Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/WikiProject Tropical Cyclones

Original filing?
Where is the request for arbitration? The main case page has no statements. What is the dispute that is being attempted to be resolved? Isn't there an original complaint with statements that arbitrators used to evaluate whether to take the case? Where is that? ConstantPlancks (talk) 00:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @ConstantPlancks: You can find them in the "Preliminary statements" and "Preliminary decisions" sections of the |main case page. Preliminary statements can be found in a subpage (/Preliminary statements). Chlod (say hi!) 00:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Got it. I didn't see the link in the Preliminary Statements section so it looked empty. ConstantPlancks (talk) 00:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Old WPTC discussions
With the draft that just accepted, it has come to light that the off-wiki discussion issue extends far beyond what the committee has been considering thus far in this case. Draft_talk:Tropical_Storm_Helene_(2012) shows evidence of off-wiki discussion as far back as 2012. It's unknown how many other discussions have been tainted in this manner. Noah Talk 13:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Hurricane Noah I am not a drafter for this case. I am slightly unsurprised to hear that there was off-wiki coordination in 2012 on IRC. The good news is that this discovery doesn't really change the shape of what we're trying to do now: minimize future disruption/violation of Wikipedia policies which means a focus on what's been happening recently, which is the evidence that was submitted during this case. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I realize that some of these discussions are nearly if not over a decade old, but shouldn't something be done about them since they are tainted? Noah Talk 15:08, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No? Primefac (talk) 10:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

's comment
In the proposed decision talk page there is an interesting statement that links WikiProject Tropical Cyclones to Hypothetical Hurricanes Wiki in Fandom, referring to falling-your-own-sword proposals that were suggested in the workshop. I think this is an issue that could be considered.  Mario Jump  83!  04:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Unless discussions at the Hypothetical Hurricane Wiki have influenced discussions or decisions on Wikipedia, I don't really see how it's relevant. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * At least one of the users involved is a member of that community. The falling-on-your-sword, over the top proposals proposed really remind me of my time there (2017-2021), before I moved on to more productive things...for some reason, they tend to act like that when literally anything happens, and often literally beg to be banned as some kind of self-pity or flagellation. - Skynorth/ Starfrost my talk page 22:30, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I still don’t see how that’s relevant to this case. There is no evidence that theperson you’re mentioning has connections with HHW. Even if they do, ArbCom does not have jurisdiction on fandom. Unless canvassing of WP discussions or a breach of policy related to this case occurred on HHW, I don’t think this should be considered. Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 01:09, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, what Destroyeraa said. There's no rule here against being on HHW. Membership in communities on other websites has no bearing here unless there is reason to believe there was canvassing or other inappropriate coordination on those sites. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:25, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Hurricane Noah unblocked
I'm noting for the arbitrators that I have unblocked Hurricane Noah proper, so the block does not need to be reinstated once the case closes, notwithstanding any remedy to the contrary. — TNT (talk • she/her) 22:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)