Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Scope?: new section |
→Scope?: Reply |
||
Line 99:
Some of the evidence is simply a list of objectionable edits by a person without any claims that they in any way coordinated their editing with anyone else. In my opinion, such behavior should be handled by an ANI case naming the editor. The reasons given for accepting this case (private evidence and outing concerns) simply don't apply to a lone individual's edits. --[[User:Guy Macon Alternate Account|Guy Macon Alternate Account]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon Alternate Account|talk]]) 01:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
:The same way a clear cut COI case with an arb saying they had received convincing evidence of COI editing would be handled at the COI noticeboard in a discussion naming the editor? [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 01:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
| |||