Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Longevity/Proposed decision

Arbitrators active on this case

 * To update this listing, [ edit this template] and scroll down until you find the right list of arbitrators.

Late evidence re JJB
I'm sorry this comes quite late, and it may perhaps seem like a nasty thing to do at this stage, but seeing that an alternative between a full ban and a topic ban for JJB is currently on the table, I think the arbitrators might still want to take into account what I submitted here. Sorry I can't condense it into more handy diffs because I've been a total outsider to all this. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

COI

 * "Editors do not have a conflict of interest merely because they have personal or professional interest or expertise in a topic, nor because they are members of or affiliated with a group of individuals with personal or professional interest or expertise in a topic." (PP3)

Hmm. If I'm a member of the board of directors of Exxon Corporation, I presumptively have a COI regarding issues relating to CO2 emissions, for example. 71.141.88.54 (talk) 11:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe that's right. The presumption isn't valid to act upon unless supported by reliable sources, in which case there wouldn't be a COI merely by being part of a group anymore.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 13:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree with Coren; it takes more than membership. It would, however, create a COI with respect to Exxon. Cool Hand Luke 15:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)