User talk:182Line

Hello, 182Line, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages that you might find helpful. If you need interactive assistance please visit The Help desk.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard
  if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Hello 182Line,

In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has decided to procedurally remove your request as invalid. It exceeded the limit of 500 words and did not describe actual prior dispute resolution attempts. Also, concerns have been voiced about your account being a throwaway account used only for filing the request.

Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.

For grievances about the conduct of a Wikipedia editor, you should approach the user (in a civil, professional way) on their user talk page. However, other mechanisms for resolving a dispute also exist, such as raising the issue at

In all cases, you should review

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:04, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree:

About the claim that this not being discussed prior:

This evidence was first post at Signpost, and removed by an administrator who said it should be posted at WP:ANI instead. When the evidence was posted at WP:ANI, it was removed by another administrator who said this evidence shouldn't be posted there either. I contacted the Wikimedia Foundation, who said this evidence should be posted at ArbCom instead.

About the claim that my account is a "throwaway", whether it is or not, that is irrelevant to the evidence. The IRP are dangerous in real life, and want to keep my information as private as possible. That is not against policy.

About word limits, I have amended my report and will be posting it one more time because this is what was suggested by the Wikimedia Foundation. 182Line (talk) 08:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The committee basically said that the evidence presented does not rise to the level of necessitating an arb com case, thus why they declined to take it and removed it from the page. They are not obligated to take on every dispute that is brought before them. Please respect their decision. If you keep attempting to send it to arb com, you will just end up getting yourself in more trouble.

AA^Talk 13:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

You have twice restored a case request that was officially removed by the Arbitration Committee and for which you were properly notified. As such I have partially blocked you from that page for a period of 36 hours. Barkeep49 (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:ARBCOM, or whichever other Wikipedia noticeboard). 182Line (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

The fact that neither you nor anyone else has tried ANI, AE, or other Wikipedia notice boards is why the Arbitration Committee removed your request. I have not blocked you from pursuing any of those options. The analogy I'd make here is to someone saying "Because the Director of the FBI would not hear my evidence about teen gangs in my city, it shows that no one in law enforcement cares about crime" where the local town police might be very receptive to such a report. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@

AA^Talk 01:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=1196528218

see that link and the next diff.

AA^Talk 01:58, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

That other Wikipedia noticeboards had already been tried was mentioned several times in the report and by other users. The fact that this has had to be explained again to admins like Barkeep shows the level of due diligence that they put into reviewing the case. 182Line (talk) 08:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]