This is an old revision of this page, as edited by My very best wishes (talk | contribs) at 22:59, 21 June 2024 (→Starting a request for amendment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Noticeboard

• recent changes
• purge this page
• view or discuss this template

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).

No arbitrator motions are currently open.

This noticeboard's primary purpose is to to attract the attention of the clerks to a particular matter by non-clerks. Non-clerks are welcome to comment on this page in the event that the clerks appear to have missed something.

The clerks may be contacted privately, in the event a matter could not be prudently addressed publicly (i.e., on this page), by composing an email to clerks-llists.wikimedia.org; only the clerk team and individual arbitrators have access to emails sent to that list.

A procedural reference for clerks (and arbitrators) is located here.

Archives

1 (to 26 January 2006) 2 (to 28 January 2006) 3 (archive of a discussion started on January 29, 2006 at the incidents noticeboard) 4 (to 28 January 2006) Old noticeboard #1 (February 2006→December 2008, clerks' coordination board) Old noticeboard #2 (December 2008→March 2010, clerks' coordination board) 5 (January 2006→May 2009) 6 (May 2009→June 2012, noticeboard merged) 7 (June 2012→September 2014) 8 (September 2014→September 2015) 9 (3 October→4 November 2015) 10 (October 2015→March 2021) 11 (April 2021→present)

This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.

Arbitrators, clerks and trainees: Please coordinate your actions through the mailing list. The purpose of this page is for editors who are not clerks to request clerk assistance.

No edit summary for preloaded filing of an amendment request

I created an amendment request through this link:

Click here to file a request for amendment of an arbitration decision or procedure (including an arbitration enforcement action issued by an administrator, such as a contentious topics restriction).

When I filed the clarification request, there was no edit summary (and no option for me to add an edit summary). Can support for an edit summary be added? Thank you. Cunard (talk) 07:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I admit I haven't the foggiest why you can't add an edit summary, so I defer to those who know the technical reasons. But if it is a headache to allow a summary, is there any downside to just doing a dummy edit immediately after for the summary? CaptainEek ⚓ 07:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The preload includes &nosummary=yes which prevents an edit summary being added. It was added by Callanecc in 2015. If I had to guess, the point is to avoid editorialising in an edit summary. Primefac (talk) 07:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I feel like at a minimum we should be using a preloaded summary then, even if it is as simple as "Adding request." CaptainEek ⚓ 07:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both for looking into this. I hope that there is an easy way to add the edit summary by changing the text "&nosummary=yes" to a preloaded summary. Regarding adding a dummy edit afterwards, that's a good idea. The instructions say to add a notification link afterwards, which I did here so that has the same effect as a dummy edit. Cunard (talk) 07:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't think you can add an edit summary when creating a new section. As per Help:Edit summary § Section editing, the section title is used as the edit summary. Since the preloaded template adds the section title, when the "Subject" edit box is displayed (which occurs when the nosummary parameter is removed), I believe if the editor enters in a subject, two titles will get added. isaacl (talk) 18:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Unsure as to revert

Hi I'm having a hard time understanding the rules for[REDACTED] and find it difficult to understand the articles on it.

Recently I was discussing points on a talk thread and the posts were reverted with the following comment "Reverted 1 edit by Galdrack (talk): Per WP:ARBECR". I think it's because the posts were deemed to be non-constructive but the implication is with the status of my account I can only make suggested edits and can't contribute to the discussion itself? The rational I was given was rather poor so I'm still confused as to the rules/reasoning. Galdrack (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Until you have made 500 edits, you are not allowed to edit in the Arab–Israeli conflict topic area. The only exception to this is for you to be able to make constructive edit requests, but participating in other discussions is not allowed. Dreamy Jazz 16:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

"but participating in other discussions is not allowed" Ok this was the one I wasn't sure of mainly, so there had/have been several entries by <500 entry users on the post and remain. I'm not bothered by that but is my understanding the comments are allowed so long as they're (in the opinion of 500> entry users) contributing to the conversation? And in turn those 500> entry users can then delete the comments they deem less constructive? Galdrack (talk) 17:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

While the rule is to not allow these comments, removing them may be an issue if another editor has already replied as removing the comment then removes the context that surrounded it. Dreamy Jazz 18:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok that's fair, thanks! Galdrack (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Starting a request for amendment

I would like to ask to amend two bans issued to me. Here is my statement . Can someone help me please to properly start the amendment? I am not sure who should be notified about it. I assume that users @Volunteer Marek: and @Piotrus: should be notified because one of the remedies includes a one-sided interaction ban with them. Thank you. My very best wishes (talk) 22:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)