| Revision as of 12:20, 15 August 2011 editAlexandrDmitri (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,569 edits →Request for clarification: WP:ARBR&I: Withdrawn - archiving← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:53, 19 August 2011 edit undoFmph (talk | contribs)4,945 edits + WP:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article namesNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| = {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification|Requests for clarification|]}} = | = {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification|Requests for clarification|]}} = | ||
| <noinclude>{{-}}</noinclude>{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification/Header}} | <noinclude>{{-}}</noinclude>{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification/Header}} | ||
| == Request for clarification: ] == | |||
| '''Initiated by ''' ] (]) '''at''' 19:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ''List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:'' | |||
| *{{userlinks|Fmph}} (initiator) | |||
| <!-- Substitute "admin" for "userlinks" if a user is an administrator. Anyone else affected must be notified that the request has been filed, | |||
| immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. The line for username2 can be removed if no-one else is affected. --> | |||
| === Statement by Fmph === | |||
| <!-- Describe the nature of your request, and any explanation or evidence why it is needed. | |||
| You can delete this comment when you have added your statement --> | |||
| Can I direct ArbCom's attention to the ] in this case. It states that ''"... no page moves shall be initiated for a period of 2 years"'' and that ruling is in force until September 18, 2011. Can ArbCom please clarify what they expect to happen on the 18th September? | |||
| There have been continued 'suggestions' over the last 23 months that the articles should be moved. So the issue has not gone away. I have ] (in response to a question as to whether the prohibition should be extended) as to what ''should'' happen. If ArbCom think its not a bad idea, perhaps they would like to endorse it, or something like it? | |||
| I will notify the project that I have opened this clarification. | |||
| === Statement by other user === | |||
| <!-- Leave this section for others to add additional statements --> | |||
| === Clerk notes === | |||
| :''This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).'' | |||
| === Arbitrator views and discussion === | |||
| ---- | |||
Revision as of 19:53, 19 August 2011
Arbitration Committee proceedings- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.
Open cases| Case name | Links | Evidence due | Prop. Dec. due |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palestine-Israel articles 5 | (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) | 21 Dec 2024 | 11 Jan 2025 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requests| Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
|---|---|---|---|
| ] | none | none | 19 August 2011 |
| Motion name | Date posted |
|---|---|
| Arbitrator workflow motions | 10 January 2025 |
Requests for clarification
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification/Header
Request for clarification: WP:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names
Initiated by Fmph (talk) at 19:53, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
List of any users involved or directly affected, and confirmation that all are aware of the request:
- Fmph (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (initiator)
Statement by Fmph
Can I direct ArbCom's attention to the first motion in this case. It states that "... no page moves shall be initiated for a period of 2 years" and that ruling is in force until September 18, 2011. Can ArbCom please clarify what they expect to happen on the 18th September?
There have been continued 'suggestions' over the last 23 months that the articles should be moved. So the issue has not gone away. I have made a suggestion (in response to a question as to whether the prohibition should be extended) as to what should happen. If ArbCom think its not a bad idea, perhaps they would like to endorse it, or something like it?
I will notify the project that I have opened this clarification.
Statement by other user
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).