[WikiEN-l] WP:EPISODE

[Nathan]

That is actually not all that uncommon for these types of situations -
similar things happen in nationalism disputes. Rather than making the
difficult content dispute decisions (which isn't their place) they
admonish editors to work constructively and sometimes address conduct
issues if necessary.

They didn't accept this case to deal with the underlying content
dispute, and the decision principles cover the conduct that was
objectionable which was the basis of 'cert' here.

Generally, there is no need to pause attempts to build consensus in a
content dispute during an ArbCom case, as long as it is done without
exacerbating the conduct and policy issues being addressed by Arbs.

On Dec 28, 2007 12:28 PM, Majdan, Nik <nmajdan at aplmc.com> wrote:
> Just FYI for everyone, this ArbCom case has closed:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes
> _and_characters
>
> I don't follow ArbCom cases too much but was following this one as a
> frequent editor of the Scrubs TV series articles. I was surprised at the
> lack of an apparent decision in this one. As I stated in AN, telling the
> editors to "work collaboratively and constructively with the broader
> community" seems ridiculous to me. The case made its way to ArbCom
> because the editors were unable to do exactly that. Granted, ArbCom
> doesn't get into content disputes, but telling users to work together
> who obviously can't seems counterproductive to me. There was a reason it
> went to ArbCom in the first place.