Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Henri Coanda/Proposed decision
|
Main case page (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk) Case clerk: AlexandrDmitri (Talk) Drafting arbitrators: Newyorkbrad (Talk) & Jclemens (Talk) |
Arbitrators active on this case[edit]
- Active
- Casliber
- Cool Hand Luke
- Coren
- David Fuchs
- Elen of the Roads
- Jclemens
- John Vandenberg
- Kirill Lokshin
- Mailer diablo
- Newyorkbrad
- PhilKnight
- Roger Davies
- Shell Kinney
- SirFozzie
- Xeno
- Risker
- Inactive
- Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
- Iridescent
- Recused
- To update this listing, edit this template and scroll down until you find the right list of arbitrators.
principles and FoF[edit]
I wonder if arbcom would consider adding a NOTBURO/NOTSTATUTE principle and a wikilawyering finding and a counselling remedy. I think part of Lsorin's problem has been his attempts to interpret WP policies WAY too rigidly. I wanted to give some diffs of that (wikilawyering) but it was too tedious and I got preoccupied elsewhere. But here is one[1] that I think illustrates the problem pretty clearly. My hope is for the decision to contain a bit more guidance that can help Lsorin relax and get along with other editors. I don't know how to phrase it though, and sometimes people in that situation are more willing to listen to arbcom than to other editors.
Lsorin, we chatted briefly on the Coanda-1910 talkpage a while back (about G. Harry Stine mostly, I think). I'm sorry things ended up this way. My advice is, figure out who the good editors are and try to edit like they do, instead of trying to learn to edit from reading policy documents (which is like trying to learn to drive by reading a physics textbook). You can probably make good contributions in other areas for a while, and get your restriction lifted once you're more used to how this place works. I don't know if I can really help, but I'm willing to discuss stuff a bit further on your talk page if you want, including about aviation authors (if that's ok under the arbitration). 75.57.242.120 (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for your input on the proposed decision. I considered your comments carefully (I read them before the decision closed though I am having this chance to respond only afterwards). Some of your comments are very well-taken. However, the fact that Lsorin seemingly continues to see, so far as I can tell, nothing at all wrong with his editing made it impossible for us to really consider a more lenient course than the one the decision takes. If Lsorin wishes to remain active on Wikipedia, editing in other topic-areas as he learned more about how collaborative editing works, I am sure you can be a useful resource for him if the two of you wish. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I wasn't proposing weakening the sanctions, but just suggesting that arbcom add a bit of editing advice to go along with them. 75.57.242.120 (talk) 02:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Candidly, if Lsorin is open to anyone's advice at this point, it's probably more likely to be yours than ours. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Brad, thanks. I won't bother Lsorin any more unless he asks. He can leave me a note if he wants to talk to me. 75.57.242.120 (talk) 03:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Candidly, if Lsorin is open to anyone's advice at this point, it's probably more likely to be yours than ours. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I wasn't proposing weakening the sanctions, but just suggesting that arbcom add a bit of editing advice to go along with them. 75.57.242.120 (talk) 02:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)