| Revision as of 12:14, 26 September 2024 editSilverLocust (talk | contribs)Administrators24,824 edits →Arbitration case opened: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:06, 13 November 2024 edit undoSilverLocust (talk | contribs)Administrators24,824 edits →[] closed: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| You were recently listed as a party to 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 October 10, 2024, 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, ] ] 12:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC) | You were recently listed as a party to 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 October 10, 2024, 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, ] ] 12:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC) | ||
| == ] closed == | |||
| An arbitration case ] (formerly titled ]) has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted: | |||
| * Yasuke is designated as a ]. Starting in 2026 and checked yearly afterwards, this designation expires on 1 January if no sanctions have been logged in the preceding 2 years. | |||
| * The article ] is subject to a ] restriction for a period of one year. | |||
| * ] is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
| * ] is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
| * ] is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
| * ] is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
| * ] is warned that disruptive behavior will lead to increasing sanctions if they continue. | |||
| * ] is subject to a one-way interaction ban with Gitz6666, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter. | |||
| For the Arbitration Committee, ] (]) 23:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : Discuss this at: '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard|Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Yasuke closed}}''' | |||
Revision as of 23:06, 13 November 2024
Heraldry and Vexillology project
Greetings! I have requested commentary from members of the heraldry and vexillology project at WT:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology#Current direction of the HV project. Please comment there. Thank you! Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 18:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Pomerania during the High Middle Ages
Hi, Tinynanorobots. Despite what Volunteer Marek says in his last edit summary, deleting large chunks of text without an explanation, especially (but not only) when it includes citations, is not okay here. would you please explain any deletion in your edit summary? Someone has worked to create each section. If it is worthless, then please say why that is in your edit summary. If it has some value but does not belong here, then please move it to another article or else create a new one to put it into. Moonraker (talk) 02:46, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
- Actually deleting large chunk of unsourced text is just fine, and in fact it's good practice (it's pretty much what real life "editors" mostly do). When the text is sourced then yes, before deleting explanation should be provided. But in this case, at least for some of the deletions it looked to me like it was provided, on talk. Volunteer Marek 18:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Featuring your work on Misplaced Pages's front page: DYKs
|
Thank you for your recent articles, including Ostsiedlung in Pomerania, which I read with interest. When you create an extensive and well referenced article, you may want to have it featured on Misplaced Pages's main page in the Did You Know section. Articles included there will be read by thousands of our viewers. To do so, add your article to the list at T:TDYK. Let me know if you need help, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC) |
WikiProject assessment tags for talk pages
|
Thank you for your recent articles, including Ostsiedlung in Pomerania, which I read with interest. When you create a new article, can you add the WikiProject assessment templates to the talk of that article? See the talk page of the article I mentioned for an example of what I mean. Usually it is very simple, you just add something like {{WikiProject Keyword}} to the article's talk, with keyword replaced by the associated WikiProject (ex. if it's a biography article, you would use WikiProject Biography; if it's a United States article, you would use WikiProject United States, and so on). You do not have to rate the article if you do not want to, others will do it eventually. Those templates are very useful, as they bring the articles to a WikiProject attention, and allow them to start tracking the articles through Misplaced Pages:Article alerts and other tools. This can help you too, as the WikiProject members will often defend your work from deletion and try to improve it further. Feel free to ask me any questions if you'd like more information. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC) |
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yasuke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bushi. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:59, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
About Yasuke
94-kun here and I noticed that you're trying your best to make sure that Yasuke is simply a retainer and not a samurai. 94-kun (talk) 22:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- That is not what I am doing and not how I see things. I don’t know why you are getting at. I am trying my best to make sure that poor sources aren’t used and that problematic sources aren’t depicted as flawless. If Yasuke was a retainer, it still wouldn’t be simple. Tinynanorobots (talk) 15:11, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have a really good point. I'm sorry for my own confusion. 94-kun (talk) 05:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Unaccounted removals of sources
Please don't remove sources from Yasuke after multiple editors have objected. Most importantly, if you do remove sources or content, please give a brief explanation in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of sources against consensus can be seen as disruptive. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:44, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- You know why those sources were removed. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your reason for removing them (though I don't agree with it). However, I don't understand why you didn't describe what you were doing in the edit summaries. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- I was distracted when making the edits and I forgot. Tinynanorobots (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- I understand your reason for removing them (though I don't agree with it). However, I don't understand why you didn't describe what you were doing in the edit summaries. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
AGF
I think you really need to read wp:agf and wp:npa. Slatersteven (talk) 12:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies and thanks for point it out. I have changed what I believe to be the problem text. Again apologies. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Ongoing problems surrounding Yasuke and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, Yvan Part (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Arbitration case opened
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 10, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 12:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Yasuke closed
An arbitration case Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Yasuke (formerly titled Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- Yasuke is designated as a contentious topic. Starting in 2026 and checked yearly afterwards, this designation expires on 1 January if no sanctions have been logged in the preceding 2 years.
- The article Yasuke is subject to a 1RR restriction for a period of one year.
- Eirikr is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Symphony Regalia is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- J2UDY7r00CRjH is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Yvan Part is topic banned from Yasuke, broadly construed. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Gitz6666 is warned that disruptive behavior will lead to increasing sanctions if they continue.
- Elinruby is subject to a one-way interaction ban with Gitz6666, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)