Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia


Article Images

Content deleted Content added

Line 389:

There is nothing for arbcom to do here. People who are concerned about disruption in the topic area should raise it at one of the community noticeboards. A sprawling, unfocused case with lots of parties, is a terrible idea, as has been proven multiple times by past arbcoms, and this is especially true in the absence of any showing that the community is unable to handle this. The only thing worse would be a topic-wide sanction; please don't do that, I fear it would trigger a "constitutional crisis" and waste more editor time. [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 14:22, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

----

:Just a heads up: if a case is opened, I will ask arbcom to name as parties and review the conduct of all the editors, admins and non-admins alike, who, on this page, are casting [[WP:ASPERSIONS]]. Those of you who have done so may want to either strike your comments or add some diffs to support your allegations, before arbcom gets around to asking who the parties should be. [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 16:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

----

Re: {{u|BilledMammal}}'s comment that {{tqq|26 replies out of 59 by Levivich at [[Talk:Zionism#Colonial project?]] were to sock puppets ... The impact of sock puppets on this issue is trivial and not worth concerning ourselves with.}} 26 replies were to ''confirmed'' sock puppets, and I rather strongly disagree that it's trivial and not worth concerning ourselves with, though of course I value my own time more than others value my time. :-P [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 01:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

----

The way my report against HaOfa "sprawled" is because [[Special:Diff/1239919256|the first admin comment]] made the "other people do it, too" argument and listed a bunch of other editors, and it went downhill from there, as those editors predictably defended themselves and the discussion focused on their conduct rather than HaOfa's (despite my attempts to refocus it). I agree with TBF that an AE referral means Arbcom should review my report against HaOfa -- meaning, look at my conduct and HaOfa's conduct -- and complaints about other editors should be brought separately, with diffs not aspersions, and a showing that some other conduct dispute resolution was first tried. Because even if Arbcom ''does'' open a case, who will the parties be, and how will Arbcom decide? It requires someone presenting some evidence... in other words, an [[WP:ARC]]. Only HaOfa and I are relevant to this AE, and with HaOfa not editing since the filing, I don't think it's necessary or a good use of Arbcom's time to look at HaOfa's conduct. [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 01:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

=== Statement by האופה ===