| Revision as of 22:54, 11 August 2015 editS Marshall (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers32,391 edits Thank you← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 06:16, 13 December 2022 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,067 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Levelledout/Archive 5) (botTag: Manual revert |
| (83 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) |
| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
|
| algo = old(14d) |
|
| algo = old(14d) |
|
| archive = User talk:Levelledout/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| archive = User talk:Levelledout/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| counter = 3 |
|
| counter = 5 |
|
| maxarchivesize = 20K |
|
| maxarchivesize = 20K |
|
| archiveheader = {{talk:Levelledout Archive}} |
|
| archiveheader = {{talk:Levelledout Archive}} |
| Line 12: |
Line 12: |
|
{{Archive box|auto=yes|search=yes|}} |
|
{{Archive box|auto=yes|search=yes|}} |
|
{{collapse bottom}} |
|
{{collapse bottom}} |
|
|
|
|
== Please comment on ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 30475 --> ] (]) 00:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==ArbCom case "Editor conduct in e-cigs articles" has now been opened== |
|
|
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at ]. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at ]. '''Please add your evidence by August 18, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes.''' You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, ]. For a guide to the arbitration process, see ]. For the Arbitration Committee, ] <sup>(])</sup> 11:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Please comment on ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 30834 --> ] (]) 00:02, 7 August 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Word and evidence limit == |
|
|
Hi, Levelledout. I'm here to ask you to withdraw your objection to an increased word and diff limit for QuackGuru. Everyone else involved, including you, will be able to develop a clear and coherent case in a few hundred words and a couple of dozen well-chosen diffs. QG will not be able to do this. He will make a case the way he writes an article: with hundreds of carefully-cited quotes grouped by topic, beautifully accurate but hopelessly unclear because there will be no thesis, no clear starting point and no conclusions. I think the arbs will emerge from reading 1,500 words of QG's prose with no great insight into his mind but a much keener appreciation for the problems we experience in dealing with him.—] <small>]/]</small> 21:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
:@] You have a point. I will withdraw part of my complaint and leave it down to the arbs to decide, who will have to read through the resultant sprawling mess. I maintain that all editors should have a level playing field though.] (]) 22:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::Thank you. I think that this ''does'' maintain a level playing field ---- QG is allowed extra words to compensate for special needs.—] <small>]/]</small> 22:54, 11 August 2015 (UTC) |
|
