This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Smallbones (talk | contribs) at 15:41, 12 November 2014 (→One Young World). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:41, 12 November 2014 by Smallbones (talk | contribs) (→One Young World)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. The three trustees elected as community representatives until July 2015 are SJ, Phoebe, and Raystorm. The Wikimedia Foundation Senior Community Advocate is Maggie Dennis. |
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
(Manual archive list) |
Hi
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case#GamerGate and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, --DSA510 Pls No Hate 19:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Please reason with @Ryulong: about this. You have clearly commented on the article many times. --DSA510 Pls No H8 21:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- There is a huge leap between commenting on an article or subject and being "involved" in an arbitration case. With such a low bar to participation, you might as well list every single editor who worked on an article as being involved in a case request. Liz 00:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
One Young World
banned editor on his usual topic |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Jimbo, don't you think the One Young World article could use some improvement? For example, it mentions the Dublin 2014 event as if it is still in the future. Also, there is not a single word of criticism about the organization. Do you think that reliable sources have never critiqued the organization or its programs? - Stylecustom (talk) 00:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
|