Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hipocrite (talk | contribs) at 09:21, 20 March 2012 (→Arbitration Committee Review: Racist). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 1 12/2008 01/2009 02/2009 03/2009 04/2009 05/2009 06/2009 07/2009 09/2009 10/2009 11/2009 12/2009 cfwar 01/2010 02/2010 03/2010 04/2010 05/2010 06/2010 07/2010 08/2010 09/2010 10/2010 11/2010 12/2010 02/2011 03/2011 04/2011 05/2011 09/2011 10/2011 11/2011 12/2011 01/2012 02/2012 03/2012 04/2012 05/2012 06/2012 07/2012 08/2012 09/2012 10/2012 11/2012 12/2012 01/2013 02/2013 03/2013 04/2013 05/2013 06/2013 01/2014 02/2014 04/2014 05/2014 06/2014 GGsockfarms 12/2014 01/2015 02/2015 03/2015 04/2015 07/2015 11/2015 01/2016 11/2016 02/2017 10/2017 12/2017 11/2018 08/2020 11/2020 04/2021 05/2021 06/2021 07/2021 08/2021 09/2021 10/2021 11/2021 12/2021 01/2022 02/2022 03/2022 04/2022 05/2022 06/2022 07/2022 08/2022 09/2022 10/2022 11/2022 12/2022 01/2023 02/2023 03/2023 04/2023 05/2023 06/2023 07/2023 08/2023 09/2023 11/2023 05/2024 Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.

Arbitration Committee Review

Please be advised that the Arbitration Committee has now opened a Review of the background relating to the Request for Amendment at which you submitted a statement. A Review is a streamlined version of case, with a short window for presenting evidence.

The Committee invites any evidence you may wish to give directly related to any of the following matters:

1. Is Mathsci engaging in improper conduct in respect of Ferahgo the Assassin?
2. Is Mathsci being harassed by socks?
3. Should Mathsci be pursuing socks in the R&I topic?
4. Are the contributions of Ferahgo the Assassin and Captain Occam, outside of article space, functionally indistinguishable?
5. Should Ferahgo the Assassin be site-banned coterminously with Captain Occam per WP:SHARE?

Evidence should be presented on the review evidence page and should be posted by 26 March 2012 at the very latest.

For the Arbitration Committee

Mlpearc (powwow) 16:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, I have caped your comments as they are outside of the reviews scope. If you would like to address the questions asked in the review, please feel free to do so.
Mlpearc (powwow) 16:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Evidence of meatpuppetry goes directly to Qs 1, 2, and 3. Did a member of arbitration committee ask you to hat my comments? If so, who? Was the entire committee aware of this request? Hipocrite (talk) 17:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

To clarify this, what we are looking for is specific evidence of harassment against Mathsci, which would obviously include diffs showing those who are engaged in it. In any event, you have not produced evidence of harassment, nor of meatpuppetry, just evidence that people may know each other off-wiki.  Roger Davies 11:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

So, I do a lot of work in statistics. What do you think the chances are that two people who are dinosaur picture friends just happen to show up at wikipedia and be Racist friends as well, after one of those two people gets banned? Hipocrite (talk) 11:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Further, are you speaking for you, or for more than you? Hipocrite (talk) 11:29, 19 Marh 2012 (UTC)

Isn't this putting the cart before the horse? Surely establishing whether harassment has taken place is an essential step before deciding what to do about it? And, in any event, on-wiki activity (ie harassment and hounding) is a lot easier for the committee to determine and deal with than less tangible material about off-wiki activity/relationships (and what X might have said to Y). After all, if the facts were as compelling as you suggest, then this would/could have been dealt with at WP:SPI or WP:AE long ago. The reality is that every discussion involving these three editors gets bogged down with a mass of allegations and counter-allegations, at the expense of the core issues. That's what we (and by we I mean the committee, see the motion discussion for details) is explicitly trying to do here. So, if there is evidence of harassment, I'd very much like to see.  Roger Davies 11:50, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand your request for evidence. Do you understand my question about the chances that dinosaur picture friends show up to be racist friends, or my question about who, exactly, you are speaking for? Hipocrite (talk) 11:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not a racist, and nothing I have ever said or done - on wiki or off - warrants that personal attack. Please redact it. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 02:28, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you denying that some of your friends are unabashed racists? I have links for you - you, of course, already have them. Hipocrite (talk) 09:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Formal organization

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Formal organization. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Opponents of same-sex marriage in the United States

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Opponents of same-sex marriage in the United States. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)