Guild Wars Wiki talk:Arbitration committee

Should this page not have a list of cases, especially current ones? Backsword 17:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Just in case the arbcomm pages are not being watched... Guild Wars Wiki talk:Arbitration committee/2007-11-15-User:Raptors#Sockpuppets. -- ab.er.rant 14:45, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Arb Comm Pages?

Where does one go to request Arb Comm assistance? I do not have an immediate need, but I was curious and therefore searched without avail. Looking at Ab.er.rant's post, there is apparently a set of arbcomm pages for such requests. Could we have that linked from the main? Or at least could it be made more readily available, say with a redirect by typing "ArbComm" into the search bar? Just a couple of thoughts. Thanks. -- Gaile 06:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

And in a splendid example of "reading down a few lines on the main page" I located that which I sought. Please ignore my request above. ;) -- Gaile 06:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Handling ArbComm cases during an election

I propose adding the following paragraph after the first paragraph of this article:

Bureaucrats are considered members of the ArbComm based upon the date the request for arbitration is made. If a bureaucrat loses his seat during an arbitration, he still acts as a member of ArbComm for that case until the arbitration is complete. Similarly, if a user attains a bureaucrat seat in the middle of an arbitration, he is ineligible to participate in that arbitration.

—Tanaric 07:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good :) - anja 10:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Something that probably should have been in there from the start, but was overlooked. I support this. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 10:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Support. I also added a "for that case" in your suggested text above to clarify. --Xeeron 11:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Support. LordBiro 20:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

This would provide continuity, so I support. Presumably needs to go on the admin policy, rather than this desciptive page.

Also, if the date of acceptance or request preferable? Backsword 07:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree with change/idea, though also agree with Backsword's thought about whether we should be changing an official policy page instead. It should tend toward date of request (as originally proposed) rather than acceptance; otherwise you run into the issue of "who exactly is supposed to decide on accepting/declining?" across transitions. --Rezyk 23:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed with Backsword about where this should be placed. Rezyk's support of my original proposal of date of request is the reason I proposed it that way to begin with. —Tanaric 04:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Support it either way :) -- ab.er.rant 15:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Added to Adminship policy, removed from Policy proposal list. —Tanaric 04:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hoorah. — ク Eloc 貢 21:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

CheckUser

I have completely digested Wikipedia:CheckUser, which points me to come here. However, I don't see how registered user had apply for this tool. They are not listed alike Guild Wars Wiki:Arbitration committee/Requests. Nor there is a list of CheckUser - users. Although I did found out by checking Special:ActiveUsers. Can I have details? Mostly looking forward for GW2W. What I learn in GWW, could be of potential benefit in the future.

"On the English Wikipedia, CheckUser is entrusted to a restricted number of users who can both execute CheckUser inquiries subject to their own discretion and monitor and crosscheck each other's use of the function. The permission is approved (exceedingly rarely and only to trusted editors) by the Arbitration Committee, following community consultation and committee vetting. Checkusers are not required to be administrators, but must be 18 years of age or older and have provided personal identification (which once confirmed is destroyed) to the Foundation."

Yoshida Keiji talk 13:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

CheckUser ability is given to all sysops and bureaucrats - that's currently the only restriction on who has it. (The system-generated list is at Special:ListUsers.) pling 19:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard allows regular users immediate contact with administrators to deal with vandal bots. Could we also have a way to request Check User to confirm registered users and IP that seem to match but want certainty? Yoshida Keiji talk 01:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

If there's a case of suspected sockpuppetry, you can post it on the noticeboard like usual. Sysops won't post results of the checkuser, but they'll look into the situation. -Auron 05:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)