Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac

Main case page (Talk) — Preliminary statements (Talk) — Evidence (Talk) — Workshop (Talk) — Proposed decision (Talk)

This case has been suspended. Please do not edit this page. For information on the suspension of this case, see the appropriate motion here.

Scope: Conduct of Mzajac

Case clerks: MJL (Talk) & Dreamy Jazz (Talk) & Firefly (Talk) Drafting arbitrators: Aoidh (Talk) & Moneytrees (Talk) & Z1720 (Talk)

Behaviour on this page: Arbitration case pages exist to assist the Arbitration Committee in arriving at a fair, well-informed decision. You are required to act with appropriate decorum during this case. While grievances must often be aired during a case, you are expected to air them without being rude or hostile, and to respond calmly to allegations against you. Accusations of misbehaviour posted in this case must be proven with clear evidence (and otherwise not made at all). Editors who conduct themselves inappropriately during a case may be sanctioned by an arbitrator, clerk, or functionary, without further warning, by being banned from further participation in the case, or being blocked altogether. Personal attacks against other users, including arbitrators or the clerks, will be met with sanctions. Behavior during a case may also be considered by the committee in arriving at a final decision.

Arbitrators active on this case

To update this listing, edit this template and scroll down until you find the right list of arbitrators. If updates to this listing do not immediately show, try purging the cache.

Active:

Inactive:

GeneralNotability (talk · contribs)
L235 (talk · contribs)

Recused:

Guerillero (talk · contribs)

Case name simplified

The drafters have decided to simplify the case name to Mzajac. Nothing else is changed about the case. Thanks, Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 06:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For ease of future reference, the previous name was "Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac". Thryduulf (talk) 08:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask whether the case name was changed, and whether there were new rules for case naming. I am concluding that the case name was changed, and that an experiment in new rules for case naming has been dropped. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, I would understand it if the old style of case name were used all the way back in the aughts, where there were 40 cases per year on average. Nowadays, with the average number of cases being <10, it really doesn't seem useful or relevant. It does give me an idea, though... (rushes to his case summaries) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{Source assessment notes} 17:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to suspend

A motion to suspend the case and desysop Mzajac has been proposed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mzajac/Proposed decision#Motion to suspend. Comments are welcome at the proposed decision talk page. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]