Title | Status | Created | Last volunteer edit | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Maratha Confederacy | New | Mohammad Umar Ali ( t) | 2 days, 5 hours | None | n/a | Timtrent ( t) | 1 days, 13 hours |
Elissa Slotkin | New | Andrew.robbins ( t) | 2 days, | Robert McClenon ( t) | 1 days, 18 hours | Alpha3031 ( t) | 8 hours |
Gangubai Kathiawadi | Closed | Ankitsalsa14 ( t) | 1 days, 7 hours | Robert McClenon ( t) | 1 days, 4 hours | Robert McClenon ( t) | 1 days, 4 hours |
If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{
DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
Last updated by
FireflyBot (
talk) at 19:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Just some feedback that I would have participated in this, but I have no idea how to login to IRC. Formerip ( talk) 19:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Omitted from your recommendations are two major needs for improvement: better fact finding, and restriction of ArbCom to ruling on the case presented, rather than broadening it to fit their preconceptions and thereupon listening to themselves alone. Brews ohare ( talk) 20:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Besides the implicit meaning of this barnstar and the barnstar before this barnstar, I award you this additional barnstar for awarding me a barnstar. Xavexgoem ( talk) 02:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC) |
Some of these are stylistic. I apologize. Grammar and syntax ones are: 3, 4, 5, 6.
Also: I can't tell if you're using the serial comma or not. It switches back and forth. -- Xavexgoem ( talk) 06:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I have a big question about Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Reforming dispute resolution: why do you do it? The first question is about something that is already implemented, and the second one doesn't provide enough context. May be the RfC could be made more focused? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk• track) 14:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
[1]. Cheers Ocaasi t | c 16:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Duly copy-edited. I have removed the passive voice with extreme prejudice, and refined some of the proposal presentation so that its structure is more coherent. I also suggested one condition in the proposed general wizard, which I've marked in red. Please review that at your leisure.
The two points for discussion in the ivory† box at the top of the page do not seem to have much relevance to your proposals. Do you have more proposals to add to the RFC? If not, I would suggest you remove those points, and leave only the paragraph in the header box. Let the proposal speak for itself. This is another red marker that needs removed once you have reviewed.
†It's nice to see somebody else who loves that colour. :-)
You may wish to say who will code these gadgets you propose; if it's not you (as the reader will assume), you should have somebody lined up. Practicality means a lot to Wikipedians: a new suspension bridge might be great for the city, but if a pauper asks for permission to build one, the citizens are naturally going to wonder where the money is to come from!
More generally, the title of "Reforming dispute resolution" certainly reflects the purpose of your reform, but not really its effect. It's too grand, so "Centralising DR requests" or something would be more accurate title. Alternatively, you could use "Reforming dispute resolution" as an umbrella RFC title, and make the page I've just copy-edited, along with pages for any other ideas you have, into sub-pages. Like all umbrella RFCs, you could then have multiple options for RFC participants to visit and consider. YMMV.
Otherwise, great work, and I hope my edits and comments are of some use. AGK [•] 22:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Deftones has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 10:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Crunkcore, Kesha has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 23:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Steve, there's a bug in the radio button code in the "How effective do you feel volunteers are at resolving disputes at the below forums (1 is the most effective, 7 is the least effective)" section. If you make a choice in the "talk page discussion" line, then make a choice in the next line below, when you make a choice in the third line it removes the choice in the second line and so on down the lines, leaving only the choice in the first line and the last line clicked. Best regards, TransporterMan ( TALK) 14:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Bitcoin as an investment has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 00:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Ruba'i article has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 22:30, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Talk:Organic food has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 19:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Leveson Inquiry has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 22:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 08:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Peter Proctor has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 10:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Steve. The thread Talk:Campaign for_Nuclear_Disarmament has been open for over ten days. Can you review it and take action if necessary? Thanks. EarwigBot operator / talk 11:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello SCrossin (WMF),
Your script
User:SCrossin (WMF)/mcw.js is no longer functional because it attempts to get an editToken
from mw.user.tokens
. The script should instead get a csrfToken
. editToken
s were removed from mw.user.tokens
on October 3, 2019 at Phabricator during
this edit as they were redundant to csrfToken
s.–
BrandonXLF (
talk) 00:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)