Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:37, 21 March 2009

Clerks' Noticeboard

• recent changes
• purge this page
• view or discuss this template

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

Currently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.

This noticeboard's primary purpose is to to attract the attention of the clerks to a particular matter by non-clerks. Non-clerks are welcome to comment on this page in the event that the clerks appear to have missed something.

Private matters

The clerks may be contacted privately, in the event a matter could not be prudently addressed publicly (i.e., on this page), by composing an email to clerks-llists.wikimedia.org; only the clerk team and individual arbitrators have access to emails sent to that list.

Procedures

A procedural reference for clerks (and arbitrators) is located here.

Clerks and trainees, please coordinate your actions through this section, so that we don't have multiple clerks working on the same cases at the same time. An IRC channel, #wikipedia-en-arbcom-clerks, and a mailing list, Clerks-l, are also available for private co-ordination and communication, although the mailing list is fairly low traffic.

Pending Requests

All work relating to pending requests on WP:RfAr

• The Request for general clarification can be archived; arbs who had comments to make have made them, and there seems to be no pending issues. — Coren  17:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Done! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 17:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Open Cases

All work relating to Arbitration cases already opened

Scientology

(od) Various editors are listed in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Evidence#New evidence by Cirt who are likely to be mentioned shortly in Findings of Fact. They may not all be aware of this case. Could they be notified urgently please? — Roger Davies 08:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Could the list of editors in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Evidence#SPAs please be notified that they are likely to mentioned in Findings of Fact? It is not necessary to notify editors who are already named parties. Thank you very much, — Roger Davies 12:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Active/inactive arbitrators

This list will be used to set the number of active Arbitrators and the case majority on cases as they open. As of 19 February 2009, there are 15 active Arbitrators, and the majority is therefore 8 for all new cases (that is, those accepted after the "as of" date). See WP:AC/C/P#Calculating the majority for help. The master list is at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee#Current members.

Active (as of 21 Mar 2009):

1. Carcharoth
2. Casliber
3. Cool Hand Luke
4. Coren
5. FayssalF
6. FloNight
7. Jayvdb
8. Kirill Lokshin
9. Newyorkbrad
10. Risker
11. Rlevse
12. Roger Davies
13. Sam Blacketer
14. Stephen Bain
15. Vassyana
16. Wizardman

Away or inactive:

Arbitrator announcements

Arbitrators, please note if you wish to declare yourself active or away/inactive, either generally or for specific cases. The clerks will update the relevant cases as needed. If you are returning, please indicate whether you wish to be: 1) Put back to active on all cases; 2) Left on inactive on all open cases, and only put to active on new cases; or 3) Left to set yourself to active on cases you wish (remember to update the majority on its /Proposed decision page).

FloNight's status

• Would a clerk mark me as inactive on Prem Rawat 2, Ayn Rand, Date delinking, and Scientology. I'm taking a break to catch up on some article work. Leave me active on West Bank vs. Judea and Samaria and MZMcBride (if they open). I'll let you all know when I'm ready to go active on all cases again. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the ACA template and proposed decision templates of the affected templates as requested. Gazimoff 09:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Cool Hand Luke

• CHL just declared himself inactive for about a week.--Tznkai (talk) 00:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

He's back. Paul August ☎ 22:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Risker

Please show me as inactive in anything I haven't voted on from now until April 1, please. Risker (talk) 22:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Note: Please mark me as inactive for the Scientology case, striking any votes I have made, and recalculate the majority. Thanks. Risker (talk) 23:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

General discussion

Workshop guidance

I'm working on a draft at User:MBisanz/Draft for participants to better understand how to use the workshop page in cases. ANy improvements or comments are welcome. MBisanz 04:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Changes to Arbitration Statistics

FYI: I've made some changes to Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Statistics:

1. All the "Arb activity" tables are now sortable (for example see: Arb activity (2009) — requests).
2. The "Cases" section now tracks each case's drafter (see: Cases involving 2009 arbs only) and Arb activity (2009) — cases).
3. The "Proposals" section now tracks the time order of each action (i.e. a support, oppose, or abstain) on each proposal. This is represented in the tables by appending to each "S", "O" and "A", a number indicating the order that each action occurred, (i.e 1 = first, 2 = second etc.). This allows for computing two new statistics for each arb, "firsts", which is the number of first actions -- generally indicative of being the drafter of the proposal -- and "AVR" (average vote rank), which is the average of the rank orders of an arb's actions on a proposal, following the first action (i.e. the average of the ranks > 1) -- giving an indicator of earlier versus later voting. So, for example for the five cases closed so far this year, encompassing 105 proposals, Coren with 38 "firsts" has apparently drafted about 36% of those 105 proposals, while Rlevse is on average the earliest voter with an AVR of 4.1 (see: Arb activity (2009) — case proposals).

Paul August ☎ 19:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Request for general clarification

Could someone please archive the request for general clarification submitted by user:Hipocrite? I believe the arbitrators have already clarified it and the user has not responded back for more than a week. Thanks in advance. -- FayssalF - 13:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Request for more information about rejected requests

See Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Rejected_requests. Maybe some automation could assist, or maybe it is more effort than it is worth. John Vandenberg 14:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Regarding "Verifiability/Use English/Burdens in proxy battlefield article"

Could a clerk please try to identify a suitable wikiproject at which to request admin/experienced editor assistance/advice for the verifiability/sourcing and related issues, and leave an appropriate message? I'm kind of stumped here. Thanks. Risker (talk) 04:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China#Request_for_assistance and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Central_Asia#Request_for_assistance would apply, leaving message. MBisanz 04:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, thanks. 05:55, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Try User:Mailer diablo. Stifle (talk) 11:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it after I've opened the cases. - Mailer Diablo 13:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)