Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question/Evidence: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Evidence by Bishonen about Smatprt's topic ban appeal
Line 814:
In closing I would like to offer this statement by Xover,[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_mediation/Shakespeare_authorship_question#Xover] one of the mainstream editors involved in the larger ArbCom case. While holding opposing viewpoints on many matters, I found his summary of the situation insightful and respectful. Thank you for allowing me to present this topic-ban appeal. Respectfully, [[User:Smatprt|Smatprt]] ([[User talk:Smatprt|talk]]) 19:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 
<font color = "green">
==Evidence by Bishonen regarding Smatprt's topic ban==
I have submitted evidence regarding the general SAQ case [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare_authorship_question/Evidence&oldid=412966990#Evidence_by_Bishonen above], but I still permit myself to create a short section here for evidence on the issue of Smatprt's topic ban. That's because a) it's a completely separate thing from the larger case, b) it's exactly what Smatprt himself does, and c) I suspect it's the only way to get people to catch sight of this new section. (It's green for newness, like my additions above. I hope that's not offensive.)
 
I only want to make one point, which is to do with Smatprt's presentation and its (lack of) clarity. Smatprt: you give many diffs to single posts, including some from the long ANI thread which is the background to your topic ban; but you don't give a link to that ANI thread itself! (If it's in your text somewhere, I apologise, but I've been looking and I can't find it.) That means that the reader has no overview of what you yourself call "the topic ban hearing", and little chance of forming their own opinion; all they have is a personally conducted tour of what you want to show them. I'm not suggesting that you did that on purpose, nor that there are highly alarming things in the whole thread that you leave out; but only that it's what the reader needs for context. So, dear reader, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents/Smatprt&oldid=394677839 here] is the ANI thread which forms the main background to Smatprt's topic ban. It's pretty long, I'm afraid. Still. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 23:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC). </font>
 
==Evidence presented by {Write your user name here}==
''before using the last evidence template, please make a copy for the next person''