Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Clarification on the scope: clarify |
→Scope?: Reply |
||
Line 136:
::Not at all. Very helpful. I still would like a definitive answer from an arb, of course. --[[User:Guy Macon Alternate Account|Guy Macon Alternate Account]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon Alternate Account|talk]]) 17:54, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
:We had some discussion before opening the case (hence the delay) on the best title and way to scope this case.
:# The scope of the case is {{em|not}} all skepticism topics. This is for two reasons: 1) that's a broader scope than was evidenced as necessary in the request statements, and 2) we did not see a need to revisit [[WP:ARBPS]], which would have a strong overlap with skepticism as a whole.
:# The scope of the case {{em|includes}} GSOW per the case request. This is the predominant reason for the "coordinated editing" in the case name and scope as well as the reference to skepticism in the case name.
:# The scope of the case is not {{em|just}} GSOW. We saw in the case statements that there were other editors whose behavior needed to be examined (later named as parties) that indicated unresolved conduct disputes. This is the predominant reason for the "editing behavior" in the case scope and skepticism in the case name and scope.
:At the end of the day, named parties are directly in scope, in so far as their editing crosses into topics related to skepticism. We are particularly interested in evidence of coordinated editing in the topic area. Beyond that, we welcome evidence of problematic conduct if it is near the locus of items 2 and 3 above.
:We realize that's not the brightest set of lines. If other evidence indicates other problematic conduct in the area exists, it is reasonable to submit it as part of the arbitration process, part of which is to let people submit what they think is important for the arbitrators to review for issues.
:I hope that sufficiently answers questions of scope. [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 00:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
| |||