108.205.228.188 (talk) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
*Participated in an arbitration request or enforcement procedure about the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on [http://Difflink1 Date]. |
*Participated in an arbitration request or enforcement procedure about the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on [http://Difflink1 Date]. |
||
*Successfully appealed all their own sanctions relating to the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on [http://Difflink1 Aug 28, 2015]. |
*Successfully appealed all their own sanctions relating to the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on [http://Difflink1 Aug 28, 2015]. |
||
**** |
|||
NPOVN question |
|||
How do we decide if there is sufficient weight to include mention of a WP:NOTABLE event in a separate article. Thing A may have played a key part in B but does that mean B should be part of the article about A? |
|||
Lacking a better word, is B notable ''in context of'' A (notable as in worth adding to the article, not WP:NOTE). |
|||
This issue has come up several times on a few recent articles and it seems we don't have a good answer. We have a few project page guidelines that provide some level of what people think but is there a good policy/essay to look at in these cases? Any rules of thumb? |
|||
Examples seem to be all over the map. |
|||
For example, the Ford Bronco article clearly mentions the OJ chase. Then again, a search |
|||
One theme that seems to have come up is did the use of A in event B become associated with it, |
Revision as of 02:11, 3 October 2016
NickCT, not sure if you got the email I sent you. I am debating filing a ARE against Hugh. See the copy below. Please don't reply here from your account because I'm sure Hugh will be tracking our comments and then trying to claim canvasing or the like.
subst:Sanction enforcement request header|Hugh
- [[1]] of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it
Editor banned from edits related to conservative politics post 2009 [2] and the political activities of the Koch family in particular [3] (" I am imposing a one-year topic ban on you from all articles related to the Tea Party movement broadly, including but not limited to anything at all related to Americans for Prosperity, Koch Industries, the Koch brothers.").
The Fraser Institute is described as a conservative think tank in the article lead. The editor has previously added Koch related content to the article (example [4]) which makes the general article a violation of "broadly". The violating edit was related to a 2014 article about the institute which would violate the 2009 and later conservative topic's portion of the ban.
- Diffs of previous relevant sanctions, if any
Previous issues with topic ban violations.
- Oct 11, 15 Violation of topic ban resulting in warning.
- Oct 29, 15 1 week block for violation of ban. Appeal of block was rejected [5]
- Jan 7, 2016 1 week block for violation. Appeal of block was rejected [6]
- If discretionary sanctions are requested, supply evidence that the user is aware of them (see [[7]])
- Previously given a discretionary sanction for conduct in the area of conflict on Date by admin|Ricky81682.
- Alerted about discretionary sanctions in the area of conflict in the last twelve months, see the system log linked to above.
- Gave an alert about discretionary sanctions in the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on Date
- Participated in an arbitration request or enforcement procedure about the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on Date.
- Successfully appealed all their own sanctions relating to the area of conflict in the last twelve months, on Aug 28, 2015.
NPOVN question How do we decide if there is sufficient weight to include mention of a WP:NOTABLE event in a separate article. Thing A may have played a key part in B but does that mean B should be part of the article about A?
Lacking a better word, is B notable in context of A (notable as in worth adding to the article, not WP:NOTE).
This issue has come up several times on a few recent articles and it seems we don't have a good answer. We have a few project page guidelines that provide some level of what people think but is there a good policy/essay to look at in these cases? Any rules of thumb?
Examples seem to be all over the map. For example, the Ford Bronco article clearly mentions the OJ chase. Then again, a search
One theme that seems to have come up is did the use of A in event B become associated with it,