User:Nsaum75/Sandbox9
RfC on Editors Behavior
- Example user (talk · contribs · logs)
Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.
Statement of the dispute[edit]
This is a summary written by users who are concerned by this user's conduct. Only users who certify this request should edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.
Cause of concern[edit]
Wikipedia's articles are no place for strong views. Or rather, we feel about strong views the way that a natural history museum feels about tigers. We admire them and want our visitors to see how fierce and clever they are, so we stuff them and mount them for close inspection. We put up all sorts of carefully worded signs to get people to appreciate them as much as we do. But however much we adore tigers, a live tiger loose in the museum is seen as an urgent problem.
Applicable policies and guidelines[edit]
List the policies and guidelines that apply to the disputed conduct. EX:
- WP:ARBPIA
- WP:ARBPIA2
- NPOV
- WP:GAME
- FORUM SHOPPING
- Wikilawyering
- Admin Shopping
- Admin Canvassing
- WP:MPOV
Desired outcome[edit]
This is a summary written by users who have initiated the request for comment. It should spell out exactly what the changes they'd like to see in the user, or what questions of behavior should be the focus.
Evidence of trying to resolve the dispute[edit]
(Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.)
Evidence of failing to resolve the dispute[edit]
(Provide diffs to demonstrate that the disputed behavior continued after trying to resolve the dispute.)
Users certifying the basis for this dispute[edit]
Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute.
[[User:]]
---
Additional users endorsing this cause for concern.
Questions
[edit]
Any users may post questions in this section. Answers should be reserved for those certifying the dispute.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.