fmt |
Carcharoth (talk | contribs) →Literaturegeek topic banned: support |
||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
;Support |
;Support |
||
:# Sadly, it seems this is necessary to give other editors breathing room. I also expect both editors to take this as a final warning about personalizing disputes and related conduct issues. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 18:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC) |
:# Sadly, it seems this is necessary to give other editors breathing room. I also expect both editors to take this as a final warning about personalizing disputes and related conduct issues. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 18:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
:# The length of the ban I could see changing, but a definite break is needed here for both of the principal editors (the warning signs for Literaturegeek were in the previous requests for clarification/amendment and in the case itself). The clerks have been asked to notify those who need to be notified. Unlike at the request for amendment, I am going to ask the clerks to keep a tight rein on this one. Statements will need to be strictly limited in length and focused on the proposal. No more walls of text. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 19:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC) |
|||
;Oppose |
;Oppose |
Revision as of 19:49, 20 October 2009
Motions
Motion to amend Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking
For this motion there are 9 active arbitrators, not counting 1 recused. With 0 arbitrators abstaining, 5 support or oppose votes are a majority. | |
Active Arbitrators:
|
Inactive Arbitrators:
Recused Arbitrators:
|
Motion
Wikipedia:Date formatting and linking poll, Wikipedia talk:Full-date unlinking bot#RFC, and Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Full-date unlinking bot indicate that Full-date unlinking bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) fulfills the requirement for "a Community approved process for the mass delinking" in "1.3 Mass date linking" and the requirement for "[d]ate delinking bots [performing] in a manner approved by the Bot Approvals Group" in "2.1 Date delinking bots". The Committee thanks the participants for their efforts and encourages them to continue with their constructive work and consensus building.
- Support
-
- Proposed. This matter seems resolved and it is best not to leave the case hanging as an unknown for the bot operator. Could a clerk please notify the bot operator, BAG, and the main parties from the date delinking case of this proposal? Vassyana (talk) 09:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- So it does. Thank you for all the efforts deployed by everyone to clarify this matter. — Coren (talk) 14:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- Wizardman 18:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- Risker (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- FloNight♥♥♥♥ 18:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose
- Abstain
-
- Recuse
-
- Carrying over my recusal from the case itself. Carcharoth (talk) 01:29, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
- Discussion
- Clerk notes
Notifications of this motion made to: Bot Approvals Group, User talk:Full-date unlinking bot, User talk:Harej and to all named parties in the Date delinking case. Manning (talk) 22:36, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Comment by Dabomb87
- Response to Rlevse
- Rlevse, could you explain where there has been controversy over dates since the last community-wide discussion on them? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Motions to amend Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ADHD
- Discussion
- Clerk notes
Literaturegeek topic banned
Literaturegeek (talk · contribs) is topic banned from all pages, topics, and discussions related to attention-deficit hyperactivity, broadly defined, for twelve months.
- Support
-
- Sadly, it seems this is necessary to give other editors breathing room. I also expect both editors to take this as a final warning about personalizing disputes and related conduct issues. Vassyana (talk) 18:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- The length of the ban I could see changing, but a definite break is needed here for both of the principal editors (the warning signs for Literaturegeek were in the previous requests for clarification/amendment and in the case itself). The clerks have been asked to notify those who need to be notified. Unlike at the request for amendment, I am going to ask the clerks to keep a tight rein on this one. Statements will need to be strictly limited in length and focused on the proposal. No more walls of text. Carcharoth (talk) 19:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose
-
- Abstain
-
- Recuse
- Discussion
Scuro topic banned
Scuro (talk · contribs) is topic banned from all pages, topics, and discussions related to attention-deficit hyperactivity, broadly defined, for twelve months.
- Support
- Oppose
-
- Abstain
-
- Recuse
- Discussion