This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Novickas (talk | contribs) at 03:59, 17 November 2008 (2 objections: to BtheCat banned, on grounds of multiple (not easily counted) Gbook references; to KL's involvement in light of !vote Piotrus award). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 03:59, 17 November 2008 by Novickas (talk | contribs) (2 objections: to BtheCat banned, on grounds of multiple (not easily counted) Gbook references; to KL's involvement in light of !vote Piotrus award)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Arbitrators active on this case
- To update this listing, edit this template and scroll down until you find the right list of arbitrators. If updates to this listing do not immediately show, try purging the cache.
Clerical comments on the proposed decision
If I may, a few suggestions:
- In finding 4, "Regrettable" should not be capitalised.
- In finding 6.1, "the Russian regime" should read "the Russian government", because the choice of the pejorative (to my ears) term "regime" may create the appearance of prejudice, particularly given the subject matter of the case.
- In finding 10, I suggest that "fear-mongering" be replaced with a term more in keeping with the measured tone expected from an Arbitration Committee decision.
I have no opinion on the merits of the case, or of the proposed decision. Sandstein 22:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Two objections
- Strongly oppose banning Boodlesthecat. I wish there were some quick and easy tool-based way to quantify this: he has added scores of reliable and easily verifiable EN Google book references to articles.
- Re Kirill in this case. Sorry, but in light of K's support of an award to Piotrus I think he should have recused himself here. Novickas (talk) 03:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)