Nanobear~enwiki (talk | contribs) →Clarification request: rsp to S |
Nanobear~enwiki (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
:If you have a concern that someone is violating a topic ban, [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement]] is the appropriate venue, however I believe something was said during the proposed decision phase that historical articles hadn't been at issue before and weren't likely to be an issue. It would be terribly disappointing if the participants from that case started disputing with each other elsewhere :( [[User:Shell_Kinney|Shell]] <sup>[[User_talk:Shell_Kinney|babelfish]]</sup> 08:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC) |
:If you have a concern that someone is violating a topic ban, [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement]] is the appropriate venue, however I believe something was said during the proposed decision phase that historical articles hadn't been at issue before and weren't likely to be an issue. It would be terribly disappointing if the participants from that case started disputing with each other elsewhere :( [[User:Shell_Kinney|Shell]] <sup>[[User_talk:Shell_Kinney|babelfish]]</sup> 08:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC) |
||
::But was the topic ban meant to cover pre-1917 Russia or not? The wording is unclear. Personally, I interpret it as a topic ban from all articles related to Russia, since Russia is one of the "former Soviet republics". [[User:Offliner|Offliner]] ([[User talk:Offliner|talk]]) 08:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC) |
::But was the topic ban meant to cover pre-1917 Russia or not? The wording is unclear. Personally, I interpret it as a topic ban from all articles related to Russia, since Russia is one of the "former Soviet republics". [[User:Offliner|Offliner]] ([[User talk:Offliner|talk]]) 08:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC) |
||
::I'm not going to take this to WP:AE, since I have no desire to play a part in the latest round of the ridiculous battleground initiated by Colchicum.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Roger_Davies&diff=prev&oldid=379581191][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Moonriddengirl&diff=prev&oldid=380338517][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=prev&oldid=380335302] But many people were looking for a clarification, but no one asked, so I did. [[User:Offliner|Offliner]] ([[User talk:Offliner|talk]]) 09:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:09, 23 August 2010
The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Article Michael Oliver (referee)Hi, you deleted the article about a football referee Michael Oliver due to his lack of notability which was probably spot on at the time. However, this guy has now been promoted to the Select Group Referees who referee games in the Premier League and thus liable to become a higher profile person. You will notice from the Select Group article that he is the only one who doesn't have an article. I suspect the very first controversial decision he makes would result in a lot of totally biased vitriol being written about him as a new article so it may be worth restoring the deleted one as a starting point. (I don't know if I've raised the query in the right way, so apologies if I haven't approached this request in the right manner.) Seedybob (talk) 08:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 August 2010
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Race and Intelligence CaseHi Shell... I noticed your recent votes on the R&I ArbCom case, and in particular your comments on Ludwigs2's views of the mediation. A couple of days ago I noticed this mediation where Ludwigs2 was mediator, which was closed earlier today. The consensus conclusion of the mediation was to rename the article Israel and the apartheid analogy to Israel and Apartheid. I took no part in the mediation or the article, having only come across it by accident. Ludwigs2's comments on the R&I PD talk page had made me wonder about judgment, and seeing this mediation and it's (in my opinion) potentially provocative conclusion made me wonder further. Consequently, I thought it worthwhile to provide you with a pointer to this other mediation case for your information, and in case it assisted you in your deliberations. I will post a note to Ludwigs2, advising that I have made this post, in the interests of transparency. EdChem (talk) 06:54, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Clarification requestSince you were the drafter of this topic ban, could you please clarify whether edits like this (notice the quote) and this breach the letter or the spirit of the ban? The same question was recently asked by the restricted person himself, although after the edits. Offliner (talk) 07:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
|