| Revision as of 14:53, 1 November 2021 editFerahgo the Assassin (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,664 edits →Requesting feedback from CaptainEek and Barkeep49: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 15:58, 15 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,709 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Archive 26) (bot |
| Line 4: |
Line 4: |
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|counter = 23 |
|
|counter = 26 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{pb}} |
|
{{pb}} |
|
|
|
|
== Requesting feedback from CaptainEek and Barkeep49 == |
|
|
|
|
|
In {{U|DGG}}'s , {{U|CaptainEek}} and {{U|Barkeep49}} both said that they were going to look into the issue of editors misrepresenting sources (and the persistent inability of talk pages and noticeboards to resolve that issue), and have a discussion about how it could be addressed. However, the amendment request was closed by the clerks before that discussion could happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
Could either of you please clarify the status of that planned discussion, and how you think this issue ought to be addressed? As I said in my last comment there, if someone is going to request another amendment or a full case, I think first there needs to be more clarity about what Arbcom considers to be within their remit in this respect, and which case (Fringe science or Race and intelligence) it should be filed under. -] (]) 14:53, 1 November 2021 (UTC) |
|
