Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Comments by Gronk Oz: More clarity on what is meant by "skepticism topics" would help |
→Comments by {username}: comments |
||
Line 34:
== Comments by Gronk Oz ==
Please excuse me for raising this same point again, but I am concerned about difficulties in interpreting and implementing the decision as it is currently written, because terms like "skepticism trade publications" and "skepticism topics, broadly construed" are so ambiguous. If I look at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Skepticism|WikiProject Skepticism]], the topics they list as being in the scope of skepticism include all of valid science, pseudoscience, valid philosophy, pseudophilosophy, cults, and pseudoarchaeology. I cannot read the minds of the drafters, but I would be surprised if they intended the remedies to extend as broadly as that. So it leaves the question of just what is intended to be included in the scope of the remedies - more clarity would really be appreciated.--[[User:Gronk Oz|Gronk Oz]] ([[User talk:Gronk Oz|talk]]) 00:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
==Comments by ScottishFinnishRadish==
Three things come to mind after reading the PD.
# I think it's bananas that the same reminder would be given to someone who called another editor "dear" once and got a bit heated, and the whole finding of fact written about Roxy the dog, who referred to her as part of a lynch mob.
# A topic ban for CSI, it's publications, writers and members eliminates the COI editing, and still allows other productive edits in the topic area.
# Does pseudoscience DS apply to the topics of skeptics, skepticism, and psychics?
[[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 00:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
== Comments by {username} ==
| |||