MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 20d) to User talk:Eraserhead1/Archive 4. |
→Your evidence in the Civility Issues arbcom case: new section |
||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
I noted your edit to the arbitration procedures page. As an FYI of no particular importance, when I started clerking for the ArbCom in 2007, "reject" was usually used when an arbitrator voted not to hear a case. A couple of the arbitrators and clerks starting suggested that "decline" be utilized instead, simply as being gentler and less dismissive of the requests. For a couple of years the two were used more-or-less interchangeably. I hadn't noticed that "decline" has completely replaced "reject," but on a quick skim you are probably right. So, thanks for updating the page. Regards, [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 17:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC) |
I noted your edit to the arbitration procedures page. As an FYI of no particular importance, when I started clerking for the ArbCom in 2007, "reject" was usually used when an arbitrator voted not to hear a case. A couple of the arbitrators and clerks starting suggested that "decline" be utilized instead, simply as being gentler and less dismissive of the requests. For a couple of years the two were used more-or-less interchangeably. I hadn't noticed that "decline" has completely replaced "reject," but on a quick skim you are probably right. So, thanks for updating the page. Regards, [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 17:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC) |
||
:No problem. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 17:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC) |
:No problem. -- [[User:Eraserhead1|Eraserhead1]] <[[User_talk:Eraserhead1|talk]]> 17:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Your evidence in the Civility Issues arbcom case == |
|||
There are problems with your evidence in the Civility Issues ArbCom case. In your evidence, you cite a letter by {{userlinks|Captain Occam}}, now site-banned under ArbCom disretionary measures for three months. In fact, in discussions on [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] in January 2011, the allegations in that letter proved to have no foundation (the claims had been made during an ArbCom case and arbitrators did not support those claims). Here for reference is the diff where Captain Occam links to his letter in the Economist. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=411211120] His contributions to the discussion on that user talk page can be found here.[http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/usersearch.cgi?name=Captain+Occam&page=User+talk%3AJimbo+Wales&max=100] [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] ([[User talk:Mathsci|talk]]) 17:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:00, 31 December 2011
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
WP:UWTEST update
Hi Eraserhead1,
We're currently busy designing some new tests, and we need your feedback/input!
- ImageTaggingBot - a bot that warns users who upload images but don't provide adequate source or license information (drafts here)
- CorenSearchBot - a bot that warns users who copy-paste text from external websites or other Wikipedia articles (drafts here)
We also have a proposal to test new "accepted," "declined," and "on-hold" templates at Articles for Creation (drafts here). The discussion isn't closed yet, so please weigh in if you're interested.
Thanks for your help! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 01:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Muhammad images arbitration case
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 11, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad images/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 14:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Season's tidings!
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Christmas_lights_-_1.jpg/100px-Christmas_lights_-_1.jpg)
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:01, 25 December 2011 (UTC).
Barnstar
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
Thought about which barnstar to give you for a while. This one seems to fit the most. It's for your hard work in areas of conflict like Abortion and Muhammad images. Ya know, you could always try helping out at MedCab... :-) Steven Zhang Join the DR army! 21:47, 27 December 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks :). I'll consider it. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
A point of information
I noted your edit to the arbitration procedures page. As an FYI of no particular importance, when I started clerking for the ArbCom in 2007, "reject" was usually used when an arbitrator voted not to hear a case. A couple of the arbitrators and clerks starting suggested that "decline" be utilized instead, simply as being gentler and less dismissive of the requests. For a couple of years the two were used more-or-less interchangeably. I hadn't noticed that "decline" has completely replaced "reject," but on a quick skim you are probably right. So, thanks for updating the page. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- No problem. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Your evidence in the Civility Issues arbcom case
There are problems with your evidence in the Civility Issues ArbCom case. In your evidence, you cite a letter by Captain Occam (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), now site-banned under ArbCom disretionary measures for three months. In fact, in discussions on User talk:Jimbo Wales in January 2011, the allegations in that letter proved to have no foundation (the claims had been made during an ArbCom case and arbitrators did not support those claims). Here for reference is the diff where Captain Occam links to his letter in the Economist. [1] His contributions to the discussion on that user talk page can be found here.[2] Mathsci (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)