Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Statement by North8000: +cmt |
|||
Line 256:
*I'm sympathetic to the "This will return to ArbCom sooner or later"-like argument provided by {{u|AirshipJungleman29}}. But that fear alone isn't sufficient; ArbCom's [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy#Scope_and_responsibilities|scope]] to act as a final binding decision-maker is limited to disputes the community <em>has been</em> unable to resolve, not those we fear it might be unable to resolve if allowed to. I'm thus not likely to accept even if I fully shared that concern. [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 21:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
*I am also sympathetic to Guerillero's view, but I am landing at: this isn't ripe for arbitration ''today'' but if there continues to be conduct issues in this area I can see that changing without the need for exhaustive prior dispute resolution. '''Decline''' on that basis. [[User:Firefly|<span style="color:#850808;">firefly</span>]] <small>( [[User talk:Firefly|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Firefly|c]] )</small> 19:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
*For an arbitration case to be useful, it needs to have a well-defined scope and parties, and some sense of goals for the case (obviously, something more specific than resolving the dispute). At this point the scope would be clear enough—move discussions that involve naming conventions for royalty and nobility are at least a contentious issue in the small-c sense of contentious. If there were more substantial attempts at prior resolution, we would have a better sense of who the parties are; inviting evidence on anyone who has participated in a relevant RM would not make for an organized case. If we knew how attempts at prior resolution failed, we would have some sense of how the Committee would be well-placed to help. I'm leaning to decline the case, but I'm more open to one if we can identify a clear scope, parties, what previous attempts at resolution and failed and why, and how ArbCom involvement would be useful (we're not going to dictate which title is "correct" as that is a content decision). [[User:Maxim|Maxim]] ([[User talk:Maxim|talk]]) 01:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
| |||