Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Statement by TomStar81: do it |
|||
Line 30:
:{{ping|SilkTork}} Weighing the two matters as they relate to the region, and taking into consideration the already existing WP:ARBPIA rulings which impact the middle east articles we have I would suggest that the committee approach the request by clarifying that for purposes of the HOA ruling, Saudi Arabia and Yemen are not to be considered part of the greater Horn of Africa ruling as these nations currently come more directly under the [[WP:ARBPIA]] ruling. This clarification would define the region as independent and as a result not covered by the Horn of Africa case. For the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, I would suggest clarifying that incidents related to these bodies of water - such as piracy in Somalia - may be designated as under the Horn of Africa case if the belligerents are from or based in one of the countries to which the HoA case applies, or designated as under ARBPIA if the belligerents are from or are based in one of the countries recognized as part of the Middle East (in this case, Yemen and Saudi Arabia). I would also clarify that while incidents on the Red Sea and/or Gulf of Aden may be reasonably construed to be under the jurisdiction of either ARBCOM case, admins should avoid preemptively attaching DS related tags to such articles unless there is a good reason to do so, and that in the event that both cases could be reasonably construed as applying to an article admins and editors should be encouraged to develop a consensus for which case a given page's CT topic designation should come under if a CT designation is judged to be needed. In the case of Somali piracy, for example, if the pirates are HoA and the Saudi Government secures there release, I'd defer to HoA since that would be the belligerent nation, but if a ship was attacked by Somali pirates and IDF forces fought them off, I'd me more incline to to lean toward ARBPIA for CT degination if it were judged needed. In the case of the example article ([[Houthi involvement in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war]]), that seems more geared toward ARBPIA since the belligerents are based in Yemen, while the [[Maersk Alabama hijacking]] would be more geared toward HoA since that was entirely a result of action by Somali pirates. As for any disruption or edit warring in the region, I have seen none - yet - however I am concerned that Hamas's attack on October 7th and the resulting conflict in the region is causing more and more groups to commit either resources to the region for defense of personnel for military action. Since the committee has approximately 5 different cases that may be obtusely construed to apply here in some way, shape, or form (HoA, ARBPIA, Iran, India-Afganistan-Pakistan, & Islam) I feel it important to clarify which case for which region here and to provide guidance on how to approach naval actions related to these regions. [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 06:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
:{{ping|SilkTork}} It works, at least for now. At a minimum it at least offer some level of clarity for the issue. I can live with it, although as the situation develops it may need to be looked at again, but we will cross those bridges when and if we get to them. [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 07:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
::{{ping|SilkTork}} Do it. [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 12:34, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
=== Statement by {other-editor} ===
|