UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(538 intermediate revisions by 52 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Shortcut|[[A/A]]}}
{{Shortcut|[[A/A]]}}
{{Moderationnav}}
{{Administrationnav}}
{| align="right"
{| align="right"
|__TOC__
|__TOC__
Line 7: Line 7:


=Arbitration Cases Currently Under Consideration=
=Arbitration Cases Currently Under Consideration=
{{ArbitrationNotice}}
{{ArbitrationNotice}}
<!--
<!--


If there is no arbitration cases under consideration, please add the following text to this header
If there is no arbitration cases under consideration, please add the following text to this header
''There are currently no cases under consideration''
''There are currently no cases under consideration''
-->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE -->
=Arbitration Cases in Progress=
=Arbitration Cases in Progress=
<!--
<!--
If there is no arbitration cases under consideration, please add the following text to this header
If there is no arbitration cases under consideration, please add the following text to this header
''There are currently no cases under consideration''
''There are currently no cases under consideration''
''There are currently no recently concluded cases, see the [[:Category:Arbitration Cases|archives]] for older cases''
<!-- DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE -->
 
''There are currently no cases under consideration''
==[[User:Yonnua Koponen]] vs. [[User:Misanthropy]]==
 
'''Summary''':Misanthropy has posted an obnoxiously large image on [[A/DM|Demotions]], and, after I made it smaller so that it didn't spam up the page, Misanthropy continued to revert the edit, starting an edit war.
 
There's case precedent [[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2010_08#User:DanceDanceRevolution|here]], showing that images can be reduced in size when there's massively over the top - in that case it was a talk page, but in this case it's an administrative page, where obviously there are harsher restrictions on massive images.
 
I ask that the image is (at a compromise) reduced to a maximum of 300 pixels, and preferably I ask that it is completely removed from the page and placed on the relevant talk page instead.
 
There is no reason to pointlessly spam up administrative pages just to have fun, which is what misanthropy seems to be doing.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 16:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 
:I accept this case and demand that Yon stop editing my (non-page breaking) comments without pressing reason to do so. I will accept anyone impartial, preferably Aichon given the page in question. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 16:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::Aichon would make sense, if he's willing.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 16:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::You're both massive tards. I'll offer my services. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 17:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Ross nailed it. Would also offer.  --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 17:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::Due a recent history of heated arguments between both parties I also suggest some form of restraint, possibly restricting use of talk pages. --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 17:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Will accept Ross. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 17:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::If Ross is willing, I'd rather that he handle it. I've always preferred to stay out of arbies as much as possible. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 22:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 
I'm in a good mood, so I'll give an alternative settlement before arbies. This: It stays for now, but is made smaller when it's archived. Deal or none?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 22:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:Surely the other way round would make more sense (which I'd agree to)? Since there's no point having the bigger one reduced when the page traffic halts entirely, like. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::No, it wouldn't, because I'm not sure if you've gathered this, it's not about page traffic, it's about the image being fucking annoying and unfunny. Ross is right. Both of you go back to the IO unit. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 22:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, so having the smaller one now and reverting back to big when archived and not being looked at (hence "no page traffic", duh) makes more sense than big now and smaller when archived. Get back to the opticians? {{Tongue}} {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::I thought you meant traffic as in network traffic! You're all still retarded though! -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 22:35, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::Page traffic, like people actually looking at the page. 300 wide now when it's in use, original 800 when it's archived and no one's actually looking at it. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::I tend to agree that small now, large later, makes more sense. It preserves usability now and intent later. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 22:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::In my opinion, images like that should abide by the image rules explained in the signature policy, especially on admin pages. That would be 16 px, anything larger then the sentences is just dumb.--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 22:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::The intent is the faggiest thing about it though. And assuming the wiki stays up for another 5 years, it'll be read more in the archives than it is now- and just will give future generations of the community a view that the admin pages are a big circlejerk lolclique and that it's a decent example to adopt themselves. No thanks -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 05:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::Sorry, that is what I meant, I wrote it down the wrong way round. Right, shall we have this as an unofficial arbies ruling then?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 23:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Sure. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 23:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::But you'll both have to shake hands and say sowwie afterwards >:0 --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 23:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Right, feel free to resize it when it gets moved to the archive (I will if I archive it, but I probably won't, it's likely be DDR or Ross).--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 23:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 
Excellent. You're still both tards. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 23:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
:<s>demote the cunts</s> Archive this?--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 23:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 
Shitting up admin pages with oversized images has been viewed as bad faith/vandalism before. Please don't do it <small>-- <span style="text-shadow: #bbb 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em">[[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 01:51 11 November 2010 (BST)</span></small>
:Yup, this should have been brought to A/VB -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 05:18, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::It seems to me that they were both acting in good faith, and it's just their mutual paranoia of each other that led to the dispute. Vandalism is for those trying to hurt the wiki, not each other. True, the picture would have been better if it was smaller, but the concept was that only a giant image could channel his feelings on the topic. Flawed attempts to slightly augment discussions but end up hurting them ≠ vandalism. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 05:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::No, they're right, it should have been vandalism, it's just that by the time it got to an edit conflict it would have been inappropriate for me to slap up a VB case.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 08:27, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::::How about next time you discuss it with mis on his talk page before altering his image? Its not as if he's not here a lot. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 09:57, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::[[User_talk:Misanthropy#Abnoxious_images|Actually...]]--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 10:45, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::[[Special:Contributions/Yonnua_Koponen|'''REALLY?''']] --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 11:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Oh you specifically meant ''before'', sorry thought you didn't see their talk page conversion. Though I can imagine not contacting someone beforehand for something simple as resizing an image. Then again, since this isn't the first conflict, he could have done it.--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 11:45, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::I see all. Besides, you didn't think I'd offer to arby before reviewing the case? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 12:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 
Letting this image get larger after the request is archived is ''not'' the way this should happen. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 00:56, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
:No, it's not. But since I was the only one who actually stood up to Misanthropy on it, I guess we'll have to live with it until somebody else does.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 17:19, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
::Why is it 300px now again anyway? But yeah it's stupid but at the same time not horribly breaking. Honestly, 50 px would be enough now as well in the archive. But we can still resolve in an A/VB case I think. Or just let it die.  --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 17:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Well stupid arbies rulings can be over-ruled, and this isn't even an official ruling. If anybody who isn't an involved party wants to make a case, so be it. As it stands, I'm holding by my arbies agreement not to go any further.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 18:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
:::I don't think we need to take this to the point of banning; The size of an image isn't that important, yet we've already written 16325 emotionally charged characters about just the 3. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 20:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Interesting to accuse others of being "emotionally charged" and biased, when you're essentially arguing that somebody shouldn't recieve a banning case. If it's vandalism, he ''should'' go to VB.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 21:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 
:Is it going to smaller once archived now, staying big now or the other way around? I'm confused.--[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 21:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


=Recently Concluded cases=
=Recently Concluded cases=
Please see [[:Category:Arbitration Cases]] for older arbitration cases.
<!--
If there are no recently concluded cases, please add the following text to this header
''There are currently no recently concluded cases, see the [[:Category:Arbitration Cases|archives]] for older cases.''
-->
''There are currently no recently concluded cases, see the [[:Category:Arbitration Cases|archives]] for older cases.''


=Archives=
=Archives=
*[[:Category:Arbitration Cases|List of Arbitration Cases]]
*[[:Category:Arbitration Cases|List of Arbitration Cases]]

Latest revision as of 15:11, 7 January 2015

Administration Services

Sysop List (Check) | Guidelines | Policies (Discussion) | Promotions (Bureaucrat) | Re-Evaluations

Deletions (Scheduling) | Speedy Deletions | Undeletions | Vandal Banning (Bots) | Vandal Data (De-Escalations)

Protections (Scheduling) | Move Requests | Arbitration | Misconduct | Demotions | Discussion | Sysop Archives

While the wiki community attempts to work on the basis of encouragement and cooperation, there are occasions where wiki users find themselves unable to reach accord. In the event of this happening, the Arbitration Team may be called upon to intervene, and attempt to find a reasonable compromise that, while perhaps not satisfying both parties, may at least assist in defusing the situation, thanks to the unbiased third party.

Guidelines for Arbitration Requests

In assisting in Arbitration, we generally suggest that both parties agree to the Arbitration. This is not, by any means, a requirement, but we do require that both parties be represented in proceedings.

Any Arbitration request should provide at least the following:

  • The aggrieved parties. Either person vs person, or [list of people] vs [list of people].
  • The reason for the arbitration. This should very specifically be without reference to people, as that information has already been provided. It should be a short paragraph indicating the causes of the aggrievement, and why both parties feel it requires arbitration
  • Any pages affected by the aggrievement. This should be a simple list of links.

Once the Arbitration commences, the Arbitrator will request statements from all parties involved. Any evidence to back up one's statement should be provided in link form. Each party will then have an opportunity to rebut their opponent's statement. After these two steps, the Arbitrator will then consider the case, and reach a conclusion, and determine the outcome that is required. It's the duty of the Arbitrator to move a case he accepted to a subpage of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration, and to update the status of the arbitration case in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.

As a note, by requesting an Arbitration, all parties are thus obliged to accept the outcome of the Arbitration. Not doing will be considered Vandalism, and such vandalism attempts will be treated as if the vandal has already received two warnings.

After the Arbitration is over, it will then be moved to an archive page. As publicly accessible pages, they may be used to establish precedent in further, applicable cases.

Current Arbitrators

For guidelines on how to arbitrate, see Arbitration Guidelines.

The following users have placed their hand up as users who are willing to be contacted to act as an Arbitrator. The role of Arbitrator is not restricted to the Administration Team; any user can be contacted as an Arbitrator (even if not listed below) and use this page for the arbitration, so long as both parties agree to the Arbitrator. Users who wish to place their hand up as an Arbitrator should place their name below on the list, using *{{usr|YourUserPage}}

Also note that not all listed Arbitrators are active on the Wiki.

Volunteer Arbitrators in Alphabetical Order

Arbitration Cases Currently Under Consideration

Administration Notice
Use this header to create new arbitration cases. Once all sides have chosen an arbiter, move the case to a sub-page of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration and update its status in the Arbitration Cases in Progress section.


Arbitration Cases in Progress

There are currently no cases under consideration

Recently Concluded cases

There are currently no recently concluded cases, see the archives for older cases.

Archives