Misplaced Pages

talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 06:46, 17 February 2013 editMiszaBot II (talk | contribs)259,776 editsm Robot: Archiving 1 thread (older than 14d) to Misplaced Pages talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive 10.← Previous edit Revision as of 13:26, 18 February 2013 edit undoRyanspir (talk | contribs)944 edits Talk:Medical uses_of_silver: new sectionNext edit →
Line 49: Line 49:
:It wasn't a missing template, it was an extra one. Catherine of Alexandria had two 'DRN archive top' templates, so the second one used up the 'bottom' template and the first swallowed everything under it. I've fixed it: I hope that's alright, as I know archives usually shouldn't be edited, but every time something new is added it would swallow that too, and it's kinda confusing. ] (]) 17:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC) :It wasn't a missing template, it was an extra one. Catherine of Alexandria had two 'DRN archive top' templates, so the second one used up the 'bottom' template and the first swallowed everything under it. I've fixed it: I hope that's alright, as I know archives usually shouldn't be edited, but every time something new is added it would swallow that too, and it's kinda confusing. ] (]) 17:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
::Sounds like a good enough reason for editing an archive. Thanks, ] (]) 17:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC) ::Sounds like a good enough reason for editing an archive. Thanks, ] (]) 17:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

== Talk:Medical uses_of_silver ==

Could it please be de-archived? I was sick for one week and it got archived during that time. I have informed the volunteer that I was sick. ] (]) 13:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:26, 18 February 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dispute resolution noticeboard page.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33Auto-archiving period: 14 days 
WikiProject iconDispute Resolution (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Dispute Resolution, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionTemplate:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionDispute Resolution
? view · edit Frequently asked questions
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconDispute Resolution (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Dispute Resolution, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionTemplate:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionDispute Resolution
This FAQ page may be developed or changed over time.
Q1. Why was I invited to the discussion?
  • You have been listed by a filing editor in hopes that the discussion of content can be continued here with the guidance of a volunteer. You do not have to participate but are encouraged to.
Q2. Are resolutions enforceable?
  • The dispute resolution noticeboard is informal, and resolutions formed here are neither binding nor enforceable. DR/N relies on all involved parties to self-enforce the agreed upon resolution. Should the dispute continue with all or some involved parties ignoring the resolutions that they participated in, this may be considered as part of the next step of the DR process. Editors who continue a dispute after accepting a resolution may be perceived as disruptive by refusing to engage collaboratively on consensus.
Q3. If resolutions are not binding, why should I participate?
  • Misplaced Pages only works when editors collaborate to form a consensus. Discussion is as important in the editing process as editing itself. While participation is not a requirement at DR/N, refusing participation can be perceived as a refusal to collaborate, and is not conducive to consensus-building.
Q4. How long does a case last?
  • It depends on the dispute, but ideally no more than a week. Volunteers will attempt to resolve disputes as fast and as thoroughly as possible. A case can remain opened for longer than a week, if the participants are nearing a compromise.
Q5. Why are the volunteers not responding to my case?
  • The noticeboard has to handle a large number of cases, despite having only a small pool of volunteers. Some volunteer editors will not open a case if they are uncomfortable with or unfamiliar with the subject matter. The bot will flag the case after a set period of time if a volunteer's attention is still required.
Q6. Why was I asked to step back from a discussion?
  • Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked step back from the discussion if warnings for disruptive behavior go unheeded. This is to keep the discussions civil and focused on the goal or resolution and discourage further disputes from arising out of the DR/N filing. Generally an editor will recieve a warning first and will be given the opportunity to contribute in a civil and respectful manner. Should warnings not be heeded, comments may be collapsed and/or personal attacks removed entirely in some cases after warnings as well.
Q7. What is the role of a volunteer?
  • Volunteers are editors that assist in resolving disputes as neutral third parties. Volunteers do not have any special powers, privileges, or authority on the noticeboard or on Misplaced Pages.
Q8. Are there any requirements for volunteering?
  • No. All editors on Misplaced Pages are invited and encouraged to participate. The noticeboard is always looking for new volunteers.
Q9. Why are disputes over an editor's conduct not allowed?
Q10. Why was my case closed?
  • The noticeboard is only for content disputes that have been extensively discussed. Conduct disputes, disputes with no discussion, and disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums, should not be brought to DRN. However, don't be afraid to post a request, if it's outside of the noticeboard's scope, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
Q11. Why is prior discussion required?
  • The dispute resolution noticeboard is not a substitution for talk pages. Editors must attempt to resolve the dispute between themselves before seeking outside help as part of a collaborative effort to form consensus.
Q12. How extensive should the prior discussion be?
  • While time may not be a deciding factor, discussions that have only gone on for a day, and/or consist of only one or two responses, do not qualify as extensive. Edit summaries are not considered discussions.
  • While we accept disputes with discussions on individual user talkpages, discussions that focus on editor conduct or that only involve a minority of the dispute's participants may not qualify as extensive.
  • It is always recommended that discussions on content take place on the relevant article talkpage to involve as many editors as possible to form a local consensus for the subject. Sometimes editors will request discussion on their own talkpage in order not to disrupt the flow of other discussions on the subjects talkpage when a dispute is between only a small group or just two contributors.
Q13. The other editor refuses to discuss. What should I do?

Open DRN cases
Case Created Last volunteer edit Last modified
Title Status User Time User Time User Time
Autism In Progress Oolong (t) 20 days, 3 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 14 hours RIT RAJARSHI (t) 29 minutes
Sri Lankan Vellalar Closed Kautilyapundit (t) 18 days, 13 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 13 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 13 hours
Imran Khan New SheriffIsInTown (t) 14 days, 3 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 10 hours WikiEnthusiast1001 (t) 2 days, 2 hours
Battle of Ash-Shihr (1523) On hold Abo Yemen (t) 8 days, 23 hours Kovcszaln6 (t) 3 days, 3 hours Abo Yemen (t) 3 days, 3 hours
Habte Giyorgis Dinagde New Jpduke (t) 3 days, 15 hours None n/a Jpduke (t) 3 days, 15 hours
List of WBC world champions Closed Blizzythesnowman (t) 1 days, 22 hours Robert McClenon (t) 1 days, 13 hours Robert McClenon (t) 1 days, 13 hours
Movement for Democracy (Greece) New 77.49.204.122 (t) 41 minutes None n/a 77.49.204.122 (t) 41 minutes

If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 18:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dispute resolution noticeboard page.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33Auto-archiving period: 14 days 

_

_

Archived without closing

It looks like Cinema of Andhra Pradesh and Mail Online got archived without being officially closed. Does something need to be done to fix that somehow? Dreamyshade (talk) 05:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

No, the system is set up that way. Cases stay open for 14 days after they're filed, but then get archived if there is no action in the case for 24 hours. The idea is that if cases are here longer than that and aren't continuously progressing then they ought to move on to another venue. I will say, however, that Steven Zhang's original vision for this noticeboard (feel free to correct me, Steve, if I'm wrong) was that this was going to be more of a clearinghouse to send DR cases to other venues except for lightweight disputes which could be quickly and easily resolved here. It has arguably morphed into something quite different from that. Having said that, however, I'm fine with the way it works now, though I wonder if we might shouldn't provide a little more notice of the way it is going to work. Tip: if you're working on a case and want to extend it's lifetime, change the date in the hidden DoNotArchiveUntil line, but don't do it unless you're making steady progress and don't extend it too far. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Yep, you're right, that was my original idea :) Steven Zhang 09:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Do I put this down as closed or resolved?

We were this close to reaching a consensus on the Medical Uses of Silver thread, and the only dissenting voice got himself indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry. Does this count as resolved or should I shut it as closed? CarrieVS (talk) 20:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks resolved to me...if the only dissenting voice was breaking the rules by socking, well, their opinion doesn't count for much. Definitely mark it as resolved. Cheers, Steven Zhang 11:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
It was just because he was the olny dissenting voice from the start - without him, there was no dispute. But he's unblocked anyway. Seems it was a mistake. CarrieVS (talk) 16:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Manual filing

Right now, the FAQ (see above) says that it's okay to manually file. But is it really? I note that the bot adds a unique case identification number and some additional housekeeping coding to the top of the listing. Most of that has syntax which is pretty obvious and can simply be copied over from an existing listing and updated, but that's not true for the case identification number. I have on occasion simply listed the dispute using the listing form for the benefit of the parties, but that has the undesirable effect of listing me as the requesting party to the dispute. (If you're fast and lucky enough, you can change that in the listing before the status bot runs, but if you're slow or unlucky you can change it in the listing but will forever be listed as the requesting party in the status box.) I see at least four things we can do:

  1. Nothing (a perennial favorite).
  2. Change our rules so that using the listing form is mandatory.
  3. Have someone who knows coding and has access to the listing coding and/or the status bot fix it so someone can list a case using the listing form without becoming listed as the requesting party.
  4. Both 2 and 3.

There are probably other possibilities about which I'm not aware since I'm coding-ignorant. Feel free to suggest them (or just fix it). I'm fine with any of those, though I'd prefer #2, 3, or 4. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I prefer 2 - I've been unbelievably busy with work since the fellowship ended and thus have had to put the brakes on all my DR work, but this should improve soon and then I will be able to continue reforms :) Steven Zhang 06:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Missing template in Archive 61?

If you check Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive 61 you may notice that the last two cases are not reachable by clicking on the links in the TOC. For example Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive 61#Royal College, Colombo does not take you to the case. It looks like the last two cases got swallowed into the collapse box for a previous case, the one for Catherine of Alexandria. I looked to see if there was a closing or opening template missing, but could not resolve the mystery. I hope that someone who is familiar with the DRN templates might have a moment to look at this. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:14, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't a missing template, it was an extra one. Catherine of Alexandria had two 'DRN archive top' templates, so the second one used up the 'bottom' template and the first swallowed everything under it. I've fixed it: I hope that's alright, as I know archives usually shouldn't be edited, but every time something new is added it would swallow that too, and it's kinda confusing. CarrieVS (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like a good enough reason for editing an archive. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Medical uses_of_silver

Could it please be de-archived? I was sick for one week and it got archived during that time. I have informed the volunteer that I was sick. Ryanspir (talk) 13:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Category: