Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:20, 8 May 2009

Proposed principles

Decorum

1) Misplaced Pages users are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users; to approach even difficult situations in a dignified fashion and with a constructive and collaborative outlook; and to avoid acting in a manner that brings the project into disrepute. Unseemly conduct, such as incivility, assumptions of bad faith, trolling, harassment, disruptive point-making, and gaming the system is prohibited. Concerns regarding the actions of other users should be brought up in the appropriate forums.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Administrative decorum

2) Administrators are expected to maintain an appropriate level of decorum. In particular, they are expected to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others, and to avoid acting in a way that brings the project into disrepute.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Struggle and standard of debate

3) The purpose of Misplaced Pages is to create a high-quality, free-content encyclopedia, in an atmosphere of camaraderie and mutual respect among contributors. While disagreements among editors are inevitable, all editors are expected to work calmly and reasonably towards resolving them, to collaborate in good faith, and to compromise where appropriate—even if they believe that their viewpoint is the only correct one. It is also inevitable that philosophical differences among the participants will result in disputes over questions regarding project policies. Nevertheless, discourse is limited by the expectation that even difficult situations will be resolved in a dignified fashion. It is unacceptable for editors to engage in vituperative rhetoric without attempting to seek help and advice from others in other areas of the project.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Building consensus: WikiProjects

A WikiProject is a collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific topic or family of topics within Misplaced Pages; and, simultaneously, a group of editors that use said pages to collaborate on encyclopedic work. It may maintain various collaborative processes, keep track of work that needs to be done, and act as a forum where issues of interest to the editors of a subject may be discussed. It should not be used as a platform to push for a certain type of agenda or a view. When in doubt of achieving consensus at the WikiProject level, users are always encouraged to seek help beyond that (i.e. sister WikiProjects, Village pump, etc....).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

"Ignore all rules"

Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules is one of the project's oldest policies and advises users: "if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore it." This advice can be helpful when addressing uncontroversial or unanticipated situations in which the project can best be helped by avoiding the unintended consequences that would occur by applying the literal wording of a policy. However, "ignore all rules" should not be used to circumvent a consensus decision about the application of a policy.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Spirit versus letter

Usually, there is no clear distinction between proposed policy, guidelines, and official policy. Policy at Misplaced Pages is a matter of consensus, tradition, and practice. While the principles of the policies are mostly well established, the details are often still evolving. Policies are not drafted like legal documents and users are urged not to be legalistic about reading policy pages. Policies are actually there to help Misplaced Pages work, defining more closely what should be done and preserving a good atmosphere. A narrow view of a policy or guideline is not likely to resolve matters. All policies and guidelines together convey to the same ideas as the five pillars.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Administrators

Administrators are trusted members of the community. They are expected to lead by example and to behave in a respectful, civil manner in their interactions with others. Administrators are expected to follow Misplaced Pages policies and to perform their duties to the best of their abilities. Occasional mistakes are entirely compatible with adminship, as administrators are not expected to be perfect, but consistently or egregiously poor judgment may result in the removal of administrator status. Administrators are expected to learn from experience and from justified criticisms of their actions.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Administrator communications

Administrators are expected to provide timely and civil explanations for their actions. All administrator actions are logged and offer a "reason" field to be used for this purpose. While all editors are expected to reply to good-faith queries about their activities placed on their talk page, administrators are particularly expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their administrative actions and to justify them when needed.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Blocking

Blocking is a serious matter. Administrators should be exceedingly careful when blocking. Blocking may only be used to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, and not to punish users; that is, blocking is preventative, not punitive. Blocks should be made only if other means --such as warnings-- are not likely to be effective. Even when reversed, blocks that appear arbitrary or capricious, or are based on poor methodology and evidence, have a chilling effect on people's willingness to contribute to Misplaced Pages.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Baiting

Editing in a manner so as to provoke other editors goes against established Misplaced Pages policies, as well as the spirit of Misplaced Pages and the will of its editors. Editing in such a manner may be perceived as trolling and harassment.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Repeated notifications

Notification are good practice. However, frequent and repeated notifications of the same subject directed at the same user may be perceived as harassment. Instead of notifying the same user of the same thing repeatedly, users are advised to seek other venues and let other uninvolved users and/or administrators to deal with it.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Notifying users of potential and effective blocks

Although notifying users of potential blocks is commonplace, administrators should avoid hinting to blocks to users with whom they are in a content dispute.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Rollback

The rollback tool allows administrators and rollbackers to quickly perform reverts. It should be used with caution and restraint, in part because it does not allow adding an explanation to the automatic edit summary. Other than to revert vandalism and edits by banned users who are not allowed to make those edits, rollback may also be used in circumstances where widely spread edits (by a misguided editor or malfunctioning bot) are judged to be unhelpful to the encyclopedia, since such edits would be tedious to revert manually. However, unless explanation is provided in another appropriate location, such as at a relevant talk page, the rollback tool should not be used to perform any revert which ought ordinarily to be explained, such as a revert of a good-faith content edit nor it should be used in content disputes.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Recall process

The recall process is a voluntary. However, for the sake of mutual trust and respect between administrators and users and administrators themselves, it is recommended that administrators who opt for being open to recall to respect their own words and promises. It is also recommended to have one's recall procedure explicit (on the administrator userspace) in order to avoid any unnecessary requests for clarifications.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Recidivism

Users and administrators whose actions have been questioned many times are expected to avoid repeating mistakes should they continue to participate in the project. Failure to do so may lead to the imposition of severe sanctions.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Request for comment/User conduct

A user-conduct request for comment ("RfC/U") represents a forum in which editors may raise concerns about the conduct of a fellow editor or administrator. Although this procedure can be misused, when utilized in good faith, it presents an editor with the opportunity to learn that concerns exist about his or her conduct, respond to the concerns, and if appropriate adjust his or her conduct. Civility and decorum are especially important in the highly charged atmosphere of a user-conduct RfC. RfCs should neither be used abusively nor the concerns raised there should be ignored.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

External conduct

While users' conduct outside of Misplaced Pages is generally not subject to Misplaced Pages policies or sanctions, the Committee may choose to consider off-wiki activities which are egregiously disruptive to the project in determining findings and sanctions.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Harassment

Any user conduct or comments that another editor could reasonably perceive as harassing (as defined in Misplaced Pages:Harassment) should be avoided. On occasion, an action or comment may cause someone to feel harassed, with justification, even if the action or comment was not intended as harassing. In such situations, the user's discontinuing the objected-to behavior, promising not to repeat the behavior, or apologizing is often sufficient to resolve the concern, especially where there is an isolated comment rather than a pattern of them.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

IRC Misplaced Pages #channels

Discussions held in the #wikipedia IRC channels have historically been subject to substantial and unpredictable unauthorized disclosure to parties outside the channel. This limits the channel(s) usefulness for discussion of matters requiring privacy and discretion, as noted in finding 15. There have been several instances, both reported on-wiki and known to Arbitrators anecdotally, in which users have approached administrators on IRC (whether in #wikipedia-en-admins specifically or in private discussions) for the purpose of urging that another user be blocked or moving or protecting a page, even though no emergency or other circumstances are present that would prevent the issue from being raised in the appropriate manner on-wiki. At times, these requests involve parties with whom a user is engaged in a content or editing dispute, but the user being discussed has no opportunity to respond to the allegation being made. While it is understandable that an aggrieved user would seek the immediacy of IRC contact rather than have to post a concern about another user on a noticeboard that might be backlogged or unattended, these types of requests still raise serious issues of process and fairness. Making frequent requests may lead to sanctions.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Sanctions and circumstances

In deciding what sanctions to impose against an administrator or other editor, the Arbitration Committee will consider the editor's overall record of participation, behavioral history, and other relevant circumstances. An editor's positive and valuable contributions in one aspect of his or her participation on Misplaced Pages do not excuse misbehavior or questionable judgment in another aspect of participation, but may be considered in determining the sanction to be imposed.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed findings of fact

Locus of dispute

This case involves two sets of disputes. One of these originated in the actions of administrator Ryulong including but not limited to his questionable blocks and use of the Rollback tool while the other arises from the editorial conflicts over the verifiability of the content of articles falling under the scope of WikiProject Tokusatsu. A common element is the involvement of administrator Ryulong (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and Mythdon (talk · contribs) in both areas.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong

Ryulong (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), has edited Misplaced Pages since February 2006, and has been an administrator since January 2007. He has made more than 82,000 edits to Misplaced Pages, has taken more than 10,000 administrator actions including blocks, deletions, and page protections, and has shown a high level of dedication to the project.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Mythdon

Mythdon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been editing Misplaced Pages since December 2007. During that time, he has shown a strong interest in the same content area as Ryulong and a high level of dedication to the Tokusatsu WikiProject.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Questionable blocks by Ryulong

During the time of his adminship, Ryulong has made around 7,000 blocks. A small percentage of those blocks were contested by members of the community as referenced by the first and second RfCs. Some of those blocks were made without prior warning (, (March 09)) and ( one hour after the user's last edit.)). Some others were excessively and unnecessarily long or with a user he's in dispute with or after a single edit with email disabled and talk page editing disabled and no reason for blocking was given (see details here). Many of those actions were made prior or during the second RfC.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong's first RfC

Ryulong's first RfC was opened on July 2007. The RfC concerned mainly his blocking attitude. In general, the community believed administrator Ryulong is a good asset to the project but that he's quite strict to when it comes to using the block button and that some of his blocks are excessive both in nature and in length. The community also agreed to give it another chance.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong misusing rollback

Ryulong has misused his administrative rollback tool to revert edits that may be considered unnecessary and non-vandalism, in Power Rangers content disputes. This occurred on multiple occasions. He was blocked for this on March 4, and continued the behavior after the block (see )

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Response to complaints about rollbacks

Several editors posted to Ryulongs's talkpage in regards to the rollbacks. Some protested the rollbacks, while others asked the reasons for them or expressed concern about potential violation of policy. Ryulong's responses to some of the queries were cursory, while others were reverted by Ryulong, sometimes in an uncivil manner such as this.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Response to general complaints

Several editors have stated explicitly their concerns concerning Ryulongs's general administrative actions (see mainly both RfCs and the recent ANI thread). While Ryulong has disputed some of the concerns, he maintained that he's been improving his overall performance as an administrator.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong and Mythdon's interactions

Ryulong and Mythdon have frequently interacted with each other in the course of article writing, particularly within WikiProject Tokusatsu. The interaction first started positively before it became negative. During these interactions, Mythdon would leave notes on Ryulong's talk page, but Ryulong generally found these to be unhelpful or lack validity. Mythdon has shown a continually strict interpretation of policies, and Ryulong has grown gradually more impatient with Mythdon as a result, multiple times stating that he would seek Mythdon be blocked for disruption.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Possible threats of blocks

During the dispute between Ryulong and Mythdon, the former has in a few occasions referred to Mythdon being blocked. While one of those comments made on December 08 this one may be seen as a clear threat, the other two made on January 09 and February 09 are debatable whether they constitute a threat or not or whether the intention is clear or not or just referring to actually 'seeking' a block made by someone else (see here and here).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong's second RfC

Ryulong's second RfC concerned mainly his use of rollback, and several instances of blocks he had performed. It also concerned his interactions with user:Mythdon. It was created on March 3, 2009 by user:Tiptoety and closed by the same user on March 20, 2009 just after this arbitration case started by user:Synergy. 13 members of the community with the March 4th's statement of Synergy where s/he said that " is here to request that steps down, or be prepared to have a Request for Arbitration filed in regards to this RfC upon a reasonable number of signatories endorsing this very statement". On the other hand, Ryulong responded to the RfC filing and saw 'no use to it, other than it being used in some future RFAR should he pisses someone off, again.'

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Behaviour of Ryulong during the case hearing

During this case hearing, there has been substantial improvements from the part of Ryulong. He's started to use the 'Undo' button instead that of Rollback when it is not necessary though not always leaving an edit summary for the revert (see here). However, and in other instances during this case, Ryulong continued to use the Rollback button for non-vandalism edits (see here, here, here and here as examples).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong and IRC I

A number of administrators have indicated that Ryulong has been seeking administrative actions from other administrators via Misplaced Pages IRC channels (see here and here. Requests made by Ryulong have spanned over a period of 2 years. Ryulong has confirmed these allegations.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong and IRC II

According to this evidence, Ryulong requested a page move and protection from administrator Risker on IRC.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong discussing the identity of Mythdon

According to User:MBisanz, Ryulong approached MBisanz last week to inform him that he had found out Mythdon's real life identity through a Youtube page. According to the same information, a couple hours later an IP from the same US State as Ryulong harassed Mythdon calling him a 'little kid'. MBisanz says he confronted Ryulong and he denied socking, blaming his University's geolocation for the similarity (see here).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Mythdon's posts at Ryulong's talk page

Mythdon has been posting notes at Ryulong's talk page about Ryulong's use of the rollback feature for more than a year. Examples include Before your account, (19 January 2008) username transaltion (18 January 2008) Fast responses (Why else would you respond very fast - 10 March 2008) Why? (Why is it that you archive your talk page every month? - 5 February 2008) and Ryulong on Youtube. However, Most of Mythdon posts in 2008 were consisted of warnings in relation to Ryulong's use of the rollback tool. On May 6, 2009, Mythdon marked an unsinged comment as "unsinged" belonging to another user --an edit that Ryulong undid. (see ). Mythdon considers that some of those questions were 'just foolish and dumb questions' tough not intended as harassment.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Mythdon monitoring users' use of Rollback

After Mythdon's exclusive monitoring of the use of the rollback feature by Ryulong, Mythdon has started in recent weeks to warn or investigate other users and administrators. (see ). Mythdon has taken to patrolling through edits with the stated purpose to "look for rollbacks" to question editors about potential misuse of the tool. These notes have been viewed as unnecessary and irritating by several of the questioned editors (see )

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Actually, the users aren't irritated. They simply disagree if anything. Arrowned disagreed, but was civil and polite about it. There is no irritation to it, as far as I know. Until proven, no assertion of irritation should be made. —Mythdon t/c 01:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You are probably right. I am noting it and leaving it for others to comment on that. -- FayssalF - 01:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Mythdon's interpretation of policies and guidelines

Throughout his time on Misplaced Pages, Mythdon has sometimes shown an excessively strict interpretation of policy as admitted by themselves here. This led to several confrontations between Mythdon and other editors including Ryulong, particularly within WikiProject Tokusatsu. In other cases, he was probably correct in raising the concerns though he has never tried any alternative methods or venues to seek assistance or wider opinions (see here and here).

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Mythdon stance toward the articles

Mythdon's contributions are mainly revolving around the Power Rangers area and topics. Mythdon has shown over the time that he holds a fixed view towards those subjects. Views include a determination of presenting some articles to AfD even after themselves finding reliable sources. (see )

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Mythdon and on and off-wiki harassment of Ryulong

On-wiki, Mythdon has asked Ryulong if he were user Ryulong on Youtube (see here). Off-wiki and back in March 2008, Mythdon did contact the account named Ryulong on Youtube, asking whether or not that user was the same Ryulong as the one on Misplaced Pages, in which the user declined to answer. Mythdon kept asking over and over for a period of time in hopes of receiving a response but never got one. This year, just about a few months ago, he attempted to ask again, but since the newer message didn't go through as far as he knows, there was no response, which implies that the user blocked him from contacting him. Besides that, he declares he has never attempted to contact Ryulong anywhere off-wiki. (see here)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

"which implies that the user blocked me from contacting him/her" - The correct way would be "which implies that the user blocked him from contacting him/her". —Mythdon t/c 00:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Proposed remedies

Ryulong desysopped

1) For misuse of his administrative tools and failure to address the concerns of the community for a long period coupled with his off-wiki behavior, Ryulong is desysopped. He may regain adminship only via an appeal to ArbCom not before 6 months from the closure of the case or through a RfA anytime.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong placed under ArbCom probation

1.1) For misuse of his administrative tools and failure to address the concerns of the community for a long period, Ryulong is placed under ArbCom probation for a period of 1 year. In case Ryulong misuses the tools again, he shall be desysopped under the discretion of ArbCom via a motion.

Comment by Arbitrators:

This is an alternative to 1 coupled with 2 and 3. -- FayssalF - 01:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Ryulong cautioned

2) Ryulong is strongly cautioned to use the administrator's rollback tool only when reverting vandalism. In case of further misuses he may be blocked briefly for each violation, extending to the removal of the rollback tool after 3 blocks, depending on the blocking administrator's discretion.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Should he not follow this restriction if it does get accepted, then what? —Mythdon t/c 01:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

This is not a restriction; it is a caution. But yes, you are right about missing clarification. -- FayssalF - 01:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Should he not be desyopped, and in fact he does retain all of his tools. Don't you think we ought to specify when he should and should not use the block button? Such as, only in situations he is uninvolved with, and only after leaving them a warning? I think that leaving a restriction in regards to blocking would be more hazardous than leaving one off for rollback. Tiptoety 00:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll leave that to other Arbitrators who may opt for 1.1. above. I've just clarified it now. -- FayssalF - 00:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ryulong admonished

3) Ryulong is admonished:

(A) For their behaviour off-wiki and directed to refrain from seeking Mythdon's identity off-wiki, identifying personal information of Misplaced Pages users, and from disclosing that information to others. Any further occurrence would lead to severe sanctions;

(B) For contacting administrators in private and seek blocks of users he is in dispute with or other administrative actions from other administrators.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Shouldn't this conclude to more like a restriction than an admonishment? —Mythdon t/c 02:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Mythdon restricted and placed under mentorship

4) Mythdon is restricted and placed under mentorship for a period of 1 year. The terms are:

(A) They are urged to find a mentor within a month of the closure of this case are are free to get a mentor of their choice. Mythdon is directed to inform the Committee once the mentor is selected;

(B) They should consult and take guidance from the mentor when issues arise concerning their editing or behavior. Inability to work constructively with a mentor may be a sign that a user has continued difficulty in collaborative editing and that stronger sanctions are required; successful editing during the mentorship may demonstrate that the opposite is true;

(C) During mentorship, Mythdon is restricted from making edits such as unencessary questions and abusive warnings to users' talk pages if not approved by their mentor. The mentor will be asked to assist them in understanding community practice to a sufficient level that continued sanctions will not be necessary.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

And how would this work out well? —Mythdon t/c 01:05, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Which particular points are not clear? -- FayssalF - 01:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I am wondering as to how the mentorship and the terms are necessary. —Mythdon t/c 01:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I personally find it necessary. You've just been to Ryulong's talk page yesterday. You know that he'd not be happy with your edits there and you still did it. You also ask too many weird and unnecessary irritating questions. Probably a mentor would help you fix that behavior. Other arbitrators may not agree with me. -- FayssalF - 01:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ryulong is perfectly welcome to undo any edit I make to his talk page. I do not understand how mentorship would help. —Mythdon t/c 01:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, to let everyone look at this and see. Now, before Ryulong is welcome to undo any edit you make to his page you better just avoid doing that edit because it shows you that you are somehow obsessed with his talk page. And why would you arrive till the point of making him undo your edits at his page? You have arrived to this case because of similar edits and you are still at it. If you don't know that you are bothering him with such edits unnecessary edits then mentorship is for you and it is the best remedy I can offer you. -- FayssalF - 02:05, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Should I refrain from making edits to his talk page if I have any doubts? —Mythdon t/c 02:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

The objective is not to see you refraining from editing anyone's talk page. The objective is to see you being able to post at people's talk pages without being reverted. If your mentor tells me that you should be restricted from commenting there then I'd follow his advice. After all, you'll be consulting with him before making any edit to anyone's talk page. I don't want people getting irritated with your talk pages' posts as much as I don't want to see your edits being reverted. Let me be clear here Mythdon, there's a problem with your communicative approach in Misplaced Pages and there's really a need for a mentor. -- FayssalF - 02:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Mythdon admonished

5) Mythdon is admonished for their harassing behavior on and off-wiki and directed to refrain from contacting Ryulong off-wiki and seeking Ryulong's identity on and off-wiki. Any further occurrence would lead to severe sanctions.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Personally, I think this should be totally left up to Ryulong. —Mythdon t/c 02:17, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Mythdon strongly urged

6) Mythdon is strongly urged:

(A) To take his specific concerns about the verifiability of the articles to a wider venue such as Misplaced Pages:Village Pump, other sister WikiProjects or the Verifiability policy talk page itself and consult his views with others. He is then advised to report the views of others to WikiProject Tokusatsu for discussions;

(B) To enhance his level of communication with editors.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

If you look at most of my AfD's, the editors agreed that the articles be deleted due to those very issues. I can show the Committee links if they wish. —Mythdon t/c 00:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

It is more than just that as documented at FoFs above. Also, AfDs are not the right place to push for an agenda. (A) refers to the appropriate methods to do so. But yes, you can still bring links to the Committee if you wish. -- FayssalF - 01:04, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I will list every Power Rangers AfD I ever did on the talk page by tomorrow night. —Mythdon t/c 01:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment by others:

Participants at the WikiProject Tokusatsu

7) All participants at are advised to work on producing a genuine guideline for the articles falling under the scope of the WikiProject Tokusatsu. They are urged to work in collaboration with Mythdon while seeking outside advice and help.

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Enforcements

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others: