Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment/Archive 100: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
m Fixing Lint errors from Wikipedia:Linter/Signature submissions (Task 31) Tags: Fixed lint errors paws [2.2] |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 337:
:''Best practice is to '''add editnotices to restricted pages where appropriate, using the standard template ({{tl|ds/editnotice}})'''.''
If it has been found sufficient in all the previous ARCA's I can recall about this, I imagine Arbs wouldn't change this rule suddenly for administrators now. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
::{{re|DGG}} {{re|Callanecc}} I'd be interested to hear your thoughts, since you've already commented below (seemingly without the realization that ArbCom wrote the policy to be used exactly as Ed used it here). <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
:::{{re|Callanecc}} Then why was this not stipulated at the last [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment&oldid=731850970#Clarification_request:_American_politics_2 ARCA] I'm clearly referring to? <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
::::{{ping|Callanecc}} Perhaps a motion to add something to the effect of "if an editnotice is used to alert editors of active page restrictions, and the editor has not been previously warned (in the required time frame), administrators should allow the editor at least 5-20 minutes [Committee should decide what time] to undo their offending edit(s) prior to being blocked or otherwise sanctioned" to the alerts section of [[WP:AC/DS]]? <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
::::{{re|Callanecc}} I rather like that one too... would definitely clear this up finally. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
::::{{re|Callanecc}} I refuse to sanction editors who are shown to be using the mobile or visual editors (this is always tagged in the history). Can we not make this an official policy until the devs fix that issue with warnings? Something to the order of: "if the offending edit is tagged as a mobile or Visual edit, administrators should not block for more than 24 hours unless the editor's knowledge of the page restrictions is clearly established"? Or would it be better to wait on the developers to have the notice more prominent in those two GUIs? <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
:::::My biggest concern obviously is that putting it into written form makes it rather easier to game the DS system. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
::::::I will note I disagree with the use of green for any ArbCom editnotice. I was under the impression we could only use {{tl|ds/editnotice}} anyways, is that not correct {{u|Doug Weller}}, {{u|Callanecc}}, {{u|Krakatoa Katie}}? <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">— [[User:Coffee|<big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee</big>]] // [[user talk:Coffee|<
=== Statement by Galobtter ===
Line 475:
=== Discretionary Sanctions: Motion ===
:
The [[Special:Permalink/816542391#Page_restrictions|Page restrictions]] section of the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions procedure]] is modified to the following:
Line 541:
#[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram#SarekOfVulcan–Doncram interaction ban]]
; List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:
*{{admin|SarekOfVulcan}} (initiator)
*{{userlinks|Doncram}}
; Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. -->
*{{diff|User talk:Doncram|820962964|820779375|Doncram notified}}
Line 584:
{{ivmbox|1=Remedy 5 (SarekOfVulcan–Doncram interaction ban) of the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram|Doncram]] arbitration case is suspended for a period of six months. During the period of suspension, this restriction may be reinstated by any uninvolved administrator as an [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement]] action should either SarekOfVulcan or Doncram fail to adhere to Wikipedia editing standards in their interactions with each other. Appeal of such a reinstatement would follow the normal [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Standard provision: appeals and modifications|arbitration enforcement appeals process]]. After six months from the date this motion is enacted, if the restriction has not been reinstated or any reinstatements have been successfully appealed, the restriction will automatically lapse.}}
:'''Enacted:''' '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·'''  [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·'''  [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 23:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
:
; Support
# Proposing in line with above comments. ~ [[User:BU Rob13|<b>Rob</b><small><sub>13</sub></small>]]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">[[User talk:BU Rob13|Talk]]</sup> 13:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Line 617:
[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88#Hijiri88: 1RR]]
; List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:
*{{userlinks|Hijiri88}} (initiator)
Line 659:
{{ivmbox|[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88#Hijiri88: 1RR|Remedy 5]] (Hijiri88: 1RR) of the ''{{ArbCase|Catflap08 and Hijiri88}}'' arbitration case is suspended for a period of six months. During the period of suspension, this restriction may be reinstated by any uninvolved administrator, as an [[WP:AC/PR#Enforcement|arbitration enforcement action]], should Hijiri88 fail to adhere to any [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|normal editorial process or expectations]] related to [[WP:EW|edit-warring]] or [[WP:DE|disruptive editing]]. After six months from the date this motion is enacted, if the restriction has not been reinstated or any reinstatements have been successfully appealed to the Arbitration Committee, the restriction will automatically lapse.}}
:'''Enacted''': '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·'''  [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·'''  [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 00:14, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
:
;Support
#Similar to what we've done with the previous two motions. ~ [[User:BU Rob13|<b>Rob</b><small><sub>13</sub></small>]]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">[[User talk:BU Rob13|Talk]]</sup> 22:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
| |||