Wiki143 talk:Requests for arbitration/-Ril-/Proposed decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 01:29, 2 June 2024 by imported>Steel1943 (Steel1943 moved page Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/-Ril-/Proposed decision to Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/-Ril-/Proposed decision over a redirect without leaving a redirect: Undoing my recent moves to match parent page per recent developments at WT:ARB, not leaving redirects behind since the title did not exist before)
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Latest comment: 20 October 2005 by Dmcdevit in topic Edit warring
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A brief but probably important point

A bit of wikilawyering, but this does not not address the current "indefinite ban" on editing anywhere, including User talk:-Ril- (since that page has been protected by TUC. see here). Tomer TALK 23:31, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Sig?

The proposed findings of fact include mention of the signature question, but the remedies don't. -Splashtalk 02:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Largely for of my own curiosity, though perhaps also of possible future precedent or generalisation, what does the 'Com have in mind as the standard as a "non-confusing signature"? Absence of wiki-coding gimmicks that tend to screw up writing or copying it? That it resemble the user's username to some intuitively obvious extent? Neither, both...? Alai 23:25, 19 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Edit warring

I was under the impression that Ril's edit warring was one of the major contentions in this arbitration. But that is not addressed in the remedies or even the findings of fact. I realize you may have discussed this somewhere, but I just wanted to make sure it isn't overlooked. Dmcdevit·t 08:18, 20 October 2005 (UTC)Reply