Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by QEDK (talk | contribs) at 12:29, 26 August 2023 (→‎Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute closed: cmt). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Behaviour on this page: This page is for discussing announcements relating to the Arbitration Committee. Editors commenting here are required to act with appropriate decorum. While grievances, complaints, or criticism of arbitration decisions are frequently posted here, you are expected to present them without being rude or hostile. Comments that are uncivil may be removed without warning. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or the clerks, will be met with sanctions.

Change to the Functionary team

Original announcement

This is a nice contrast to the welcome Brad initially got upon his return to activity here. Welcome back. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back to the “Brad cabal”! Courcelles (talk) 22:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back! Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 03:46, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm It's August. Are we nearing the time to start the "bradv for Arbcom" campaign, yet? : ) - jc37 05:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the warm welcome. @Jc37, let me save you and anyone else who might be thinking this some time: No. :) – bradv 13:09, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well. There's always next year...  : ) - jc37 13:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I might as well say in public what I've said in private. I have absolutely no doubt that bradv would be a good arb (again). On the other hand, I think it's more important, for the long-term health of the project, to be identifying, grooming, and recruiting new blood into leadership positions rather than recycling the old guard. RoySmith (talk) 20:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. It's nice to see a well-respected user return. Nice to meet you, and welcome back. Pecopteris (talk) 18:13, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Original announcement

This is a very sad occasion, speaking as somebody who has seen BHG around for almost two decades, and almost always agreed with her on substance. A very high and substantial edit count, from a person who was key in forming many of our early editorial principals. I do understand what happened and why, but its still hard to take. Wish BHG, who always had very, very impressive energy and insight, all the best for future projects, and wish to thank her for her countless hours / years of voluntary work which has significantly aided our project. It seems like the end of an era. Ceoil (talk) 03:37, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like the end of a 3 year long downward spiral.I think Wiki was stressing her and this is certainly time for her to think of her actions through.I hope she comes back better that ever.--88.240.152.194 (talk) 08:24, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

She has closed to 3M edits, the second-highest only behind Ser Amantio di Nicolao. Just a random Wikipedian(talk) 09:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thank the Arbitration Committee for making the difficult but ultimately correct decision for enwiki. I truly wish it didn't have to come to this but years of intractable disputes take a toll on editors, and the community in general (Barkeep's vote on the matter comes to mind, it is quite well-written and conveys the point much better than I have). That said, I wish the parting editors the best, and I hope to see them participating positively to the wiki in the future. --qedk (t c) 12:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]