Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question/Evidence: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Evidence presented by Johnuniq: add information on comments by NinaGreen |
→NinaGreen's use of article talkspace is contrary to guidelines: signing yesterdays presentation |
||
Line 262:
*'''Be concise'''; [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=NinaGreen Take your pick of any half a dozen...]<br>
*[[Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable|When describing other people's contributions or edits, use diffs]]; Unable to supply an example of NinaGreen specifically not using a diff, but also unable to supply an example of one being used.<br>
I reget, truly, that I have felt compelled to make this addition - I have said many times that this case was not brought for the review of one or a couple of persons actions, but to resolve a long standing issue of the avoidance of standard practices and misapplication of policy in a possible attempt to allow a [[WP:UNDUE]] referencing of one or more particular claimants of the authorship of the works of William Shakespeare - but NinaGreen has several times in the ongoing ArbCom case made claim that the case is "against her". It is not, but it is apparent that NinaGreen has acted and continues to act contrary to WP guideline, and remains unfamiliar with WP policy and practice. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] 13:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
==Evidence presented by Xover==
| |||