Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Clarification request: Noleander: statement by Newyorkbrad
m →‎Statement by Newyorkbrad: minor copyedit, fmt
Line 511:
As an arbitrator I drafted most of the decision in the ''Noleander'' case, which it's hard for me to believe was 13 years ago. I think the principles I drafted stand up well to rereading at this late date; but as I just pointed out in another section of this page, there is a limit to how much any discussion of current policy should be steered by a general principle contained in a wiki-ancient arbitration decision which, like any ArbCom decision, was written in the context of a particular set facts.
 
That being said, those who flatter me by seeking guidance from principles contained in old ArbCom decisions that I drafted in my past wiki-life might also enjoy [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitrationRequests for arbitration/International_Churches_of_ChristInternational Churches of Christ#Conflict of interest]], although the relevant policies have evolved somewhat since that time (as has the threshold of disruption necessary to trigger an ArbCom case to begin with, but I digress).
 
MembershipAn editor's membership in a given religious group or adherence to particular religious beliefs, nor the lack of such membership or beliefs, does not give rise to a "conflict of interest" that must be disclosed or should generally be inquired about. In this context, non-neutral, biased, or otherwise disruptive editing can almost always be addressed on its own merits without asking intrusive questions about editors' personal attributes or beliefs. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 14:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 
=== Statement by {other-editor} ===
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment"