NSWiki:Arbitration
|
This page exists only to discuss and resolve issues, like "edit wars" and serious disagreements about content. Try to resolve the conflict using the specific page's discussion/talk page. If, and only if, all other steps have failed, and you see no reasonable chance that the matter can be resolved in another manner, you may request that it be decided by the administrators here.
If you support a particular position, list your username and reasoning.
We hope never to have to use this page!
Format and Instructions
Use the following format to add an issue:
Case
Users involved in dispute:
Evidence and comments in this case should be directed to /CASENAME
Statement of complaint (signed by plantiff(s))
Statement by affected party (signed by respondant(s))
Comments bv administrators
If an administrator decides to protect a page in question, he/she will add:
Page protected by <Administrator's Name> at
Unprotection of that page will be indicated by:
Page unprotected by <Administrator's Name> at <Time of Unprotection>
Keep the list of protections/unprotections in anti-chronological order, with most-recent on top.
Once the issue is resolved, indicate the following in addition to the above:
Description of Resolution:
Requests for Arbitration
User:Knootoss and User:Tanah Burung vs. User:Syskeyia
Articles involved in this dispute: Tanah Burung, Utrecht
Evidence and comments in this case should be directed to /Syskeyia
Statement of complaint
Well, I'm not sure about the use of arbitration as a means here but as goober suggested it I'll go with it. Thing is, Syskeyia has been misbehaving here for a while. Yes, he has made some useful contributions (which I welcome) but on the other hand I have to check every single entry he makes for childish comments and (sometimes) vandalism. Examples:
- Adding silly RL comments in Der Angst entry, after which DA warned him clearly not to do it again.
- That did not stop him from Adding childish RL comments to my 19th century history , which I subsequently removed with comment.
- Adding 'Fuckian' as a language of SeOCC was an example of plain vandalism. He was warned about this on his by me on his talk page. This was a clear violation of the rules. Syskeyia never bothered to respond to this warning.
- Knootian independence entry declaring that my edit was 'supposedly' written in 1581
- I consider these edits to the Utrecht entry to be childish and bordering on vandalism. Removing the link to Knootian independence to replace them with the implication that Lavenrunz is Spain certainly was over the line.
As a normal user (not as a sysop) I'd recommend that something be done about all of this. From our warnings AND all the reverting edit comments it should be abundantly clear that we did not want such edits. (And he reads the reverting edits, since he uses them himself to reply to MY reverting edits so it is IMO a bit difficult to feign ignorance on that matter.)
Now, seperate from this is the matter of the Tanah Burung entry. See the Talk:Tanah_Burung corresponding talk page and edit history, really. I'm willing to describe in more detail if that is required. -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 21:52, 22 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Statement by affected party
Comments by administrators
== Previous issues ==
