|
Main case page ( Talk) — Evidence ( Talk) — Workshop ( Talk) — Proposed decision ( Talk) Case clerk: Seddon ( Talk) Drafting arbitrator: John Vandenberg ( Talk) |
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
A list of questions will be posted on October 5th 7th. All questions need to be answered by October 12th 14th. The remaining week will be dedicated to preparing the decision. --
FayssalF -
Wiki me up® 11:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Due to the recent evidence posted by user:Nefer Tweety, I am postponing the questions' session for two more days. If there are other evidences to be submitted by other parties, please do so by tomorrow. Thanks for your cooperation.
Hmwith, please inform all involved parties of this and update the target day which becomes October 20. Thanks. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 17:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Done
hmwith
☮ 17:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update, Hmwith and FayssalF. I had been expecting that
user:Arab Cowboy would want to submit their own evidence. And hoped they would so so before I added anything. Since this doesn't appear to be the case, I'll add some evidence by the end of today so that this case can move towards completion. —
CactusWriter |
needles 08:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- I am still away on vacation. I hardly get the chance to be online at all. Is it possible to give me a chance to post my evidence by the end of next week when I am back home in the US? Thanks, -- Arab Cowboy ( talk) 11:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- Fayssal, what "questions" do you refer to above? Who will be asking the questions and who will reply? I will still post my evidence, hopefully next week if agreed by hmwith. --
Arab Cowboy (
talk) 11:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- Arab Cowboy, to have an idea please have a look at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop#Questions from Arbitrators .28General.29. Note that there won't be many questions. Note also that I don't have any problem with waiting because that won't change the evidence or facts. However, a party to this case has objected. Another idea is to ask all involved parties again and see if we can postpone the case. The bottom line is that I don't want to move on or postpone basing that on a single party.
- Hmwith, could you please consult with the rest of the involved parties? --
FayssalF -
Wiki me up® 18:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- I've been in contact with them, and I know that at least one party still does not want to postpone based on Arab Cowboy's vacation, as he's said so many times.
hmwith
☮ 14:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Arab Cowboy posted his evidence, no need to postpone. And I have added response at talkpage. -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 15:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- I've been in contact with them, and I know that at least one party still does not want to postpone based on Arab Cowboy's vacation, as he's said so many times.
hmwith
☮ 14:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update, Hmwith and FayssalF. I had been expecting that
user:Arab Cowboy would want to submit their own evidence. And hoped they would so so before I added anything. Since this doesn't appear to be the case, I'll add some evidence by the end of today so that this case can move towards completion. —
CactusWriter |
needles 08:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Asmahan/Workshop#Proposed_motions_re:_Arab_Cowboy appear to be proposed remedies. They are not really appropriate at this stage, so I think they should be removed. After the questions are answered, the clerk ( user:hmwith) can set up some sections for proposals by parties & non-parties.
hmwith, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ryulong/Workshop is a good template, but feel free to improvise ;-) John Vandenberg ( chat) 17:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)