Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence/Review/Evidence: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration | Requests | Case | Race and intelligence | Review Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:32, 18 March 2012 editHipocrite (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,615 edits →Meatpuppetry: new section← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:26, 19 March 2012 edit undoRoger Davies (talk \| contribs)Administrators34,587 edits →Meatpuppetry: YesNext edit →
Line 4:		Line 4:

	Is it the position of the committee that Meatpuppetry, as described in our sockpuppetry policy at ] is beyond the scope of this review? ] (]) 17:32, 18 March 2012 (UTC)		Is it the position of the committee that Meatpuppetry, as described in our sockpuppetry policy at ] is beyond the scope of this review? ] (]) 17:32, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
			:Yes. This review is restricted to matters directly arising out of the five questions in the ].  ] <sup>]</sup> 05:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:26, 19 March 2012

Main review page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk) — Original case page

Review clerk: ] (]) Drafting arbitrator: TBD

Misplaced Pages Arbitration

About arbitration Talk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appeals Report
Open proceedings All open requests Case requests Clarification and Amendment requests Arbitrator motion requests Enforcement requests
Active sanctions Contentious topics (Log) General sanctions Editor sanctions
Arbitration Committee Discuss + Contact Members Procedures Elections Talk History Clerks + Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk Statistics Talk Reports (pre-2016)

Track related changes
v t e

Meatpuppetry

Is it the position of the committee that Meatpuppetry, as described in our sockpuppetry policy at WP:SOCK is beyond the scope of this review? Hipocrite (talk) 17:32, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes. This review is restricted to matters directly arising out of the five questions in the scope. Roger Davies 05:26, 19 March 2012 (UTC)