Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Archive 21) (bot Tag: Replaced |
m →Expand footnote 2?: fix section header |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
== Expand footnote 2? == |
|||
From section [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy#Scope and responsibilities]]: |
|||
{{quote|The Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia has the following duties and responsibilities: |
|||
... |
|||
: 3. To handle requests (other than self-requests) for removal of administrative tools; |
|||
}} |
|||
Note 2 on the same page clarifies this: {{tq|... administrator accounts which had been inactive for over a year ... may also be [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Procedural removal for inactive administrators|desysopped by a community process]]}}, and links to subsection of [[Wikipedia:Administrators]]. The linked subsection "Procedural removal for inactive administrators" is actually a part of section [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Review and removal of adminship|Review and removal of adminship]]. Should the Note 2 be altered to explain the whole section, not just a subsection of policy [[WP:ADMIN]]? There is also another project page about removal of administrative tools—[[Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Removal of permissions]]. Should it be referenced in the same or separate footnote? —[[User:Andrybak|andrybak]] ([[User talk:Andrybak|talk]]) 20:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 20:07, 25 June 2019
Use this page to discuss information on the page (and subpages) attached to this one. This includes limited discussion of the Arbitration Committee itself, as a body. Some things belong on other pages:
|
 | This Arbitration Committee has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
| Wikipedia Arbitration |
|---|
 |
|
|
| Track related changes |
Expand footnote 2?
From section Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy#Scope and responsibilities:
The Arbitration Committee of the English Wikipedia has the following duties and responsibilities:
...
- 3. To handle requests (other than self-requests) for removal of administrative tools;
Note 2 on the same page clarifies this: ... administrator accounts which had been inactive for over a year ... may also be desysopped by a community process
, and links to subsection of Wikipedia:Administrators. The linked subsection "Procedural removal for inactive administrators" is actually a part of section Review and removal of adminship. Should the Note 2 be altered to explain the whole section, not just a subsection of policy WP:ADMIN? There is also another project page about removal of administrative tools—Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Removal of permissions. Should it be referenced in the same or separate footnote? —andrybak (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2019 (UTC)