User talk:Arcticocean/Archive 2020

A quickie drive by
Just wanted to say Thank You for your participation. Awilley & JFG helped get my alert up and running on my UTP. If you get a chance, check it out by trying to post a DS alert. Atsme Talk 📧 00:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Remove protection of orphaned template
Hey could you remove protection at Template:WikiProject Free and open-source software? Thanks! --Trialpears (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

DR thoughts
Hey AGK. I've always trusted your opinion over the years so am asking for it now, if you're willing. I opened a thread at WP:VPI about our DR processes, which really hasn't gone anywhere. With MedCom closing up shop in late last year, I see a gap now, and I don't think DRN is up to the job anymore (my views on how some handle disputes there is well known). I guess the problem now is that I'm not too sure how to fix this - RFC's are touted as a be all and end all to content dispute resolution, but doesn't really always work or garner a workable consensus. I'd start another RFC on dispute resolution, but I have the gut feel that nowadays most just don't care. I'd reach out to MedCom, but well, they don't exist anymore. We are a dying breed and I'm a bit stumped on the next move. Disputes haven't magically vanished in the last few years, my thought is they are now just all that less visible, and that can't be good for our content disputes if they're not getting resolved. On one dispute, I've decided to conduct private mediation Talk:William Lane Craig/Mediation - since I've got nowhere else to send it anymore. Anyways, appreciate you're busy with ArbCom etc, but I would value your thoughts on this one, if you have time. Cheers, Steven Crossin  Help resolve disputes! 00:32, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Magic word capitals
Hello. When making magic word templates, please do them in all caps. I moved Revisionmonthname to REVISIONMONTHNAME by creating REVISIONMONTHNAME and, on Revisionmonthname, redirecting it there. Please make magic word templates all caps when creating them. Thank you! Mr. Juicyfun (Obliterator time!) 01:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

P.S.: I also moved its /doc subpage the same way as the template, and also added substitution to the template by using. Mr. Juicyfun (Obliterator time!) 01:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Arbcom e-mail query 2
Do you remember this message that I posted on your talk page two months ago regarding two e-mails I've sent to Arbcom? In it, I asked you to confirm the receipt of my e-mails, which you did. That's appreciated. However, it's now been 60 (sixty) days and my e-mails, which I know for a fact the Committee has received, still haven't been answered. As an arbitrator, do you believe that this is acceptable? Iaritmioawp (talk) 12:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I would prefer that you received a response to your email earlier than now; and that you did not have to send a reminder. I shall look in again on the committee's email discussions and try to move things along.  You may need to keep asking for an update until you receive a decision; please consider doing so at WT:AC next time.  AGK  &#9632;  18:45, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Some types of attacks should not be tolerated on Wikipedia
AGK, I posted also on the case talk page, but I feel I should make the point here as well. "anti-Polish", directed at me in diff from 15 August, is described as: "In the popular usage the anti-Polonism is limited almost exclusively to the alleged ‘anti-Polish machinations’ on the part of Jews." in this expert source. This was the "justification" of the mass deportation of almost all Polish Jews in 1968. Use of such racially associated language (with the further implication of required action vs. such "anti-Polish" people) is not something that should be tolerated here. This is much worse than the continued bullying and hounding in the past few months - continuing as the case was open.Icewhiz (talk) 06:42, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Not the
first user to raise issues about your competence (or the lack of it) in English language; noting for posterity. Also noting that you have been pinged in my section over the Fram-case PD-talk-page, because you seem to have a general apathy in responding to pings that are critical of your actions. &#x222F; WBG converse 15:54, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations, you lucky guy, you're the swing vote
AGK, I don't envy you. Jehochman Talk 22:17, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment
Hi, AGK. I appreciate your work and strong ability with logic. You said  Could you please add a finding of fact to the case that includes a few representative diffs and links so that observers will know what that statement refers to? As the decision stands now, this remark is conclusory and may even appear to contradict the finding of fact that Fram has not abused admin tools. Additionally, would you consider adding a finding of fact that Fram was not unblocked to participate in the evidence of workshop phases of the case, as is our custom. Since the ban was found to be improper, it is relevant to know that it was kept in place through the duration of the case until after the desyop remedy had already been passed, and greatly hindered Fram's ability to defend himself as decisions were being made. I expect that the desysop will be challenged at RFA or at a future ArbCom. Thank you. Jehochman Talk 14:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC) updated at 19:51, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Wishes for a speedy recovery
Jehochman Talk 20:08, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Best wishes for the recovery. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

thanks
Hey, AGK, I hope your family member's health concerns are going well. I wanted to thank you for your hard work. I can only imagine how difficult this has been for all of you, especially if you've got stuff going on offwiki, and I appreciate the time and energy you all spent on this. --valereee (talk) 13:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Seconding this, hope all is OK with you and yours. Best wishes. Steven   Crossin  Help resolve disputes! 10:50, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom case
Hello. I saw your that a party is currently busy. It appears from the banner above their user page that is also unavailable. Certes (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Noted, but I think we would address that problem when Northamerica1000 requests more time or after it becomes clear they are completely unavailable.  AGK  &#9632;  13:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

BrownHairedGirl
I think you should consider that while BrownHairedGirl has indicated they can't respond due to RL issues, they sure are able to delete portals just fine. It feels disingenuous to hold up a case and yet continue to edit on the very thing the case is about. 50.35.82.234 (talk) 07:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * You might want to login with your account because it's not cricket to hide from scrutiny while slagging somebody else. I will however take over your objection.  See  as just one example among a great many, Mr. AGK.  It is bogus for BHG to ignore a request for arbitration while continuing to advance her preferred position in the underlying dispute.   Jehochman Talk 13:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I agree with the two above comments. This is like ANI-flu, only worse because the person in question is continuing with the behaviors they are being scrutinized over.--WaltCip (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * We should not stop having sympathy, but you are right that the Portals-related editing cannot continue unabated. I have just suggested as much to .   AGK  &#9632;  19:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I fully support sympathy. However, portal editing continues unabated. 50.35.82.234 (talk) 01:27, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom portals case
Hi AGK

I have just reviewed the list of participants at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Portals, and I believe that list omits one editor who should have been included due to their sustained WP:BATTLEFIELD conduct.

Please can you advise me on how and where I can make the case for that editor's addition?

Thanks? -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs)


 * AGK might answer but also you can ask for procedural help at the clerks noticeboard WP:AC/CN. Jehochman Talk 03:51, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, @Jehochman. I have asked at WP:AC/CN.
 * Sorry to AGK for the intrusion. I am still learning my way around Arbitration. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 06:21, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It was no problem at all. AGK  &#9632;  09:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:54, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks!  AGK  &#9632;  09:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

 * Thanks!  AGK  &#9632;  21:29, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

PIA index
Hi AGK. Regarding Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles, I included the first motion on the page because of the wikilawyer clause – that all existing sanctions are based on the wording of the former remedies rather than the new ones. So for any users that are currently subject to enforcement actions, that section remains relevant, and the collapsed section provides continuity between the old remedies and the new. That was my thinking at least – is that not helpful? – bradv  🍁  17:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, got you! Its inclusion is helpful, although perhaps not to the casual readers that the Index page is designed to serve.  I have put the remedy back onto the page, but moved it to the end and collapsed some of its detail.  Look good?   AGK  &#9632;  21:27, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

 * Thanks!  AGK  &#9632;  21:29, 26 December 2019 (UTC)