Misplaced Pages

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Palestine-Israel articles 5 arbitration case opened

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Sean.hoyland (talk) 03:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Pitch for Workshop (bad idea, second edition)

Hello @Sean.hoyland, I’m planning to suggest this at the workshop for the Arb case as a slightly modified version. Any thoughts/issues from your side, or is it good to go?

Consensus board

Through the invocation of “at wit’s end”, a content resolution board (hereafter: board) is created. If two methods of creating a consensus have failed to create a stable version of an article or there is a comparable kind of long-term dispute, they may be called upon by any editor involved in the dispute or any admin. The board is tasked with creating language or making a decision regarding sources, to create a resolution that is most acceptable to all parties involved. Thereafter, they present a proposal, which is then put to a formalized community discussion and is considered to have community consensus unless there is consensus against its implementation. The board is made up of 5 members: one uninvolved administrator, elected by the community except editors involved in ARBPIA, and two members of each “faction”, elected by involved editors voluntarily (but reasonably) grouping themselves into two sides. Internally, the proposal requires a simple majority, but at least one vote from each faction. Members of the board are elected for one year and may be sanctioned based on private evidence provided to Arbcom if they intentionally disrupt the process. Voters or candidates have leeway when it comes to their category, but grouping oneself in a wholly unreasonable way may be sanctioned by AE or the community. FortunateSons (talk) 12:31, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@The Kip courtesy ping, as you participate as well FortunateSons (talk) 12:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

I think you should go for it regardless of what I think. I have reservations about normalizing factionalism, but I think it's probably much more important to just get as many ideas into the mix as possible at this stage rather than worry about the details. Sean.hoyland (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

I will do that, thank you for your help! FortunateSons (talk) 12:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Sean.hoyland, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Abishe (talk) 23:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 23:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Flagging possible sock puppet

Hey there, I've seen you do some great work finding socks and I think I may have found one. This user who does very contentious edits in Israel-Palestine has edited the exact same content as this user on several occasions. Their editing styles and the content in general also overlap, and they're both recently EC-obtained editors who moved to contentious edits in Israel-Palestine. Can you look into this and see if there's anything here? Thank you.

Here are the relevant diffs:

The Axis page talk discussion on the lede that was restored by them had many socks involved, so there may be a connection between them and those. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 23:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)