Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

Page restriction request

Could someone assist Armatura with asking for a page restriction as a discretionary sanction? See Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan_2#1RR_for_Battle_of_Shusha_(2020). The template doesn't seem to work for page restrictions. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks, KevinL, for trying to help. Also asked on the article talk page, hoping that one of the admins who dealt with NKR-related topics previously might assist. Regards, Armatura (talk) 00:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:AN would be the easiest one, but the request makes perfect sense to me, and I will impose the sanction in about an hour when I get to the office, no need to duplicate.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:53, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Time to archive

Could we possibly switch from seven days to at most like five days? This board is getting a little cramped with closed requests. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:23, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Info about the 500 words limit

Hi, I didn't understand if, for the one who fills out the form, the limit of 500 words only concerns this part:
Diffs of edits that violate this sanction or remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it
Or also this part
Additional comments by editor filing complaint
Can I write 500 words in all? Or only in the first part 500, while in the second there are no limits? Thank you, I'm so noob.--Mhorg (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I think the word limit applies to the total of all the explanatory words you add, in whatever section. EdJohnston (talk) 19:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern about recent influx of collapsed content

My sense is that this doesn't happen often here (trimming by collapsing). But ever since MVBW started doing so in the report that features themselves, it seems to have spread to most other AE requests currently live. I just wanted to emphasize that I'm not particularly a fan of the practice, so I do hope it doesn't become a regular thing. Thoughts? El_C 17:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I will not do it again. My very best wishes (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey, no worries. El_C 17:38, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Collapsing in a thread about collapsing? Well, yes! Anyway, let's not have the actual content behind these various complaints spillover tooo much in this discussion. Thanks. El_C 18:38, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

This is like a chain reaction. Someone places new accusations, another contributor places more rebuttals, etc. Why? Because I guess the contributors have no idea which of the accusations will be taken by admins very seriously. Another problem: a lot of the accusations are false, but one needs to know more details to make a judgement. For example, Mhorg just posted a number of new accusations, claiming "wikistalking" everywhere with supporting diffs like that. How is that harassment if I did not even touch the content he recently included to this page? And so it goes. My very best wishes (talk) 17:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC) By chance in this month of discussions you are reverting my edits from 2015, either on articles you have never touched, or reverting my stuff on articles you haven't touched for over a year. Now you end up again on an article that you have never edited, and you edit the part related to the topic that I have covered few hours before. Do you seriously want to claim that you are not checking all my moves? What do I have to do to be left alone?--Mhorg (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC) None of my edits or comments was harassment. I am only trying to explain you the policies, like in our latest discussion here. My very best wishes (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC) Maybe it is I who do not know English well, but it seems to me the situation I am experiencing this month. Wikipedia:Harassment#Wikihounding: "Hounding on Wikipedia (or "wikihounding") is the singling out of one or more editors, joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance, or distress to the other editor. Hounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia."--Mhorg (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Additional pings to users who are using collapsed content in AE requests at the present moment: Paul Siebert, Nicoljaus, Springee, LokiTheLiar, SpicyBiryani (a lot). Also, to expand a bit: my view is that collapsed content sorta works to circumvent the word limit, so, I think that a simple diff showing what was removed, would better live up to the spirit of that requirement. Thanks! El_C 17:38, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

My collapsed content is a timeline, and needs to be to show reverts over time. I would just link the relevant history page except that people specifically requested that I provide more evidence when I did that. Loki (talk) 17:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, Loki. That kind of usage of collapsed content is one which I think actually is appropriate for the noticeboard. El_C 18:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

They're a lot of pretty serious allegations against me so my statement was kind of doomed to be long from the start. If any further word count cutting is needed I'll just add a diff to the removed content, but considering the stage of discussion we've reached now, I don't think any more long statements and cutting will be necessary. SpicyBiryani (talk) 19:39, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

SpicyBiryani, that is incorrect. Significant trimming is still necessary as your response to the complaint continues to grossly exceed to assigned word limit. El_C 19:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Right, I'm doing it now. It was 1 in the morning for me when you posted this so I couldn't do it then. SpicyBiryani (talk) 07:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)