.