User:Cs32en/Arbitration


 * Arbitration enforcement

I have started a thread at WP:AE about your editing. Feel free to comment. Jehochman Talk 20:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd really rather that you weren't topic banned. All you need to do is acknowledge that 9/11 is a troubled area of editing, and that you'll seek out feedback from uninvolved editors.  You don't need to listen to me. Feel free to get advice from anybody else who has had substantial experience on en-wiki.  I'd recommend you take a tour of the place and edit a diversity of articles to get a more representative view of how things work here. Jehochman Talk 00:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, the reference to the unrealiable CNN story about "box-cutters" has been removed by MONGO, after a rather difficult discussion, in which an editor who read about the policy issues on the WP:V talk page had become involved. You might have noticed that I haven't changed anything in any 9/11-article from April 9 until today, and I have received a lot of feedback during this time. So the allegation that I would not seek out feedback from anyone who wants to join in the discussion seems rather strange to me.
 * I am acknowledging that 9/11 is a troubled area of editing (I have never claimed anything to the contrary), and I'll continue to seek out feedback from uninvolved editors (as well as from involved editors). --Cs32en (talk) 00:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Will you test the waters with a few other articles? If you have concerns about reliability of sources, WP:RSN is a great place to ask for help.  For questions about undue weight (probably what MONGO was concerned about), there is WP:NPOVN.  If you will take concerns to the noticeboards and follow whatever advice appears to be the consensus, I see no need for any arbitration enforcement, and I'll agree to remove my request. Jehochman Talk 00:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Note: This thread has been copied from User talk:Cs32en at the time the A/E request was withdrawn. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. --Cs32en (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)