Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Proposed decision: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Comments by Rhododendrites: Reply |
|||
Line 205:
== Comments by 2601:647:5800:1A1F:50AB:FFB9:DD80:EFC5 ==
In case you're wondering, I'm the IP who participated in the workshop of this case a few weeks ago. All I have to say is to thank the Arbs for taking their time to deliberate on the complex situation that was put in front of them, and for creating a brilliant, creative proposed decision to resolve the case. I especially like the "Principles" section, because the principles are well-crafted, creative, and important standards for future coordinated editing in case something like this happens again. Once again, thank you Arbs for taking the time to resolve this dispute fairly and thoughtfully. [[Special:Contributions/2601:647:5800:1A1F:50AB:FFB9:DD80:EFC5|2601:647:5800:1A1F:50AB:FFB9:DD80:EFC5]] ([[User talk:2601:647:5800:1A1F:50AB:FFB9:DD80:EFC5|talk]]) 06:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
:A special thank you to @[[User:L235|L235]], @[[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] and @[[User:Izno|Izno]] who put in a lot of work here [[User:Worm That Turned|<b style="color:#000;">''Worm''</b>]]<sup>TT</sup>([[User talk:Worm That Turned|<b style="color:#060;">talk</b>]]) 08:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
== Comments by Rhododendrites ==
| |||