Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Ebionites/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.

Question
Would the outcome of this decision likely touch on the page User:MichaelCPrice/mega2, which is essentially a recreation of the version of the Ebionites page before the removal of the unsourced material, and/or any subsequent attempts to recreate that page in userspace or elsewhere? John Carter 14:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Not sure about your question. Are you asking if User:MichaelCPrice/mega2 can remain and continue to be edited? FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 11:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's probably a better way of phrasing it, yeah. Also, as indicated above, what if anything should be done if the content were recreated on another userpage. I regret to say that, to my eyes anyway, the editor has given the impression of having all the qualities of a true religious fanatic, although in this case of an atheistic tilt, and that as I and others have said I don't think it likely that a decision on this case will necessarily change that aspect of the editor. John Carter 13:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * My initial reaction is that the page should be deleted because we do not provide user space to host poorly sourced content that we do not allow in our articles. I would like to give MichaelCPrice a chance to explain and perhaps remove it himself before we speedy delete it, okay. Let me look into it a bit more and get back with you. FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 15:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Deleting the material on the debatable grounds of it being "poorly sourced content" would be to judge content, would it not? I thought arbitration did not judge content? --Michael C. Price talk 19:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I think "content" refers to content in the encyclopedia itself. Userspace is a different matter. And at this point, I think the content being "poorly sourced" is probably only semantically arguable, as several parties have already referred extensively to the problems that particular content has. John Carter 19:34, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I would like to hear from someone with less of a conflict of interest in the matter. --Michael C. Price talk 01:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You will. I am nominating the page for deletion. John Carter 15:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)