Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by L235 (talk | contribs) at 21:20, 19 August 2015 (section +notice). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A drafting arbitrator has directed that all discussion on all talk pages of this case be sectioned, not threaded. Therefore, with the exception of arbitrators and clerks, all editors must create a section for their statement and comment only in their own section. Thank you.

Case clerk: TBD Drafting arbitrator: TBD

Misplaced Pages Arbitration
About arbitrationTalk Arbitration policy (CU/OS) Guide to arbitration Noticeboard + Talk Search archived proceedings Ban appealsReport
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 ElectionsTalk History Clerks+ Talk Clerk procedures Conflict of interest reports
Audit Talk StatisticsTalk Reports (pre-2016)
Track related changes
v t e

Behaviour on this page: Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at a fair, well-informed decision. You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being rude or hostile, and to respond calmly to allegations against you. Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all). Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator or clerk, without further warning, by being banned from further participation in the case, or being blocked altogether. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or clerks, will be met with sanctions. Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.

I'm slightly lost on this case and some real life disruption has gotten in the way of serious contribution. I think I'm seeing some balanced solutions that would help with both the advocacy concerns and the weighting issues, where is the appropriate venue to pose solutions arbcom could enforce? SPACKlick (talk) 10:16, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

EllenCT's section

"confirming that a picture is not Muhammad"?!?

Almost a year ago I stopped editing the article, but I've occasionally participated on the talk page up until about half a year ago. I just today learned about this case, and stopped by to say I endorse Bluerasberry's initial statement saying that editing should generally be allowed to continue as it has been without topic bans, because from what I saw there was quite a bit of actual progress on improving the articles even when people were bickering. I have a feeling Britannica editors used to bicker behind the scenes too.

But anyway, then I saw stuff like "confirming that a picture is not Muhammad" from an IP here on the Workshop, and I don't know what to think. EllenCT (talk) 21:15, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected workshop page

 Clerk note: The workshop page of this case is now semi-protected due to persistent disruption of the workshop and evidence pages of this case. Non-autoconfirmed users who have workshop proposals may send them by email to the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)