| Revision as of 23:12, 30 April 2009 editTiptoety (talk | contribs)47,300 edits →Clerk request re WP:ARBMAC2: Note← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:15, 8 December 2024 edit undoIzno (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Interface administrators, Administrators113,508 edits →WP:A/C alignment: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| = Noticeboard = | = Noticeboard = | ||
| {{/Header}} | {{/Header}} | ||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | |||
| | age=90 | |||
| | archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/archive | |||
| | numberstart=10 | |||
| | maxarchsize=150000 | |||
| | header={{Archive}} | |||
| | minkeepthreads=2 | |||
| | minarchthreads=1 | |||
| | format= %%i | |||
| }} | |||
| {{archive box|search =yes| | |||
| * ] (to 26 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (archive of a discussion started on January 29, 2006 at the ]) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (February 2006→December 2008, clerks' coordination board) | |||
| * ] (December 2008→March 2010, clerks' coordination board) | |||
| * ] (January 2006→May 2009) | |||
| * ] (May 2009→June 2012, noticeboard merged) | |||
| * ] (June 2012→September 2014) | |||
| * ] (September 2014→September 2015) | |||
| * ] (3 October→4 November 2015) | |||
| * ] (October 2015→March 2021) | |||
| * ] (April 2021→present) | |||
| {{#ifexist:Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/archive 12|* ] (fill in dates please)|}} | |||
| }} | |||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| <div style="border-top: 1px solid #aaa; font-style: italic; padding-left: 1.6em"> | |||
| ---- | |||
| '''Arbitrators, clerks and trainees:''' Please coordinate your actions through the mailing list. The purpose of this page is for editors who are not clerks to request clerk assistance. | |||
| :'''''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, , and a ], Clerks-l, are also available for private co-ordination and communication, although the mailing list is fairly low traffic.'' | |||
| </div> | |||
| ==Pending Requests== | |||
| == ARBPIA5 motion at ARCA == | |||
| ''All work relating to pending requests on ]'' | |||
| ==Open Cases== | |||
| ''All work relating to Arbitration cases already opened'' | |||
| === 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 03:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC), there are 16 active Arbitrators, and the majority is therefore 9 for all '''new''' cases (that is, those accepted after the "as of" date). See ] for help. The master list is at ].'' | |||
| '''Active''' (as of 17 Apr 2009): | |||
| #Carcharoth | |||
| #Casliber | |||
| #Cool Hand Luke | |||
| #Coren | |||
| #FayssalF | |||
| #FloNight | |||
| #Jayvdb | |||
| #Kirill Lokshin | |||
| #Newyorkbrad | |||
| #Risker | |||
| #Rlevse | |||
| #Roger Davies | |||
| #Sam Blacketer | |||
| #Stephen Bain | |||
| #Vassyana | |||
| #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).'' | |||
| ==]== | |||
| Really high drama going on over here, some more eyes are needed.--] (]) 17:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah, this being my first case & not having learned much yet, any number of eyes would be appreciated. If anyone is willing to share some advice along the way, please do. '''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>''' 18:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Long term projects == | |||
| ===Workshop guidance=== | |||
| I'm working on a draft at ] for participants to better understand how to use the workshop page in cases. ANy improvements or comments are welcome. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 04:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| === Request for more information about rejected requests === | |||
| See ]. Maybe some automation could assist, or maybe it is more effort than it is worth. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 14:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| === Procedures update === | |||
| The procedures need to be updated. | |||
| ===New Bot === | |||
| Bjweeks was working on a bot. Anyone here anything from him recently?--] (]) 14:43, 6 April 2009 | |||
| ===Template overhaul=== | |||
| arbcomopentasks is getting mighty crowded. It is now common for us to have 2 clerks per case, and 1 drafting arb. We are likely to have teams of 2 or 3 drafting arbs, and 2 clerks, and that leaves us with 5 initalisms on a tiny tiny template. RfAropentasks needs to be modified to more easily take arbitration related RfCs, requests, and so on; ACA, I hate with a passion; Arbcomnav is underused. All in all, I think we need to overhaul our templates. | |||
| So, who here actually knows how to design those things?--] (]) 20:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I know a lot of people tend to consider me the template guru - I can take a look once I get some free time. What exactly are you thinking of having done? ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 01:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| = Discussion = | |||
| {{archive box| | |||
| * ] (to 26 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (archive of a discussion started on January 29, 2006 at the ]) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (current)}} | |||
| ===Changes to Arbitration Statistics=== | |||
| FYI: I've made some changes to ]: | |||
| #All the "Arb activity" tables are now sortable (for example see: ]). | |||
| #The "Cases" section now tracks each case's drafter (see: ]) and ]). | |||
| #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: ]). | |||
| ] ] 19:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I've completed collecting and tabulating arbitration statistics for 2008. The data is posted here: | |||
| ] | |||
| Some highlights follow. | |||
| The 2008 Arbitration Committee considered 255 requests, voted on 53 motions, publicly heard 38 cases, and drafted and voted on 841 case proposals. | |||
| There were 152 case requests, open on average for 4.6 days, with 67% declined, 23% accepted, 8% withdrawn, and two disposed of by motion. There were 103 clarifications and other requests, open on average for two weeks, with the longest duration being nearly three months. The motions were open on average for 12 days, with 47% passing. The cases were open on average for 39 days, with the longest being open for just over four months. | |||
| Here is a smattering of individual arb statistics. On case requests, Flo has the honor of having the highest voting percentage of 85, followed closely by Sam with 82 and Brad with 78, against an average of 41 and a low of 6. Kirill drafted almost half of the cases, Brad though missing for a quarter of the year, drafted nearly a quarter of the cases. Kirill, Sam and Flo each acted on about 95% of case proposals, compared with an average of 74 and a low of 42. Kirill, Brad and Flo were on average the quickest to act on case proposals. (On a personal note I find that on most measures I myself was solidly mediocre. There was one area however in which I did excel -- declining case requests -- which I did a remarkable 93% of the time. This might be attributed either to judicial conservatism or laziness, take your pick.) | |||
| Having the 2008 data now allows comparison between years. For example the average case request duration is surprisingly the same for both years at 4.6 days. There are differences. For example, so far this year there have been 24 motions offered and voted on, versus only 53 for all of 2008. | |||
| (''I've also cross-posted this at ]'') | |||
| ] ] 16:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :This is awesome.--] (]) 23:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ===Resigning=== | |||
| As ] I've been appointed to the Audit Subcommittee, so I think it is the right time for me to end my tenure as a clerk. I believe that its best to make a clean break between these roles if possible. More than that however, I have been impressed with the new group of clerk and clerk trainees who have volunteered to help out. I am confident in the dedication and ability in each and everyone of the clerks to do the job better and faster than I ever did. Effective immediately, I am resigning as a clerk. It has been a privilege. | |||
| --] (]) 02:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| * Congratulations on your new appointment, and thanks for the long dedicated service in ArbCom clerking! - ] 04:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| **Yes, congrats from me was well. I know you will thrive in this new position. Also, I want to thank you for all your work clerking for the committee. Cheers, ] <sup>]</sup> 05:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| *Thanks, and ] for you. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 06:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| **Tznkai, thank you for your work as a Clerk, and welcome to the Auditing Subcommittee. :-) ]] 10:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| *Thanks, Tznkai. You were a great mentor. Will anyone be able to pick up where TZ left off? I may need help with ]. '''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>''' 17:01, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Congrats, Tznkai! Hmwith, I mentioned on the mailing list that I'm able to do it if you don't mind having a total newbie on board. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 17:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hersfold, I'm a newbie too. This is my first case, & I haven't really done much at all. '''<font face="times new roman">]]</font>''' 22:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ok, then, I'll add myself when I open the Abd/Jzg case later tonight. I've been reading up on it some already. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 23:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| === 9/11 amendment request === | |||
| Threaded discussion. Please move. <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 19:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Done. Thanks for the note. ] (]) 19:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Jehochman and Bainer are having a fun little conversation. Someone might want to have a polite word.--] (]) 14:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Here's the diff. Third time in one week: perhaps a clerk should remind this administrator that the posting rules apply to everyone. I tried several days ago, and his reaction was unhelpful. Specifically, "Threaded conversation doesn't hurt anybody, and the clerks don't complain because I don't do it that often." It could set a bad precedent for other editors if an experienced administrator treats this as the norm (and to be candid, it's no fun to be on the receiving end). <font face="Verdana">]</font><sup>'']''</sup> 15:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| === Opening of JzG / Abd Case? === | |||
| Perhaps I have misunderstood, but I thought cases were opened one day after the fourth net vote to accept. As far as I can see, there have been at least 10 net votes to accept for something like three days now. Consequently, I am wondering when the case will be opened. Is there something I have misunderstood? Thanks, ] (]) 21:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :See . ] (]) 22:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks... I was looking around a few places to see if there was any reasoning already posted, and that note was posted in the interim. ] (]) 22:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes, the case has been delayed due to some confusion over who has assigned to clerk the case, and because I've had some other obligations off-wiki. The case should be opened later tonight. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 23:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Clerk page relocations == | |||
| I've relocated the clerk procedure page and noticeboard to the main clerk page and its talk page, respectively, as part of the planned arbitration page relocations (] & ]). | |||
| Refers to ]. | |||
| I would be very grateful if everyone here could check over the results and see whether anything is broken (aside from the double redirects, which I'm leaving for the bot to clean up). | |||
| For motion 5 (ARBPIA5) it states that there are 10 active arbs and since 1 has abstained, 5 is a majority. However, L235 (an inactive arb) has voted on it, so the majority needs to be altered to 6. | |||
| In light of the new arrangement on this page, I would also suggest reorganizing the sections a bit, such that we have a place for arb requests in the noticeboard on top, and the bottom section can be used for actual discussion instead. However, I'll leave determining the best layout here up to the clerk corps. ] <sup>]] ]]</sup> 04:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| I'm unsure if that affects the numbers for any of the other motions (or indeed any other cases) but it clearly does for this one. ] 20:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Date delinking not ready for voting == | |||
| :Marked as active on the one motion. ], we'll assume you're not active on the other 6 motions unless you indicate otherwise or vote on them. ] ] 20:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Note ] - this decision isnt ready for voting just yet. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 04:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== ] alignment == | ||
| The box at ] used to be on the left side of the page. There is a parameter used in {{tl|ArbComOpenTasks}} called {{para|acotalign|left}}, but that parameter seems to no longer do anything, and the box now floats way down bottom-right. I tried a few things to fix this but they didn't work. Complicating things, for whatever reason the box floats left in preview. Any ideas? <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 06:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{user|SQRT5P1D2}}, one of the many "new" users who invited themselves in on the case even though they had no prior involvement, having created their accounts only after the case started, after swamping the evidence page with ], and the proposals page with ], has now entered on a spree of inquisitorial questioning against myself regarding some private discussion I had with another participant | |||
| (]), and then went so far as to spam references to that thread across multiple other participants' talkpages, evidently to invite them to put further pressure on me , , . I believe this is crossing the line into harassment, and would appreciate if a clerk put a firm stop to this kind of behaviour. This person never had any business meddling with the case anyway; now it becomes overwhelmingly clear he's just here to stir up the shit. ] ] 14:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :], it looks fine on my screen? It appears that {{para|acotalign}} was removed ], so that parameter has been worthless for over a decade at this point. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 02:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :For starters clerk KnightLago some non-evidence from the /evidence page. I am looking into the other accusations at this time. ] <sup>]</sup> 23:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::@]: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::], I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking <del>out loud</del> <ins>in writing</ins>, do we need the dispute resolution sidebar there? It is not a current arbitration request. Thinking even more in print, I am wondering if WP:A/C can be BLAR'd to ], which has all of the information at WP:A/C and more. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly . Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, ] works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Well, it was an idea. Happy to keep it around if people find it useful :){{pb}}Forcing all three into a table looks even worse on my screen. It forces ACOT to be super narrow. I think your proposed edit (moving the least relevant item to drop below) is the least bad option which does not involve {{User:Tamzin/The diaeresis|re|i|nventing}} the wheel. If someone wants to work on making ACOT's width flexible, I think that would be awesome, but with ] I am reluctant to sign up for doing that myself. Happy to let you do the honors of reinstating your edit; also happy to do it myself. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Parameters to set widths on pages, or arbitrary floats, inhibit display at mobile resolution. Setting width is a no-go from that perspective. Setting a different kind of float is possible in TemplateStyles and if that's pursued should be pursued there. ] (]) 04:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:15, 8 December 2024
Noticeboard
Clerks' noticeboard (shortcut WP:AC/CN)Clerks' Noticeboard
Arbitration Committee proceedings- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.
Open cases| Case name | Links | Evidence due | Prop. Dec. due |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palestine-Israel articles 5 | (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) | 21 Dec 2024 | 11 Jan 2025 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requestsCurrently, no requests for clarification or amendment are open.
Arbitrator motions| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Arbitrator workflow motions | 1 December 2024 |
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-l
lists.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.
 Archives |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Arbitrators, clerks and trainees: Please coordinate your actions through the mailing list. The purpose of this page is for editors who are not clerks to request clerk assistance.
ARBPIA5 motion at ARCA
Refers to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Motion_5:_PIA5_Case.
For motion 5 (ARBPIA5) it states that there are 10 active arbs and since 1 has abstained, 5 is a majority. However, L235 (an inactive arb) has voted on it, so the majority needs to be altered to 6.
I'm unsure if that affects the numbers for any of the other motions (or indeed any other cases) but it clearly does for this one. Black Kite (talk) 20:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Marked as active on the one motion. L235, we'll assume you're not active on the other 6 motions unless you indicate otherwise or vote on them. SilverLocust 💬 20:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
WP:A/C alignment
The box at WP:A/C used to be on the left side of the page. There is a parameter used in {{ArbComOpenTasks}} called |acotalign=left, but that parameter seems to no longer do anything, and the box now floats way down bottom-right. I tried a few things to fix this but they didn't work. Complicating things, for whatever reason the box floats left in preview. Any ideas? -- Tamzin (they|xe) 06:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, it looks fine on my screen? It appears that
|acotalign=was removed in 2012, so that parameter has been worthless for over a decade at this point. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- @HouseBlaster: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking
out loudin writing, do we need the dispute resolution sidebar there? It is not a current arbitration request. Thinking even more in print, I am wondering if WP:A/C can be BLAR'd to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests, which has all of the information at WP:A/C and more. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly many others do too. Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, this works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it was an idea. Happy to keep it around if people find it useful :)Forcing all three into a table looks even worse on my screen. It forces ACOT to be super narrow. I think your proposed edit (moving the least relevant item to drop below) is the least bad option which does not involve reïnventing the wheel. If someone wants to work on making ACOT's width flexible, I think that would be awesome, but with current stuff I am reluctant to sign up for doing that myself. Happy to let you do the honors of reinstating your edit; also happy to do it myself. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Parameters to set widths on pages, or arbitrary floats, inhibit display at mobile resolution. Setting width is a no-go from that perspective. Setting a different kind of float is possible in TemplateStyles and if that's pursued should be pursued there. Izno (talk) 04:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly many others do too. Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, this works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking
- @HouseBlaster: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)