Misplaced Pages

User talk:Arcticocean: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:00, 25 October 2009 editArcticocean (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators46,404 edits →Your advice to Brews ohare: Response to Brews ohare.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:25, 16 January 2025 edit undoTulsi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,371 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLove 
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="padding-bottom: 0.5em;">
{{User talk:AGK/Header}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{Usertalk bar}}
|minthreadsleft = 1
</div>
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
{{Message}}
|algo = old(7d)
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archive = User talk:AGK/Archive/54
|archiveprefix=User talk:AGK/Archive_
}}{{NOINDEX}}__NOTOC__
|format=Y
|minkeepthreads=0
|age=8760
}}
<div style="float: right" class="infobox">
<div class="toctitle">
<p style="text-align: center">
'''Related pages'''
</p>
</div>
* ]
* ()
* ]
</div>__TOC__


== ''The Misplaced Pages Signpost'': 19 October 2009 ==


==Hello, stranger!==
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2; ">
Hi, Arcticocean,
* News and notes: ]

* In the news: ]
No, nope, nah, nyet, it's not going to work. Go back to your former name! You know us long-time editors don't adapt well to changes, especially small ones.
* Discussion report: ]

* Features and admins: ]
Any way, in case you have indeed transitioned to a new identity, I hope I'll run into you on this project in the future (in a positive way, I mean). Just spend some time working on some subject that brings a smile to your face. And stay away from noticeboards. Take care, <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
* Arbitration report: ]

* Technology report: ]
:You might want to change the target page for the redirect on ]. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">] ]</sup> 06:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
::<small>Sorry, the archive bot had buried your message away. I've just restored it.<br/></small>{{xt|And stay away from noticeboards}} – was better advice ever given to a Misplaced Pages editor? :) ] 13:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
== Good article reassessment for ] ==
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
== Editor experience invitation ==

Hi Articocean. Have I asked you yet about whether or not you'd be interested in ]? I see you blank your talk page regularly and I'm worried I'm missing my name in the history even though I checked. 😅 I really hope this isn't a duplicate request. ] ] 16:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
==Welcome back==

Hey there! I just wanted to give you a shoutout for nominating this ] for deletion. I’m surprised it’s been hanging around for about five years now and you definitely did the right thing by calling it out! Also, welcome back! I’m glad to see you’re active again and I hope you’ll stick around this time! Thanks for all your good work!<span id="Saqib:1730576685561:User_talkFTTCLNArcticocean" class="FTTCmt"> — ] (] I ]) 19:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)</span>

:Thanks for the welcome! It's nice to be contributing again. I have been part of the Misplaced Pages community for nearly 20 years, and after so long I was losing my enthusiasm. However, the break has done me some good. ] 10:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks for noticing this. We created this template as part of a drive to refresh the WikiProject, but the planned use of the template did not materialise. I have now tagged it for speedy deletion: the deletion is clear-cut and does not necessarily require a TfD. Thanks again, ] 12:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>

</div> </div>
</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' &middot; ] &middot; ] &middot; ] (]) 02:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC)</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

== Alt account ==

Hey. Is actually your alt, or is someone messing around? Thanks, ] (]) 21:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Ah nevermind, I see you created it. Should have checked the logs first. ] (]) 21:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::No problem. Better safe than sorry! ] 08:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)


==Happy Birthday!==
== re: ] ==
<!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## -->
{{ombox
|type = notice
|image = ]
|style = background:Darkgreen;border: 1px solid #CC9999;
|text = <span style="font-family:Book Antiqua;color:#FFFF00;">Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the ].</span>--] (]) 02:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
}}


Thanks, {{u|DaniloDaysOfOurLives}}! ] 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Talkback|Roger Davies|User:Anonimu|ts=11:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)}}
== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> <b>]]</b>&nbsp;(]&nbsp;•&nbsp;he/they) 20:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)


:Sorry, I don't have any memory now of why such a template would have been needed. It was around 15 years ago. Regards, ] 21:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== AA2 and other ''issues'' ==


== Hello and welcome back ==
This is in response to your ''warning''/''threat'' left on my talk page.<br />
:Considering<br />
:* 1) I was not notified of being mentioned in the incident concerning Abbatai, which I was unaware<br />
:* 2) Apparently ''leaving me in the dark'' was a way and means of pushing through to this ''warning'' without giving me any opportunity to explain myself or my actions, which consisted of '''1''' revert!!<br />
:* 3) In light of the '''urgency''' in which this was undertaken, certain ''individuals'' should have checked Abbatai's edits where they would have found his post on my talk page, accusing me of "''adding Anti Turkish stuffs''". Which apparently doesn't violate '''any''' rules of conduct on Misplaced Pages.
:Conclusion: While spouting rules and regulations of Misplaced Pages, it would be prudent to ''practice what one preaches''. Warnings, are indications of violations of conduct with a link showing such conduct to be unproductive. '''Threats''', on the other hand, are actions taken '''AFTER''' the fact, involving '''NO''' warning(s) of any discussion(s) or being allowed a voice in said discussion(s).
:Final: I don't know what the '''real''' issue was concerning that Arbitration. However, I find the proceedings quite cryptic when you dragged my name into this over '''1''' revert(which was subsequently reverted by Abbatai later), and yet I was not made aware of these proceedings until your ''threat'' of October 20th. I hope any further interaction with you will be of a more ''positive'' nature. --] (]) 15:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
:: There was no warning and no threat. To place a user on notice is to simply notify them that the arbitration decision concerned with the subject area they are editing includes a discretionary sanction remedy, and that they must bear that in mind when contributing. Your involvement—as brief as it was—with an incident that later involved one user having sanctioned placed upon their account does, I think, warrant what is in effect a simple notification. The red triangle warning sign that furnishes the notice template that I used in my comment on your talk page may have mislead you, so I will reiterate to ensure my point is made clear: I neither warned you, nor suggested (implicitly or otherwise) that your conduct was questionable. With that in mind, I am afraid I don't see where your complaint lies. ] 17:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


Hi there, I hope you’re doing well. I won’t refer by your old username just in case, but it’s good to see you again. I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages in just the last 24 hours after a post on my talk page around a DRN template, which prompted me to look at the state of DRN and I have a few concerns which I believe are shared by others in the community. You’re probably one of the few old guard DR folk around still, and I was reading the RFC from 5 or so years back where MedCom was closed, had a few ideas on improving DR again. Was wondering if you might be willing for a chat some time? <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 11:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::My complaint? Your actions. You dragged my name into this Arbitration on October 14th, yet felt that my notification was redundant or unnecessary until the ''warning/threat'' of October 20th! Your lack of notification implies that I ''somehow'' knew of these proceedings, which in and of itself means implying I'm a sockpuppet. So yes, I question your actions.
:Hi again ], appreciate you are likely quite busy, just sending a ping as I’d really value your input. Of course if you aren’t interested please let me know and I’ll be on my way :-) <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 19:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Odd how my '''1''' simple revert garnered '''such''' attention. I'd suggest next time that, out of simple courtesy, if you drag someone's name into an arbitration that you notify the individual you include. As for ''discussing'' anything with Abbatai, I'd suggest you discuss the vandalism he posted on my talk page. Since that garnered ''such'' attention, like the other 8 times my page has been vandalized, that '''nothing''' was done. As such I will not be ''assuming good faith'' with that individual in any situation.
:Hello and welcome back to Misplaced Pages :). My old username just felt overdue to be changed, but you're welcome to call me what's easiest. I'm excited by your excitement to discuss the dispute resolution processes, but I don't have much current experience with them, and I have almost none of DRN. I'm probably not the best person to be discussing reform, but I will follow any discussions with interest and contribute where I can… ] 20:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Oh, and as for AA2, I honestly could care less, but I'm sure ''someone'' feels better seeing my name on that list. --] (]) 17:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
::Ah, OK good to know re: your name! But alas, DRN is just a small part of the puzzle. It’s re-establishing mediation that I have interest in. I returned because of the state I saw DRN in, and while it really only has one consistent volunteer, I wonder about whether the structure of the noticeboard now (lots of rules and comments only in sections) is off putting for other volunteers to get involved in. Way back when (jeez, DRN is something I created nearly 14 years ago!), I designed it to be sort of a 3o+ but not for massive disputes with many editors - I was actually chatting to ] about my thoughts about what we could look at DR wise and I boiled it down to this:
:::: My notification implies that you are a sock puppet? What nonsense! To repeat myself for the third occasion: to be placed on notice is not involving you at all in the arbitration proceedings to a great degree than you already were by editing the concerned subject area.
::*Talk page dispute between two that that need an outside opinion - 3O
::*Simple disputes with a few editors - DRN
::*Complex disputes, or disputes with many involved parties that which need assistance to get to a consensus point / resolve an issue or create a proposal: mediation
::*Disputes where a clear proposal exists and a decision point is needed from outside editors to finalise consensus - RFC
::Some of the concerns around MedCab When it was closed was that it was redundant to DRN and MedCom, I remember discussing at the time the concept that DRN was traffic control/triage, and that the DRN coordinator (a role at the time, which rotated but was often me) could recommend referral of disputes to MedCom when it was judged that was valuable. Mediation could then help resolve the issues (] that I did worked quite well) or boil down issues to a few that could get wider community consensus in an RFC (I did that to some success on an abortion mediation ages ago). I think the concerns around MedCom were when DRN was more successful, but that people felt it was bureaucratic and didn’t accept much cases, and didn’t have teeth. I’d argue the first point can be handled by keeping it sort of like MedCab, but perhaps with the privilege of mediation, and perhaps even community selected mediators (all theoretical), the second point could be addressed by coordination and handover of disputes between volunteers at DRN and whoever coordinates “mediation”, and the teeth component would only be needed in intractable disputes where we could leverage an RFC to create consensus. I think the most common objection I’ve see are that “RFCs work” but they often require a known, agreed on proposal and starting point and this isn’t always there for a content dispute. I’ve also factored in that often, there’s a reluctance for uninvolved editors to wade into controversial content disputes that might be at an RFC. But yeah, those are my rather long winded thoughts. Be keen to get your perspective! <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 01:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I know the above is massively TL;DR and may not be an interest area of yours but would value your thoughts if you have time at some point! <span style="font-family:Verdana">] ] <sup>]</sup></span> 12:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)


== Unblock-decline ==
:::: I'm sorry that you were not notified of the proceedings, but, to be quite fair to the editor who filed the complaint at AE, you were not a party to the situation. Your peripheral involvement simply attracted my attention. Perhaps some administrators would not have issued the notice, but I think most would have. I also think that, because you were involved in an incident that required administrator intervention, it was quite right that you were formally notified of the arbitration decision.


{{noping|Renamed user b57b1e6b25176be485b548cf4103dc90}} is a very-L LTA, {{noping|Najaf ali bhayo}} if I recall. One of their patterns is creating an account, making a few of their favorite edits, then playing account-rename games and eventually VANISHing to cover their tracks. ] (]) 22:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::: Regarding the edits to your talk page: Abbatai has just been banned from reverting without consensus for three months. I think that, in light of that, we can let earlier misbehaviour slide: something ''has'' now been done about his conduct. ] 18:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


:Thanks for dropping a block on that account, and I'll think of this if I see similar behaviour again. ] 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
== Your advice to Brews ohare ==


== Additional sock ==
AGK: please explain to me why entering a discussion of guidelines and their possible uses puts me in jeopardy of ''having your topic ban upgraded to something a lot less pleasant.'' I don't understand why general discussions of this nature should have any bearing whatsoever upon my situation, which in my mind has nothing to do with it all. Further, I do not see why such general conversations constitute ''getting yourself into bad situations''. Aren't such conversations part and parcel of WP and its evolution? These do not seem to me "bad situations", but simple discussions of what can be done to improve openness to contributions without inviting craziness. ] (]) 23:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
You just banned ] and ] for being socks, and I believe they instantly created a new account at ]. ] (]) 18:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)


: It's almost certainly ] or ], but they are not posting images of the same footballer and violating the copyright policy in the same manner. There is no need to block them for the time being. Please ask an administrator to block them if they become disruptive. By the way, the two accounts were blocked, not banned: see ] for an explanation. Thanks, ] 09:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:Long story short Brews, you got yourself banned for pushing views and not accepting they were in the minority. Couple that with the fact that several of the participants in ] were also involved in the speed of light ARBCOM, and you have a recipe for trouble brewing. You want to lay low and do uncontroversial stuff (like ] or ]) for the next few months, not write or influence proposed policies that are related to your own ban.


== A barnstar for you! ==
:I hope this clarifies. ]&nbsp;{<sup>]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-4.0ex;">]</sub>&nbsp;&ndash;&nbsp;]} 07:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


{| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
:: I echo what Headbomb said. A user who has been topic-banned would be expected to be on his very best behaviour and to make ''zero'' trouble for himself for the duration of the sanction. Your recent contributions to the meta discussions that have been cited on your talk page and elsewhere are certainly not the most effective way of fulfilling those two expectations. My basic point is that you are doing yourself a disservice by making a point to get involved in the discussions you have been contributing to, and especially in discussions relating to the policies that are related to your topic ban.
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
:: The tl;dr version: you are exhibiting an extraordinary lack of ], and I implore you to adjust your ways. If you don't, then fine; but don't be surprised when you land yourself in more trouble. ] 12:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Admin's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I am flattered of your presence on my unblock request. I really am grateful. Means a lot to me. Lots of love. ]&nbsp;] 13:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
|}

Latest revision as of 13:25, 16 January 2025

This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article.
Please leave a new message.

Related pages


Hello, stranger!

Hi, Arcticocean,

No, nope, nah, nyet, it's not going to work. Go back to your former name! You know us long-time editors don't adapt well to changes, especially small ones.

Any way, in case you have indeed transitioned to a new identity, I hope I'll run into you on this project in the future (in a positive way, I mean). Just spend some time working on some subject that brings a smile to your face. And stay away from noticeboards. Take care, Liz 06:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

You might want to change the target page for the redirect on User:Arcticocean. Liz 06:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, the archive bot had buried your message away. I've just restored it.
And stay away from noticeboards – was better advice ever given to a Misplaced Pages editor? :) arcticocean ■ 13:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for 2010 Shanghai fire

2010 Shanghai fire has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Articocean. Have I asked you yet about whether or not you'd be interested in participating here? I see you blank your talk page regularly and I'm worried I'm missing my name in the history even though I checked. 😅 I really hope this isn't a duplicate request. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hey there! I just wanted to give you a shoutout for nominating this PROMO AUTOBIO for deletion. I’m surprised it’s been hanging around for about five years now and you definitely did the right thing by calling it out! Also, welcome back! I’m glad to see you’re active again and I hope you’ll stick around this time! Thanks for all your good work! — Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! It's nice to be contributing again. I have been part of the Misplaced Pages community for nearly 20 years, and after so long I was losing my enthusiasm. However, the break has done me some good. arcticocean 10:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WPCGR/Backlog

Template:WPCGR/Backlog has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 10:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing this. We created this template as part of a drive to refresh the WikiProject, but the planned use of the template did not materialise. I have now tagged it for speedy deletion: the deletion is clear-cut and does not necessarily require a TfD. Thanks again, arcticocean ■ 12:13, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Alt account

Hey. Is this actually your alt, or is someone messing around? Thanks, Spicy (talk) 21:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah nevermind, I see you created it. Should have checked the logs first. Spicy (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
No problem. Better safe than sorry! arcticocean ■ 08:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee.--DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 02:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, DaniloDaysOfOurLives! arcticocean ■ 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Arbitration clerks chart

Template:Arbitration clerks chart has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have any memory now of why such a template would have been needed. It was around 15 years ago. Regards, arcticocean ■ 21:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello and welcome back

Hi there, I hope you’re doing well. I won’t refer by your old username just in case, but it’s good to see you again. I’ve returned to Misplaced Pages in just the last 24 hours after a post on my talk page around a DRN template, which prompted me to look at the state of DRN and I have a few concerns which I believe are shared by others in the community. You’re probably one of the few old guard DR folk around still, and I was reading the RFC from 5 or so years back where MedCom was closed, had a few ideas on improving DR again. Was wondering if you might be willing for a chat some time? Steven Crossin 11:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi again User:Arcticocean, appreciate you are likely quite busy, just sending a ping as I’d really value your input. Of course if you aren’t interested please let me know and I’ll be on my way :-) Steven Crossin 19:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello and welcome back to Misplaced Pages :). My old username just felt overdue to be changed, but you're welcome to call me what's easiest. I'm excited by your excitement to discuss the dispute resolution processes, but I don't have much current experience with them, and I have almost none of DRN. I'm probably not the best person to be discussing reform, but I will follow any discussions with interest and contribute where I can… arcticocean ■ 20:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Ah, OK good to know re: your name! But alas, DRN is just a small part of the puzzle. It’s re-establishing mediation that I have interest in. I returned because of the state I saw DRN in, and while it really only has one consistent volunteer, I wonder about whether the structure of the noticeboard now (lots of rules and comments only in sections) is off putting for other volunteers to get involved in. Way back when (jeez, DRN is something I created nearly 14 years ago!), I designed it to be sort of a 3o+ but not for massive disputes with many editors - I was actually chatting to User:Xavexgoem about my thoughts about what we could look at DR wise and I boiled it down to this:
  • Talk page dispute between two that that need an outside opinion - 3O
  • Simple disputes with a few editors - DRN
  • Complex disputes, or disputes with many involved parties that which need assistance to get to a consensus point / resolve an issue or create a proposal: mediation
  • Disputes where a clear proposal exists and a decision point is needed from outside editors to finalise consensus - RFC
Some of the concerns around MedCab When it was closed was that it was redundant to DRN and MedCom, I remember discussing at the time the concept that DRN was traffic control/triage, and that the DRN coordinator (a role at the time, which rotated but was often me) could recommend referral of disputes to MedCom when it was judged that was valuable. Mediation could then help resolve the issues (Talk:William Lane Craig/Mediation that I did worked quite well) or boil down issues to a few that could get wider community consensus in an RFC (I did that to some success on an abortion mediation ages ago). I think the concerns around MedCom were when DRN was more successful, but that people felt it was bureaucratic and didn’t accept much cases, and didn’t have teeth. I’d argue the first point can be handled by keeping it sort of like MedCab, but perhaps with the privilege of mediation, and perhaps even community selected mediators (all theoretical), the second point could be addressed by coordination and handover of disputes between volunteers at DRN and whoever coordinates “mediation”, and the teeth component would only be needed in intractable disputes where we could leverage an RFC to create consensus. I think the most common objection I’ve see are that “RFCs work” but they often require a known, agreed on proposal and starting point and this isn’t always there for a content dispute. I’ve also factored in that often, there’s a reluctance for uninvolved editors to wade into controversial content disputes that might be at an RFC. But yeah, those are my rather long winded thoughts. Be keen to get your perspective! Steven Crossin 01:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
I know the above is massively TL;DR and may not be an interest area of yours but would value your thoughts if you have time at some point! Steven Crossin 12:13, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Unblock-decline

Renamed user b57b1e6b25176be485b548cf4103dc90 is a very-L LTA, Najaf ali bhayo if I recall. One of their patterns is creating an account, making a few of their favorite edits, then playing account-rename games and eventually VANISHing to cover their tracks. DMacks (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping a block on that account, and I'll think of this if I see similar behaviour again. arcticocean ■ 00:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Additional sock

You just banned User:Giovanni.idn and User:Giovanni.idndutch for being socks, and I believe they instantly created a new account at User:Giovanni.tysm. Anwegmann (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

It's almost certainly the same person or someone connected, but they are not posting images of the same footballer and violating the copyright policy in the same manner. There is no need to block them for the time being. Please ask an administrator to block them if they become disruptive. By the way, the two accounts were blocked, not banned: see WP:BANBLOCKDIFF for an explanation. Thanks, arcticocean ■ 09:42, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I am flattered of your presence on my unblock request. I really am grateful. Means a lot to me. Lots of love. Tulsi 24x7 13:25, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
User talk:Arcticocean: Difference between revisions Add topic