| Revision as of 04:01, 29 May 2012 view sourceHersfoldArbClerkBot (talk | contribs)11,398 editsm Bot updating evidence length information (toolserver)← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 18:34, 9 August 2012 view source Courcelles (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators434,776 edits {{pp-protected|small=yes}} |
| (382 intermediate revisions by 35 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{pp-semi-indef}} |
|
{{pp-protected|small=yes}} |
|
{{Casenav}} |
|
{{NOINDEX}} |
|
|
{{ombox |image=none |text= This page has been ]. {{#ifeq:yes|yes|The ]'s decision is still in effect, and can be viewed at ]. The contents of the page can be viewed in the .|}} |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Notice}} |
|
|
|
}} |
|
{{notice|Create your own section to provide evidence in, and '''do not edit anyone else's section'''. Keep your evidence within the limits. Evidence longer than the limits will be refactored or removed entirely.}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Any editor is entitled to add evidence to this page, irrespective of whether they are involved in the dispute. Create your own section and '''do not edit another editor's section'''. Named parties are granted a maximum word limit of 1,000 words and 100 ]; all other users are limited to a maximum of 500 words and 50 diffs. While in general it is is more effective to make succinct yet detailed submissions, users who wish to submit over-length evidence should contact the Arbitration Committee by email and ask for an extension.. Over-long evidence may be trimmed to size or simply removed by the Clerk without warning. Focus on the issues that are important to the dispute and on diffs which show the nature of the dispute. |
|
|
|
|
|
You ''must'' use the prescribed format in your evidence. Evidence should include a link to the actual page diff in question, or to a short page section; links to the page itself are insufficient. Never link to a ], an editor's contributions, or a ] for all actions of an editor (as those change over time), although a link to a log for a specific article or a specific block log can be useful. Please make sure any page section links are permanent; see ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
General discussion of the case will not be accepted on this page, and belongs on the ]. The Arbitration Committee expects that all rebuttals of other evidence submissions will be included '''in your own section''' and will explain how the evidence is incorrect. Please do not refactor the page or remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, only an Arbitrator or Clerk may move it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at ], which is open for comment by parties, Arbitrators, and others. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies, Arbitrators vote at ]. Only Arbitrators (and Clerks, when clarification on votes is needed) may edit the proposed decision page. |
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
|
|
|
|
== Evidence presented by Rich Farmbrough == |
|
|
{{User:HersfoldArbClerkBot/Length header|word=110|diff=0|link=0}} |
|
|
|
|
|
===RFC on Fae was contrary to policy=== |
|
|
The RFC on Fae was predicated on linking two accounts. If the two accounts were operated by the same person they were protected under the provisions of ] (legitimate accounts:Privacy). The outing policy further makes it clear that we should never give credence to attempts to link legitimate socks, absent an overriding need. No such need has been shown, therefore no linkage should be made on-Wiki. |
|
|
|
|
|
===Fae well advised not to be involved in RFC=== |
|
|
Given the above assertion, Fae was well advised and to be congratulated for keeping away from the three ring circus that the RFC became. The Misplaced Pages community, especially admins (including myself) should be reprimanded for not closing this unproductive and divisive muck-fest much earlier. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Evidence presented by Anthonyhcole == |
|
|
{{User:HersfoldArbClerkBot/Length header|word=86|diff=3|link=1}} |
|
|
|
|
|
===Fæ misled the community at his RfA=== |
|
|
Fæ took a clean start in the middle of an RfC/U that was seeking sanctions due to his use of sources. The RfC/U was closed with "User has stopped editing Misplaced Pages. Delisted due to inactivity." In his subsequent RfA as ] he said he'd taken a clean start ''after'' an RfC/U rather than "during" and that he'd never been blocked or banned under the earlier name. This implied, to the !voters at his RfA, that a completed RfC/U had found nothing worthy of a topic ban. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Evidence presented by {your user name}== |
|
|
''before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person'' |
|
|
==={Write your assertion here}=== |
|
|
Place argument and diffs which support your assertion; for example, your first assertion might be "So-and-so engages in edit warring", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits to specific articles which show So-and-so engaging in edit warring. |
|
|
|
|
|
==={Write your assertion here}=== |
|
|
Place argument and diffs which support the second assertion; for example, your second assertion might be "So-and-so makes personal attacks", which should be the title of this section. Here you would show specific edits where So-and-so made personal attacks. |
|