| Revision as of 06:51, 24 December 2010 editAlexandrDmitri (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,569 edits →ArbCom Request 23 Dec 2010: You are entitled to present evidence, irrespective of whether they are the filing party or a named party← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:57, 24 December 2010 edit undoAlexandrDmitri (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,569 edits →ArbCom Request 23 Dec 2010: addendumNext edit → | ||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
| I observe that I filed an ArbCom complaint against John J. Bulten who was THE filing party of the Longevity case... the intent of the ArbCom I filed is not focused on longevity-related matters but on John J. Bulten's inappropriate behaviour and methods demonstrated in my previous request for ArbCom, where as I indicated, previous attempts at resolution with Bulten have completely broken down time and again. As John J. Bulten was the filing party of the Longevity ArbCom, I am NOT entitled to present evidence ''against'' him. ] <small>'''(], ])'''</small> 06:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC) | I observe that I filed an ArbCom complaint against John J. Bulten who was THE filing party of the Longevity case... the intent of the ArbCom I filed is not focused on longevity-related matters but on John J. Bulten's inappropriate behaviour and methods demonstrated in my previous request for ArbCom, where as I indicated, previous attempts at resolution with Bulten have completely broken down time and again. As John J. Bulten was the filing party of the Longevity ArbCom, I am NOT entitled to present evidence ''against'' him. ] <small>'''(], ])'''</small> 06:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :As you can see, the four Arbitrators who have commented have also declined on the grounds of the ongoing case. I do not know who told you (or if this is a misunderstanding), but there are no restrictions whatsoever on you presenting evidence in the Longevity case, even if it is against the filing party. When ArbCom opens a case, it examines the behaviour '''of all parties''' involved, irrespective of whether they are the filing party or a named party. Therefore you are entitled to present evidence against him. The case is still in the evidence stage, so I see no barriers whatsoever to you bringing up your concerns there. If you need any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact lead clerk ], myself, or any other ArbCom clerk. Regards ] (]) 06:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC) | :As you can see, the four Arbitrators who have commented have also declined on the grounds of the ongoing case; one arbitrator has said "Decline as a separate case, but the issues can be addressed in the pending Longevity case, as suggested by Kirill and Risker". I do not know who told you (or if this is a misunderstanding), but there are no restrictions whatsoever on you presenting evidence in the Longevity case, even if it is against the filing party. When ArbCom opens a case, it examines the behaviour '''of all parties''' involved, irrespective of whether they are the filing party or a named party. Therefore you are entitled to present evidence against him. The case is still in the evidence stage, so I see no barriers whatsoever to you bringing up your concerns there. If you need any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact lead clerk ], myself, or any other ArbCom clerk. Regards ] (]) 06:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:57, 24 December 2010
 Archives | |||
|
|||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Please click here to leave me a new message.
If I have left a message on your talkpage, I will have it watchlisted.
My ACC request
A few weeks ago, I requested ACC access. You declined it, and I fully understand why - I was (and still am, really) a new editor, just getting started. I'm just wondering, what experience are you looking for in requests for access? If I feel I've gained sufficient experience in a couple months, I'll reapply, but it would help if I knew what you were looking for :p (also, my username's changed since I applied. I used to be Julianmh, but it's been changed to Demize now) dmz 08:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
- Just checking to see if you've seen this yet. dmz 03:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- There are some specialised areas that you could work in such as WP:UAA and WP:CHU. Given that ACC is all about helping people new to Misplaced Pages create accounts, helping out newcomers is also a great area in which to work. There are no set criteria for joining ACC, so these are just suggestions, though ones that we often mention to users interested in joining the team. Regards --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 11:53, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Cooperation with ru-wiki Incubator
Hello. I'm a participant of ru-wiki's Article Incubator, and it is important to notice, that we use it not like your WP:Article Incubator, but like WP:Articles for creation. So after creation by new user we check new article and move in mainspace if it is good. And sometimes we have articles in English in our Incubator. So, I want to ask you can we move (for example by copy-pasting or another way) this articles from ru-Incubator to English Misplaced Pages by WP:Articles for creation or maybe some other project? For example now we have such an article: Sanatoria and Resorts of Ulyanovsk Region. Dmitry89 (talk) 12:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Привет, я участвую в русскоязычном Инкубаторе, кстати важно отметить, что мы используем его не как английский для удаленных статей, а как проект WP:Articles for creation. То есть после создания новичком статьи, мы ее проверяем и переносим в основное пространство, если оно соответствует правилам. Иногда нам встречаются статьи написанные на английском языке. Поэтому я бы хотел узнать можем ли мы переносить эти статьи (напр. копипастом или каким-то другим способом) эти статьи из русскоязычного Инкубатора в англоязычный раздел, например через WP:Articles for creation или другой подобный проект? Одним из примеров на данный момент может служить вот такая статья: Sanatoria and Resorts of Ulyanovsk Region. Dmitry89 (talk) 12:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- I have not participated in WP:Articles for creation in a long time; I have just removed myself from the list of participants. I suggest you get in contact with one of the people listed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation. Regards, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 12:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
ACC access re-activation
G'day AlexandrDmitri, I was wondering if you would be so kind as to re-activate my access for the Account Creation Interface, it was suspended for nil activity of 45+ days. I would like to get back into the process and assist with account creation requests again. Kind Regards ZooPro 12:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- I've unsuspended your account. The interface and the guide have changed somewhat in the past couple of months; I suggest you reread it thoroughly before handling any requests. Regards Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 12:45, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- Cheers and will do. ZooPro 12:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
ArbCom Request 23 Dec 2010
I observe that I filed an ArbCom complaint against John J. Bulten who was THE filing party of the Longevity case... the intent of the ArbCom I filed is not focused on longevity-related matters but on John J. Bulten's inappropriate behaviour and methods demonstrated in my previous request for ArbCom, where as I indicated, previous attempts at resolution with Bulten have completely broken down time and again. As John J. Bulten was the filing party of the Longevity ArbCom, I am NOT entitled to present evidence against him. → Brendan (talk, contribs) 06:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- As you can see, the four Arbitrators who have commented have also declined on the grounds of the ongoing case; one arbitrator has said "Decline as a separate case, but the issues can be addressed in the pending Longevity case, as suggested by Kirill and Risker". I do not know who told you (or if this is a misunderstanding), but there are no restrictions whatsoever on you presenting evidence in the Longevity case, even if it is against the filing party. When ArbCom opens a case, it examines the behaviour of all parties involved, irrespective of whether they are the filing party or a named party. Therefore you are entitled to present evidence against him. The case is still in the evidence stage, so I see no barriers whatsoever to you bringing up your concerns there. If you need any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact lead clerk User:NuclearWarfare, myself, or any other ArbCom clerk. Regards Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 06:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)