The Committee opened no new cases during the week, but closed two cases. Two cases are currently open.
During the week, 11 editors submitted over 67 kilobytes in on-wiki evidence. One of these editors also submitted several workshop proposals.
During the week, another editor submitted an additional 15 kilobytes in on-wiki evidence. No workshop proposals were submitted.
This case concerns allegations about disruptive editing on articles relating to the Shakespeare authorship question. Evidence was submitted on-wiki by 27 editors, including co-founder of Wikipedia, Jimbo Wales ( talk · contribs). During the case, Smatprt ( talk · contribs) also appealed the Community's restriction which topic-banned Smatprt from William Shakespeare related articles until 3 November 2011. Although drafters Newyorkbrad and SirFozzie did not submit their proposed decision to the workshop, arbitrators Cool Hand Luke and Elen of the Roads submitted a new principle to work on, which built on the proposals made in the workshop (cf. Signpost coverage). The case came to a close during the week, after a total of 15 arbitrators voted on the proposed decision.
The case concerns allegations about problematic conduct, conflicts of interests, notability, and sourcing in relation to longevity articles. Evidence was submitted on-wiki by 12 editors over several weeks after parties requested for additional time to submit evidence (cf. Signpost coverage). Drafter Kirill Lokshin submitted a proposed decision in the workshop, before it was submitted for arbitrators to vote on. The case came to a close during the week, after a total of 11 arbitrators voted on the proposed decision.
The Committee opened no new cases during the week, but closed two cases. Two cases are currently open.
During the week, 11 editors submitted over 67 kilobytes in on-wiki evidence. One of these editors also submitted several workshop proposals.
During the week, another editor submitted an additional 15 kilobytes in on-wiki evidence. No workshop proposals were submitted.
This case concerns allegations about disruptive editing on articles relating to the Shakespeare authorship question. Evidence was submitted on-wiki by 27 editors, including co-founder of Wikipedia, Jimbo Wales ( talk · contribs). During the case, Smatprt ( talk · contribs) also appealed the Community's restriction which topic-banned Smatprt from William Shakespeare related articles until 3 November 2011. Although drafters Newyorkbrad and SirFozzie did not submit their proposed decision to the workshop, arbitrators Cool Hand Luke and Elen of the Roads submitted a new principle to work on, which built on the proposals made in the workshop (cf. Signpost coverage). The case came to a close during the week, after a total of 15 arbitrators voted on the proposed decision.
The case concerns allegations about problematic conduct, conflicts of interests, notability, and sourcing in relation to longevity articles. Evidence was submitted on-wiki by 12 editors over several weeks after parties requested for additional time to submit evidence (cf. Signpost coverage). Drafter Kirill Lokshin submitted a proposed decision in the workshop, before it was submitted for arbitrators to vote on. The case came to a close during the week, after a total of 11 arbitrators voted on the proposed decision.
Discuss this story
I believe the clause above "including founder of Wikipedia ..." should instead read "including co-founder of Wikipedia ...". What is the etiquette for such a revision to the main article? (please note, before the inevitable, that the designation of "co-founder" is the hard-won usage in many other articles) -- Seth Finkelstein ( talk) 01:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC) reply