No cases were opened or closed this week. Four cases remain open:
Senkaku Islands, which looks at the behavior of editors involved in a dispute over whether the naming of the articles Senkaku Islands and Senkaku Islands dispute is sufficiently
neutral. It is alleged that the content dispute has been exacerbated by disruptive editing (see last week's issue). This week, more than 10 kB of on-wiki evidence was submitted, including contributions by
User:Lvhis, who accuses
User:Qwyrxian of violating the policies of
WP:SOURCE,
WP:NOR, and
WP:NPOV, making "consensus in solving disputes not only on page edition but also on naming issue practically impossible"; and
Cla68, who argues that some editors "give the impression that they are trying to reclaim the islands on behalf of [a] government". Little new material has been submitted in the case's
workshop page.
Abortion, a dispute over the lead sentence of
Abortion and the naming of abortion-related articles, also said to have been exacerbated by disruptive editing. Little new evidence was submitted this week, but the case's
workshop was busy: six users have now presented proposals, including suggestions of article probation, discretionary sanctions, and a new noticeboard. All are yet to receive attention from a large number of arbitrators.
Manipulation of BLPs, a general exploration of the phenomenon named by the title. This week, a considerable amount of content was added to the case's already large
evidence page, although some was also withdrawn. The case's
workshop page was similarly busy, seeing more than 200 revisions in the past week alone, which added 100 kB to the page's size, to exceed a total of 200 kB. Arbitrators have not yet responded to proposals submitted by five editors.
Cirt and Jayen466, a dispute that centers on the editing of the two editors. No new evidence was presented to the committee this week, but the case's
workshop page was active; a number of proposals are now on the table, though none has yet been voted on by arbitrators.
No cases were opened or closed this week. Four cases remain open:
Senkaku Islands, which looks at the behavior of editors involved in a dispute over whether the naming of the articles Senkaku Islands and Senkaku Islands dispute is sufficiently
neutral. It is alleged that the content dispute has been exacerbated by disruptive editing (see last week's issue). This week, more than 10 kB of on-wiki evidence was submitted, including contributions by
User:Lvhis, who accuses
User:Qwyrxian of violating the policies of
WP:SOURCE,
WP:NOR, and
WP:NPOV, making "consensus in solving disputes not only on page edition but also on naming issue practically impossible"; and
Cla68, who argues that some editors "give the impression that they are trying to reclaim the islands on behalf of [a] government". Little new material has been submitted in the case's
workshop page.
Abortion, a dispute over the lead sentence of
Abortion and the naming of abortion-related articles, also said to have been exacerbated by disruptive editing. Little new evidence was submitted this week, but the case's
workshop was busy: six users have now presented proposals, including suggestions of article probation, discretionary sanctions, and a new noticeboard. All are yet to receive attention from a large number of arbitrators.
Manipulation of BLPs, a general exploration of the phenomenon named by the title. This week, a considerable amount of content was added to the case's already large
evidence page, although some was also withdrawn. The case's
workshop page was similarly busy, seeing more than 200 revisions in the past week alone, which added 100 kB to the page's size, to exceed a total of 200 kB. Arbitrators have not yet responded to proposals submitted by five editors.
Cirt and Jayen466, a dispute that centers on the editing of the two editors. No new evidence was presented to the committee this week, but the case's
workshop page was active; a number of proposals are now on the table, though none has yet been voted on by arbitrators.
Discuss this story
Quick question: my (Qwyrxian's) evidence went up on the Senkaku Islands arbitration yesterday; will you be adding anything about that, or is that too late now and will be mentioned next week? I have no concerns about the repetition of the claims Lvhis made, and think you summarized his points well (though, of course, I disagree with those point...but that's an issue for the arbitration). Qwyrxian ( talk) 21:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC) reply
A critical typo: The sentence in "Arbitration/Senkaku Islands case opened" of last week's issue describing
should be:
Regard -- Lvhis ( talk) 17:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC) reply