UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Midianian vs Karek
Midianian vs. Karek
This is about the protection request where I requested that the individual CSS styles creating the rounded corners on certain pages be replaced with a template, which was done by Cheese, but later reverted by Karek. We discussed it on the protections page, but didn't reach an agreement. Finally he moved the request from Requested Edits to Recent Actions when I suggested we go to arbitration to settle this.
The pages in the original request were:
but I don't really mind if the template isn't edited into the first two pages, for reasons explained in the protections request.
Since this is mainly a technical matter, please do not put your name forward unless you have at least basic understanding of the technical basis of this case. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 20:28, 21 October 2008 (BST)
- Suggestions is the third most viewed page on the wiki and is a significant through-fare for wiki traffic(the others don't show up on popular pages because they're categories but they get a significant amount of views as well, enough that they would show up top 20 if they could). The fact that they mostly have "templated sigs", as you say, is actually that much more reason why space there is an issue, inclusion size problems would screw up the page and this template adds to the inclusion size needlessly.--Karekmaps?! 02:35, 22 October 2008 (BST)
I'll be willing to arbitrate on this matter as I'm a technically orientated person. I also have experience with the Wiki Software as well as CSS. - Jedaz - 02:48/22/10/2008
I don't understand why Midianian thinks there is an arbitration case here. It is called a request not a demand. Should the sysop team not feel it is needed it won't be honored. If Cheese and Karek do not agree on what needs to be done with the request since they are the only two sysops that are involved they might need an arbitration (or discussion) but frankly, Midianian has no right to demand any action on this matter.--– Nubis NWO 02:51, 22 October 2008 (BST)
- This is the essence of arbitration, resolving edit disputes, which is exactly what this is. Just because Midianian has to request a sysop to change the page does not mean that Midianian is not an invested party, and thus has every right to request arbitration for resolving the edit dispute. I fail to see how you can not see that this is clearly an edit dispute. If the whole Sysop team disagrees with the request then no arbitration case could even get it changed (obviously). - Jedaz - 03:07/22/10/2008
- This isn't an "edit dispute" this is a functionality issue. Since Karek is a sysop and responsible for the upkeep of this wiki and the requested page to be edited is protected to only be edited by sysops then the everyday user has no expectation of getting the edit they want on the page. If the page was meant to be edited by anyone it wouldn't be locked. It's not like Midianian's request was ignored. Karek responded and decided that the current version was fine. Just because a user wants a certain edit on a page doesn't mean he should get it. --– Nubis NWO 03:18, 22 October 2008 (BST)
- I'd assume the page was protected to prevent vandalism and preserve its textual content, not its formatting. I'd have no expectation of getting the rules changed on that page through an edit request. On the other hand, getting something changed that isn't why the page was protected? Of course, as much as on any unprotected page. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 12:01, 22 October 2008 (BST)
- And if Cheese disagreed with Karek he would have made his point in the discussion those two had on the Admin page. So it seems that none of the sysops disagree with Karek on this issue therefore the page won't be edited. --– Nubis NWO 03:21, 22 October 2008 (BST)
- Just because someone doesn't disagree doesn't mean they agree either. Cheeze thought it was a reasonable request and grated it (even if he didn't feel strongly about it either way), so why not allow the two parties who are pushing their views to have it out in arbitration? Just because a page is protected doesn't mean that it shouldn't be changed if there are good enough reasons (and conversly it should stay the same if the reasons aren't good enough). I think there is enough grounds for an arbitration case to exist.
- I'm sure that there are sysops who don't care either way about it and would perfer to avoid any conflict. Saying nothing doesn't mean that you agree with a position either. - Jedaz - 03:46/22/10/2008
- This isn't an "edit dispute" this is a functionality issue. Since Karek is a sysop and responsible for the upkeep of this wiki and the requested page to be edited is protected to only be edited by sysops then the everyday user has no expectation of getting the edit they want on the page. If the page was meant to be edited by anyone it wouldn't be locked. It's not like Midianian's request was ignored. Karek responded and decided that the current version was fine. Just because a user wants a certain edit on a page doesn't mean he should get it. --– Nubis NWO 03:18, 22 October 2008 (BST)
What possible harm can an Arbies ruling on this matter cause if all directly involved have a good understanding of the dispute? If the page was protected to prevent textual alterations and vandalism rather than format changes and one sysop has already said it is an acceptable request then it does become an edit conflict (albiet a complex one) and were Karek to call SYSOP priviledge here it could be construed as misconduct if other sysops disagree with him. Sensible course then is obviously to let the interested parties make their case to an impartial arbitator with the technical knowledge to judge. --Honestmistake 14:21, 22 October 2008 (BST)
- I wouldn't say as much but, I also actually agree that it is subject to arbitration. Well, the suggestions page stuff is, the other two not so much as I can, and probably should, call SYSOP privilege on that and deny any change that is not necessary to the daily health and use of the page(as it's the auto-load), I also doubt Midianian would care overly much there because he's already said he's willing to concede at least that.
That being said, I doubt there's much in the way of impartial arbitrators that I'd be willing to concede know enough code wise to be of use, I do think Jedaz knows enough. I'm not so sure that he hasn't already chosen his ruling in the matter, I'm also not going to put up with the whole both sides make an argument crap, it's already been done. I will point out that using Cheese's actions to justify the argument for doing it is ridiculous, even if he is a nice guy and tries to help out he has a history of performing administrative actions without first gathering all the knowledge needed to make those judgements well and correctly(it's why I don't want him as 'crat actually), so stop it. With that I accept Jedaz, as the odds of any other users with the knowledge coming forward is slim to none.--Karekmaps?! 20:50, 22 October 2008 (BST)- Don't worry, I will be impartial and stick to the facts. I'll keep this case short and sweet. - Jedaz - 01:41/23/10/2008
Ok, since this case is different then most other cases we'll go in the following way, both Midianian and Karek will present a list of Pros for their side, and a list of cons for the other side of the disagreement. Once both lists have been completed I will rule as to which is more appropriate to use. I will also consider the arguments as linked to, as well as my own experience with the Wiki software and CSS. - Jedaz - 01:41/23/10/2008
Midianian
Pros of using the template
Please enter the pros here in dot point format
Cons of using hard coded CSS
Please enter the cons here in dot point format
Karek
Pros of using hard coded CSS
Please enter the pros here in dot point format
Cons of using the template
Please enter the cons here in dot point format
