Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard/Archive 2

< Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee | Noticeboard
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Kirill Lokshin in topic Updated procedure for handling incoming mail
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SemBubenny

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. SemBubenny (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been found to have failed or refused to communicate with editors who have raised questions about his administrator actions. As such SemBubenny is admonished and warned to:

  • speedy-delete only articles that fall within the criteria for speedy deletion or are otherwise blatantly inappropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia, and to err on the side of caution in cases of doubt, unless the article contains BLP violations or implicates matters of similarly high concern;
  • provide clear explanations of his administrator actions and to respond promptly and civilly to questions and comments regarding such actions; and
  • not to take administrator action regarding any matter where he would be unable or unwilling to reasonably discuss any questions or concerns that may arise regarding that action.

Should SemBubenny continue to delete phobia articles outside of process, the user may be brought back to the Committee and a motion to desysop can be requested.

For the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Notification of injunction relating to RFAR/MZMcBride

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

MZMcBride is directed to refrain from using automated tools (including bots and scripts) to delete pages or nominate them for deletion while this arbitration case is pending. This is a temporary injunction and does not reflect any predetermination on the outcome of any issue in the case. This temporary injunction shall take effect immediately.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 23:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Discuss this

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above-linked Arbitration case has been updated following this request for clarification

ScienceApologist is banned from Wikipedia for three months for disruption, gaming and wikilawyering. The clock on his six-month topic ban restarts on his return and further instances of misbehaviour will be dealt with by longer bans. For the avoidance of any doubt, a topic ban means "entirely prohibited from editing articles within the topic". Requests by ScienceApologist for clarifications of whether articles are within scope are to be made by him to the Arbitration Committee by email.

Administrators are given interpretive leeway when reasonably enforcing arbitration decisions and are expected to explain their rationale at their earliest opportunity in discussion or edit summary. Formal clarifications are best articulated by the Arbitration Committee and may be sought by a request for clarification. SirFozzie has acted appropriately and within administrator discretion by interpreting the remedy and by clearly explaining his interpretation despite misunderstandings about the best form and forum in which to clarify his reasoning. The Committee thanks and commends him for this, and his considerable past efforts in helping in the difficult area of arbitration enforcement.

For the Arbitration Committee, Gazimoff 13:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.

In the event that any user mentioned by name in this decision engages in further disruptive editing on Ayn Rand or any related article or page (one year from the date of this decision or one year from the expiration of any topic ban applied to the user in this decision, whichever is later), the user may be banned from that page or from the entire topic of Ayn Rand for an appropriate length of time by any uninvolved administrator or have any other remedy reasonably tailored to the circumstances imposed, such as a revert limitation. Similarly, an uninvolved administrator may impose a topic ban, revert limitation, or other appropriate sanction against any other editor who edits Ayn Rand or related articles or pages disruptively, provided that a warning has first been given with a link to this decision.

Both experienced and new editors on articles related to Ayn Rand are cautioned that this topic has previously been the subject of disruptive editing by both admirers and critics of Rand's writings and philosophy. Editors are reminded that when working on highly contentious topics like this one, it is all the more important that all editors adhere to fundamental Wikipedia policies. They are encouraged to make use of the dispute resolution process, including mediation assistance from Mediation Cabal or the Mediation Committee, in connection with any ongoing disputes or when serious disputes arise that cannot be resolved through the ordinary editing process.

For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 03:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Aitias desysopped

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Aitias (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)'s adminship is temporarily suspended for six months (motion). This suspension will become permanent if he doesn't return within 6 months--in this case he can only regain adminship through an RFA (motion). If he does return to editing in that timeframe, he may request adminship back by a request to the committee or an RFA.

Arbitrators supporting: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, John Vandenberg, Vassyana, Wizardman.

Arbitrators opposing: none.

Arbitrators abstaining: none.

Arbitrators not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Kirill Lokshin, Sam Blacketer.

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Tweaked wording to reflect what was said in the motions, and updated list of arbitrators voting. Carcharoth (talk) 07:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Motions Re: Aitias

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The request for arbitration named above has been superseded by four motions that were passed by the Committee.

  • A motion was passed on 18 Mar 09 for this request for arbitration to be temporarily suspended for up to 72 hours to allow Aitias to officially advise the Committee during this time whether he intends to continue as an administrator. Should Aitias confirm that he will not resign as an administrator, or fail to respond within 72 hours, then the arbitration case will be opened unless otherwise directed by the committee.

By 22 Mar 09, Aitias (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has not voluntarily requested that his administrator access be removed. The Commitee then passed three additional motions, as of follow :

  • In order to avoid a ruling without the participation of the main party to the case, this request for arbitration is suspended until Aitias returns to editing. After this motion passes the Committee will invoke an immediate temporary suspension of his adminship. When Aitias returns to editing, he may contact the Committee and request the return of his adminship, which would trigger an additional ruling by the Committee about this current request for arbitration; or as an alternative, he may submit an RFA on his return to editing in lieu of a case.
  • The suspension of Aitias's adminship becomes a permanent desysop if he doesn't return within 6 months. Thereafter, Aitias may request adminship again through an RfA only.
  • Aitias is instructed to edit Wikipedia English with only the User:Aitias account until the issues in this dispute are resolved.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Mailer Diablo 14:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

New mail handling procedure

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee receives a substantial amount of e-mail each day on its mailing list, arbcom-l. To streamline the process of handling arbcom-l traffic and improve response times, the Committee has adopted a new procedure for handling incoming mail, which supersedes the current mailing list coordinator position.

The procedure was adopted by a 13/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Stephen Bain, Wizardman

The Committee wishes to thank Deskana for his diligence as mailing list coordinator over the past three months. Deskana went above and beyond the call of duty in continuing to assist the Committee despite having no obligation to do so following his retirement; if not for his efforts, the Committee would be in a significantly worse position at the moment.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 00:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

New ban appeals subcommittee and procedure

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

One of the Arbitration Committee's responsibilities is to address appeals received via e-mail from banned or long-term blocked users. To improve the level of attention and response time for these requests, the Committee has formed a Ban Appeals Subcommittee, which will consist of three arbitrators. This subcommittee will consider ban appeals and recommend actions regarding them to the Committee as a whole, as outlined in the newly adopted procedure for handling ban appeals.

The subcommittee was created by a 15/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Stephen Bain

The procedure was adopted by a 10/0 vote, with 2 abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: FayssalF, Vassyana
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FloNight, Risker, Stephen Bain

The subcommittee will begin work on April 1, and will initially consist of Carcharoth, FayssalF, and Roger Davies. It is likely that the membership of the subcommittee will be rotated approximately quarterly; further appointments will be announced at the appropriate time.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 00:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Notification of second injunction relating to RFAR/MZMcBride

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

The Arbitration Committee previously adopted an injunction passed on March 6, 2009, directing MZMcBride to refrain from using automated tools such as bots or scripts to delete pages while the case was pending. The purpose of this injunction was to allow time for the committee to address issues concerning MZMcBride's mass deletions of pages, which have been controversial and which some participants in this case have alleged violate policy.

Since the injunction was adopted, MZMcBride has deleted hundreds of additional pages, sometimes at a rate of dozens of pages per minute. MZMcBride has explained several times that these deletions have been effectuated using tabbed browsing, rather than by a bot or script. However, at least some of the concerns regarding the mass deletions remain the same as those covered by the injunction.

Accordingly, MZMcBride is directed to refrain from deleting pages while this case remains pending, with the exception of obvious attack, nonsense, or vandalism pages. There is no restriction against his proposing lists of pages to be deleted by other administrators, provided that the deleting administrator exercises his or her own judgment in determining that deletion is appropriate.

This temporary injunction shall take effect immediately and shall remain in effect until the case is closed. It does not reflect any prejudgment of the merits of the case. The committee shall take reasonable steps to expedite the resolution of this case, thereby producing a final decision that will supersede this and the prior temporary injunction.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 22:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Designated drafting arbitrators

To assist with managing case workflow, and to provide a default point of contact for case matters, the initials of the designated drafting arbitrator(s) for each case will now be displayed on {{ArbComOpenTasks}} next to those of the designated clerk(s) for that case.

This proposal was approved by a 10/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Sam Blacketer, Stephen Bain

Archived discussion

Full clerkships

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Arbitration clerk trainees User:Mailer diablo, User:MBisanz, and User:Tiptoety have been granted full clerkships by the arbiration committee. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding User:Mitchazenia

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Per a motion at WP:RFAR, Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) may regain his adminship via RFA, request to the arbitration committee, or request to bureaucrat.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 18:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

  • MZMcBride (talk · contribs) resigned his status as an administrator on April 6, 2009, while the above arbitration case was pending. Should MZMcBride request restoration of adminship privileges, he will be required to submit a request for adminship or request approval of the Committee.
  • MZMcBride is directed to consult with and obtain approval from the Bot Approvals Group before using any bot to edit Wikipedia and particularly before using any bot to undertake administrator actions.
  • MZMcBride and those working with him are commended for developing an innovative method to identify articles with potential BLP issues, but are strongly urged to consult and carefully consider whether the current location and nature of the listing of the output of the script represents the most appropriate means of addressing the issues raised.
  • MZMcBride is directed to create user accounts distinct from his own, clearly identified as bots and clearly associated to his primary account, from which to execute any automated or semi automated task that can make edits or administrative actions.
  • MZMcBride is restricted from making edits or actions from his primary account that are either (a) automated, or (b) at a rate higher than twelve actions per minute. Edits or actions made from authorized bot accounts are not so restricted.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 23:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Draft arbitration policy

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Committee has prepared a provisional draft of an updated arbitration policy for initial community review. All editors are invited to examine the text and to provide any comments or suggestions they may have via one of the two methods specified on the draft page.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 00:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Agenda as of April 8

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee's agenda as of April 8 has now been published, and may be viewed at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Agenda.

In order to provide the community with a more up-to-date understanding of the Committee's plans, the published agenda will now be updated on a regular schedule (nominally once a week). Future updates will not be formally announced; editors interested in following the agenda may wish to watchlist it. The agenda will also remain displayed at the top of the Committee's noticeboard.

In the near future, we anticipate adding cases in progress and the associated milestone dates to the agenda.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 01:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Audit Subcommittee established

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

To provide better monitoring and oversight, the Arbitration Committee has decided to establish an Audit Subcommittee, which will investigate complaints concerning the use of CheckUser and Oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia. The subcommittee shall consist of three arbitrators appointed by the Committee and three editors elected by the community. The Committee shall designate an initial slate of three editors until elections can be held.

This proposal was approved by a 12/0 vote, with one abstention:

  • Support: Casliber, Carcharoth, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Roger Davies, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: Rlevse
  • Not voting: Newyorkbrad, Sam Blacketer, Stephen Bain

The initial membership, the procedures for the subcommittee, and more details on the election process will be published in the near future.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 22:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Notification of injunction relating to West Bank - Judea and Samaria

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

Due to his repeated failure to abide by reasonable standards of conduct in arbitration, Malcolm Schosha (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is prohibited from editing the pages of this arbitration case. He may, at his discretion, send his comments directly to the Committee via e-mail.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, KnightLago (talk) 03:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Relocation of arbitration pages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In order to simplify and streamline the arbitration process, the Arbitration Committee has decided to reorganize and relocate various arbitration-related pages, as outlined below:

Phase 1 (administrative pages)

Phase 1A relocates and consolidates the core administrative pages.

Phase 1B consolidates the core administrative talk pages.

Structure after Phase 1

Phase 2 (arbitration requests and cases)

Phase 2A relocates and consolidates the active arbitration case and request pages.

Phase 2B relocates and consolidates the arbitration case and request archives.

Phase 2C relocates and consolidates the active arbitration enforcement pages.

Structure after Phase 2

This proposal was adopted by a 9/0 vote, with one abstention:

  • Support: Casliber, Carcharoth, FloNight, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: John Vandenberg
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Stephen Bain

Any comments regarding the planned changes should be made by April 25. Unless the Committee determines otherwise based on comments received, implementation of Phase 1 will begin on April 26, to be completed by May 1, and implementation of Phase 2 will begin on May 2, to be completed by May 8.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 02:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Audit Subcommittee procedure, term lengths, and members

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee has adopted a provisional procedure for CU/OS auditing to be used by the newly formed Audit Subcommittee. The Committee anticipates that the procedure may be revised in the future based on the recommendations of the subcommittee.

The procedure was adopted by an 11/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain, Vassyana

The Committee has also determined that arbitrator members of the subcommittee will be designated to serve six-month terms, and that the other members will be elected to twelve-month terms.

The arbitrator term length was adopted by a 12/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain

The elected term length was adopted by a 13/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Risker, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Newyorkbrad, Stephen Bain

The initial arbitrator members of the subcommittee will be FloNight, John Vandenberg, and Roger Davies. Interim appointments to the other slots will be announced shortly.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 02:40, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Notification of injunction relating to Macedonia 2

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia 2, have voted to implement a temporary injunction. It can be viewed on the case page by following this link. The injunction is as follows:

No Macedonia-related article, broadly defined, shall be moved/renamed until after the "Macedonia 2" case closes. If it does occur, any uninvolved administrator can expeditiously revert it. After the case closes, Macedonia-related moves/renames can occur as prescribed in the final decision.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, KnightLago (talk) 13:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

RFAR/Prem Rawat 2

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Momento (talk · contribs) and Rumiton (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Prem Rawat or any related article (including talk pages) for one year. The Prem Rawat article and all related articles are subject to revert limitations for one year. Several users are admonished for their conduct in the case and all parties and other interested editors are encouraged to restart mediation in relation to Prem Rawat. Also, should Jossi (talk · contribs) return to Wikipedia to edit Prem Rawat articles, he is required to contact the Arbitration Committee beforehand. These remedies are in addition to, and do not replace, the remedies passed in RFAR/Prem Rawat.

For the Committee. MBisanz talk 02:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Case milestones on the agenda

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As promised earlier, the Committee's agenda has been updated to indicate milestone dates for the Aitias, Ryulong, and West Bank - Judea and Samaria cases. We anticipate that all future cases will be tracked in this manner.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 00:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Procedure for temporary removal of permissions

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee has adopted a procedure for authorizing the temporary removal of advanced permissions in cases where the Committee must undertake such removal expediently.

The use of this procedure by the Committee is not intended to constrain the authority of the Wikimedia Stewards to undertake emergency removal of permissions on their own discretion, pursuant to the relevant policies governing Steward actions.

The procedure was adopted by an 9/0 vote, with two abstentions:

  • Support: Casliber, Coren, FayssalF, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Roger Davies, Vassyana
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: Carcharoth, Sam Blacketer
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Stephen Bain, Wizardman

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 01:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Interim appointments to the Audit Subcommittee

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee has appointed Mackensen, Thatcher, and Tznkai to fill the non-arbitrator seats on the Audit Subcommittee in the interim until elections are held. Together with the three arbitrators whose appointment was announced earlier, these editors will conduct investigations into CheckUser- and Oversight-related complaints, as well as providing feedback to the Committee regarding the provisional procedures established for the auditing process.

For the Committee, Kirill [pf] 01:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Revised plan for relocating arbitration pages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In light of the comments received regarding the previously published plan for relocating arbitration pages, the Committee has adopted a revised final page structure:

The new plan was adopted by an 8/0 vote, with one abstention:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Coren, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Roger Davies, Vassyana
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: Risker
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, FayssalF, FloNight, Rlevse, Sam Blacketer, Stephen Bain, Wizardman

For the Committee, Kirill [talk] [pf] 01:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Full revised plan
Phase 1 (administrative pages)

Phase 1A relocates and consolidates the core administrative pages.

Phase 1B consolidates the core administrative talk pages.

Structure after Phase 1

Phase 2 (arbitration requests and cases)

Phase 2A relocates and consolidates the active arbitration case and request pages.

Phase 2B relocates and consolidates the arbitration case and request archives.

Phase 2C relocates and consolidates the active arbitration enforcement pages.

Archived discussion

Checkuser usage statistics

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee has authorised the Audit Subcommittee to release a redacted and anonymised version of a report analysing checkuser operator use for the period to 24 Apr 2009. The report is here.

Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, Kirill Lokshin, Rlevse, Risker, Stephen Bain, Vassyana, and Wizardman.
Abstain (as sitting AUSC members): FloNight, Jayvdb, Roger Davies

For the Arbitration Committee,

 Roger Davies talk 12:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Updated procedure for handling incoming mail

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Arbitration Committee has updated its procedure for handling incoming mail.

The updated procedure was adopted by an 11/0 vote, with no abstentions:

  • Support: Carcharoth, Casliber, FloNight, John Vandenberg, Kirill Lokshin, Newyorkbrad, Risker, Roger Davies, Sam Blacketer, Vassyana, Wizardman
  • Oppose: None
  • Abstain: None
  • Not voting: Cool Hand Luke, Coren, FayssalF, Rlevse, Stephen Bain

For the Committee, Kirill [talk] [pf] 20:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Archived discussion

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard/Archive_2&oldid=1190129743"