Misplaced Pages

talk:Arbitration/Requests/Motions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration | Requests

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DuncanHill (talk | contribs) at 15:49, 1 August 2009 (Geogre: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:49, 1 August 2009 by DuncanHill (talk | contribs) (Geogre: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This talk page is for discussion related to motions currently being voted on. For discussion on requests for arbitration, see Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration.

User;Tajik

User:Tajik was permabanned by Thatcher following Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/E104421-Tajik. No and again Tajik surfaces with his sockpuppets that we have to block. Still all those sockpuppets appear to be productive users, who generate minimum disruptions. It appears that at least part of the abusive socks that caused Tajik to be permabanned were misattributed. User:E104421, tha main Tajik's opponent does not object to Tajik's return and even asked for this on Jimbo's talkpage. It is already more than 6 months since Tajik is permablocked and while he occasionally appeared onwiki using socks he seems to work as a productive and disciplined user. It seems to be a misuse of resources to block productive accounts only for being Tajik's socks. Is it possible to give him some sort of the last chance? Alex Bakharev (talk) 09:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

A-A 2

Are we completely wiping the remedies from the first as well as the second case (meaning that the article probations are lifted)? - Penwhale | 15:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The article probations are subsumed into this remedy; anything authorized by them is also authorized by this broader one. The individual editor sanctions of the first case remain, though, as do any already imposed under the second case. Kirill 01:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Geogre

Where has the case been archived to? DuncanHill (talk) 15:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)