| Revision as of 08:20, 17 February 2010 editEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 edits →Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Tang Dynasty: mentor confirmation← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 06:44, 1 January 2025 edit undoHouseBlaster (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators59,531 edits →WP:A/C alignment: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| = Noticeboard = | = Noticeboard = | ||
| {{/Header}} | {{/Header}} | ||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | |||
| | age=90 | |||
| | archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/archive | |||
| | numberstart=10 | |||
| | maxarchsize=150000 | |||
| | header={{Archive}} | |||
| | minkeepthreads=2 | |||
| | minarchthreads=1 | |||
| | format= %%i | |||
| }} | |||
| {{archive box|search =yes| | |||
| * ] (to 26 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (archive of a discussion started on January 29, 2006 at the ]) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January 2006) | |||
| * ] (February 2006→December 2008, clerks' coordination board) | |||
| * ] (December 2008→March 2010, clerks' coordination board) | |||
| * ] (January 2006→May 2009) | |||
| * ] (May 2009→June 2012, noticeboard merged) | |||
| * ] (June 2012→September 2014) | |||
| * ] (September 2014→September 2015) | |||
| * ] (3 October→4 November 2015) | |||
| * ] (October 2015→March 2021) | |||
| * ] (April 2021→present) | |||
| {{#ifexist:Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/archive 12|* ] (fill in dates please)|}} | |||
| }} | |||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| <div style="border-top: 1px solid #aaa; font-style: italic; padding-left: 1.6em"> | |||
| ---- | |||
| '''Arbitrators, clerks and trainees:''' Please coordinate your actions through the mailing list. The purpose of this page is for editors who are not clerks to request clerk assistance. | |||
| :'''''Clerks and trainees''', please coordinate your actions through this section, so that we don't have multiple clerks working on the same cases at the same time. An IRC channel, , and a ], Clerks-l, are also available for private co-ordination and communication, although the mailing list is fairly low traffic.'' | |||
| </div> | |||
| ==Pending Requests== | |||
| == ARBPIA5 motion at ARCA == | |||
| ==Open Cases== | |||
| ''All work relating to Arbitration cases already opened'' | |||
| === Active/inactive arbitrators === | |||
| :''This list will be used to set the number of active Arbitrators and the case majority on cases as they open. As of 12 February 2010, there are 11 active Arbitrators for all new cases, and the majority is therefore 6 for all '''new''' cases (that is, those accepted after the "as of" date). See ] for help. The master list is at ].'' | |||
| '''Active''' (as of 12 February 2010): | |||
| #Cool Hand Luke | |||
| #Fritzpoll | |||
| #Kirill Lokshin | |||
| #KnightLago | |||
| #Newyorkbrad | |||
| #Risker | |||
| #Rlevse | |||
| #Roger Davies | |||
| #Shell Kinney | |||
| #SirFozzie | |||
| #Steve Smith | |||
| '''Away or inactive''': | |||
| #Carcharoth | |||
| #Coren except for MZMcBride 2 | |||
| #FayssalF | |||
| #Hersfold | |||
| #Mailer diablo | |||
| #Wizardman | |||
| === Arbitrator announcements === | |||
| :''Arbitrators, please note if you wish to declare yourself active or away/inactive, either generally or for specific cases. The clerks will update the relevant cases as needed. If you are returning, please indicate whether you wish to be: 1) Put back to active on all cases; 2) Left on inactive on all open cases, and only put to active on new cases; or 3) Left to set yourself to active on cases you wish (remember to update the majority on its /Proposed decision page).'' | |||
| == Long term projects == | |||
| * ''None, currently.'' | |||
| = Discussion = | |||
| {{archive box|search=yes| | |||
| * ] (to 26 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (archive of a discussion started on January 29, 2006 at the ]) | |||
| * ] (to 28 January, 2006) | |||
| * ] (to May 2009) | |||
| * ] (noticeboard merged→present)}} | |||
| == Images in case statements == | |||
| There is a growing tendency to add irrelevant images to statements. These are ] and serve only to reinforce the writer's POV. I've removed just now. Please remove any others as and when they appear. Thanks, ] <sup>]</sup> 07:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == Piotrus == | |||
| I was perusing the arbcom case and noticed that the 1 year ban for piotrus ended up at 4 supports and 3 against, while 1 arb stated that they were abstaining. This means that there was one undeclared abstention (i.e. an arb didn't vote in any direction), meaning the motion passed (2 abstaining arbs means 4 is the magic number)? Or is a non response considered a vote against rather than abstaining? More a procedural question to further my own understanding than anything else. <span style="font-family: helvetica;"> --] ~ ] • </span> 19:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Not voting is the same as opposing since we tallying the number of supports to figure if a motion or proposal passes. An abstain vote must be actively noted by voting since it reduces the majority. ]] 20:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Superb :) Thank you very much! <span style="font-family: helvetica;"> --] ~ ] • </span> 22:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Copyediting of guide == | |||
| Clerks, I am trying to copyedit the guide to arbitration for clarity. ] asked that I place a notice here. The edits will concentrate on clarifying and simplifying the language; please let me know if I make inadvertent changes that you would consider a problem. Best, ] (]) 16:27, 8 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == 2nd Jack Merridew motion == | |||
| Hi. There were two full copies of my last motion; one on the page and another on the talk page, and also duplicate copies of the prior motion in the intros to the new motion. I noticed that the motion had been moved per the discussion last month and went to tidy-up the link to it from my history page and I have cut the duplication for clarity. The only substantive change is a change of the word 'following' to 'above', as I made the second motion link to the original just above it instead of repeating it. I have linked to the copy of the votes and discussion on the talk page as was done for the prior motion and also added a link to the statements from my mentors and myself. It all seems much clearer to me this way. | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| Cheers, ] 21:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == request help from a clerk == | |||
| Tothwolf, who's involved in an arbcom case with me, has decided to mark himself as retired in his user page. As a final bout of incivility, he's written a ] post on his talk page which links to diff that includes a semi-attack on me. please see ]. I've tried to remove the wiki link to the attack, but he's come out of retirement to restore it. could someone remove the attack diff from his ]? the diff consists of uncivil language such as "Theserialcomma, you aren't fooling anyone here either." "due to your wikihounding, harassment, collusion, and gaming of the system." "considering that you've taken to harassing and wikihounding multiple editors (too many to name) and even administrators" and "heserialcomma, let me also be quite blunt with you: I'm not afraid of you or your bullying. Try as you did to find my identity and information about me to use to out, bully, and threaten me, you failed to find anything (although you certainly left quite a ] during your efforts)". i dont think he should be allowed to leave this soapbox, rambling nonsense personal attack against me as his 'farewell' to wikipedia message, since the arbcom results did not find anything he is claiming ] (]) 23:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| : This does not relate to the enforcement of guidelines for conduct on arbitration pages, so there is little a clerk could do for you. Might you have more luck at the ]? ] 00:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration clerks == | |||
| The ] welcome the following users to the clerk team as trainees: | |||
| *{{User|AlexandrDmitri}} | |||
| *{{User|Amorymeltzer}} | |||
| *{{User|DoriSmith}} | |||
| *{{User|MBK004}} | |||
| The clerk team as well as the committee would also like to congratulate the following clerks who have been as "full clerks": | |||
| *{{User|Dougweller}} | |||
| *{{User|Lankiveil}} | |||
| *{{User|Seddon}} | |||
| ''On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,'' | |||
| ] <sup>]</sup> 04:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :''']''' | |||
| ::Just a note to the clerks, I believe there is an error with my time zone listing. I am not in the Pacific Time zone, but the ]. I have been unsuccessful with getting the template to accurately work since it appears that I am the only person in this time zone currently. -''']'''<sub>]</sub> 04:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::{{Fixed}} - I had to make a tweak to the time zone template because it appeared yours was not included. Anyways, welcome. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Congratulations to the selected trainees. –''']''' | ] 05:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Seconding the congratulations. ''Perhaps there should be an official Arbitration Clerk Song Contest?'' :-) ] <sup>(])</sup> 05:32, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Congratulations to the three trainees who have shown their mettle through challenging times, and are now full clerks: Good work!. And congratulations and welcome to the team to our four new clerk trainees. Glad to have you all aboard; I will look forward to working with all of you. ] (]) 05:53, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == tothwolf, again == | |||
| i was told that this was not an arbcom enforcement situation and to bring it to ANI instead; however, i believe it's crossed into arbcom enforcement territory. tothwolf, per the arbcom ruling, has been (or will be) warned not to make any further bad faith accusations against other editors. when the arbcom voting began, he decided to "retire" in order not to face the enforcement. however, his talk page consists of a vague, soapboxy personal attack against the editors who were found not to be harassing him. http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Tothwolf he links a diff which is nothing but a direct attack on me ], and serves no purpose but to cast aspersions and negativity on me. i tried to remove only the diff, and tothwolf then came out of 'retirement' to start more drama. someone please look into this. the arbcom case filed against tothwolf is, if anything, going to admonish him for his bad faith accusations. they should not be allowed to continue as a soapbox on his talkpage. ] (]) 17:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::it feels like tothwolf has "retired" because he didn't like the outcome of the arbcom situation. fair enough. but on the other hand, he wants to go out with as much drama as possible. is it really necessary for him to have his soapbox farewell message link to a diff stating "... Miami33139 and JBsupreme due to your wikihounding, harassment, collusion, and gaming of the system" and "Try as you did to find my identity and information about me to use to out, bully, and threaten me, you failed to find anything (although you certainly left quite a ] during your efforts)." this is craziness that does not help build the encyclopedia in anyway, and it undermines arbcom's proposed decision which is supposed to stop tothwolf's false allegations against others http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf/Proposed_decision#Allegations_against_other_editors . he's also been admonished for his decorum http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf/Proposed_decision#Decorum . can a clerk please modify/remove his message so that it complies with arbcom's finding on decorum and false allegations? ] (]) 00:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::The case isn't closed yet (soon I believe), so your only recourse is in fact ANI as you asked on my talk page. You can also add it to the evidence. ] (]) 20:24, 20 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Speed of Light amendment == | |||
| Could a clerk please place the current size and majority figures on the speed of light motions?--] (]) 18:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==Request for clarification - I do not understand the instructions== | |||
| I see the template and can fill it out. But what do I do with it then? I do not see where to file it. Regards, —] (]) 00:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :What do you mean "where?" Are you seeing the full instructions in the edit notice when you click edit on ]? ~ <font color="#FF0099">Amory</font><font color="#555555"><small> ''(] • ] • ])''</small></font> 14:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Question about the motion to close. Is this being held for some reason? It's been over 24 hours since Rlevse's oppose vote (made when there were 7 votes to close) and the motion has been over 4 net votes since the evening of the 10th. If it just hasn't been got to yet, that's fine, but if there is some further trigger that the clerks are waiting for, they might want to note it in the implementation notes. ] (]) 04:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| {{User|Alansohn}} has been notified about this but has not yet responded. Could someone remind them that their responses would be welcomed please? Thanks, ] <sup>]</sup> 23:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Excuse me as I learn my way around. If I have a question about process/protocol, may I ask it here? (I'd left a note for Ryan on his talk, but realized I should perhaps ask this to all the clerks.) ] <sup>(])</sup> 04:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| ArbCom remedies in Tang Dynasty imply a multi-step process, e.g., restrictions "... to begin when a mentor is located and approved by the Committee." However, no process was established. | |||
| Refers to ]. | |||
| In the absence of specifics, ] seemed arguably relevant as a model. Tenmei's plan and list of proposed mentors was e-mailed to each ArbCom member. However, protocols for confirming ArbCom's approval of each mentor is unknown. The process will need to encompass notifying each ArbCom-approved mentor; and informing Tenmei will be essential as well. | |||
| For motion 5 (ARBPIA5) it states that there are 10 active arbs and since 1 has abstained, 5 is a majority. However, L235 (an inactive arb) has voted on it, so the majority needs to be altered to 6. | |||
| Mentors have been located. Now what? If this is the wrong venue, what is the more appropriate one? | |||
| I'm unsure if that affects the numbers for any of the other motions (or indeed any other cases) but it clearly does for this one. ] 20:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ;Plan | |||
| The explicit core of complaints consists of one item only: ]. | |||
| :Marked as active on the one motion. ], we'll assume you're not active on the other 6 motions unless you indicate otherwise or vote on them. ] ] 20:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Optimistic predictions about Tenmei's ] and ] to make mentorship successful arise from the range and quality of those who have agreed to be presented for ArbCom confirmation: | |||
| {{col-begin}} | |||
| {{col-2}} | |||
| :* ] | |||
| :* ] | |||
| :* ] | |||
| :* ] | |||
| {{col-2}} | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| {{col-end}} | |||
| This small group, plus an evolving vocabulary, plus ] and ] for avoiding complicated subjects form the crux of a ] for the near future. | |||
| == ] alignment == | |||
| Pre-planning encompassed: | |||
| :1. An ] search for prospective wiki-"]" and advisors involved (a) rejecting any sort of ]-like/]-like/] officer-like ]; (b) accepting and valuing meaningful help and ]. | |||
| :2. First steps involved contriving (a) a committee structure; (b) venues for working together, including an ]; and (c) vocabulary conventions for communicating within the group, including shared ] and ] like ], ], and "soft wiki-]". | |||
| :3. ] was inevitable and repeated. | |||
| The box at ] used to be on the left side of the page. There is a parameter used in {{tl|ArbComOpenTasks}} called {{para|acotalign|left}}, but that parameter seems to no longer do anything, and the box now floats way down bottom-right. I tried a few things to fix this but they didn't work. Complicating things, for whatever reason the box floats left in preview. Any ideas? <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 06:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| This overview was developed in an ArbCom-imposed ]-like/]-like context. This summary of ] is the result of two-months work. Further assessments on the basis of off-wiki projections have limited ]. This plan will be tweaked on a ] and an ] basis in response to on-wiki experiences. | |||
| :], it looks fine on my screen? It appears that {{para|acotalign}} was removed ], so that parameter has been worthless for over a decade at this point. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 02:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Additional subjects not fully investigated include ] and/or ]/]/]. Longer-term objectives are not yet identified. --] (]) 08:20, 17 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::@]: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::], I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking <del>out loud</del> <ins>in writing</ins>, do we need the dispute resolution sidebar there? It is not a current arbitration request. Thinking even more in print, I am wondering if WP:A/C can be BLAR'd to ], which has all of the information at WP:A/C and more. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly . Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, ] works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Well, it was an idea. Happy to keep it around if people find it useful :){{pb}}Forcing all three into a table looks even worse on my screen. It forces ACOT to be super narrow. I think your proposed edit (moving the least relevant item to drop below) is the least bad option which does not involve {{User:Tamzin/The diaeresis|re|i|nventing}} the wheel. If someone wants to work on making ACOT's width flexible, I think that would be awesome, but with ] I am reluctant to sign up for doing that myself. Happy to let you do the honors of reinstating your edit; also happy to do it myself. <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 03:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::@]: Idea just popped into my head the other night: Why not just redirect it to ]? <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">[]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::{{done|]}} BOLDly; if anyone has objections revert (and I waive ] for this particular edit). <b>]]</b> (] • he/they) 06:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Parameters to set widths on pages, or arbitrary floats, inhibit display at mobile resolution. Setting width is a no-go from that perspective. Setting a different kind of float is possible in TemplateStyles and if that's pursued should be pursued there. ] (]) 04:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:44, 1 January 2025
Noticeboard
Clerks' Noticeboard (WP:AC/CN) Arbitration Committee proceedings- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.
Open cases| Case name | Links | Evidence due | Prop. Dec. due |
|---|---|---|---|
| Palestine-Israel articles 5 | (t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t) | 21 Dec 2024 | 11 Jan 2025 |
No cases have recently been closed (view all closed cases).
Clarification and Amendment requests| Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amendment request: American politics 2 | none | (orig. case) | 15 January 2025 |
No arbitrator motions are currently open.
This noticeboard's primary purpose is to to attract the attention of the clerks to a particular matter by non-clerks. Non-clerks are welcome to comment on this page in the event that the clerks appear to have missed something.
Private mattersThe clerks may be contacted privately, in the event a matter could not be prudently addressed publicly (i.e., on this page), by composing an email to clerks-l
lists.wikimedia.org; only the clerk team and individual arbitrators have access to emails sent to that list.
A procedural reference for clerks (and arbitrators) is located here.
 Archives |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Arbitrators, clerks and trainees: Please coordinate your actions through the mailing list. The purpose of this page is for editors who are not clerks to request clerk assistance.
ARBPIA5 motion at ARCA
Refers to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Motion_5:_PIA5_Case.
For motion 5 (ARBPIA5) it states that there are 10 active arbs and since 1 has abstained, 5 is a majority. However, L235 (an inactive arb) has voted on it, so the majority needs to be altered to 6.
I'm unsure if that affects the numbers for any of the other motions (or indeed any other cases) but it clearly does for this one. Black Kite (talk) 20:24, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- Marked as active on the one motion. L235, we'll assume you're not active on the other 6 motions unless you indicate otherwise or vote on them. SilverLocust 💬 20:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
WP:A/C alignment
The box at WP:A/C used to be on the left side of the page. There is a parameter used in {{ArbComOpenTasks}} called |acotalign=left, but that parameter seems to no longer do anything, and the box now floats way down bottom-right. I tried a few things to fix this but they didn't work. Complicating things, for whatever reason the box floats left in preview. Any ideas? -- Tamzin (they|xe) 06:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, it looks fine on my screen? It appears that
|acotalign=was removed in 2012, so that parameter has been worthless for over a decade at this point. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 02:47, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- @HouseBlaster: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking
out loudin writing, do we need the dispute resolution sidebar there? It is not a current arbitration request. Thinking even more in print, I am wondering if WP:A/C can be BLAR'd to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests, which has all of the information at WP:A/C and more. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)- I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly many others do too. Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, this works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it was an idea. Happy to keep it around if people find it useful :)Forcing all three into a table looks even worse on my screen. It forces ACOT to be super narrow. I think your proposed edit (moving the least relevant item to drop below) is the least bad option which does not involve reïnventing the wheel. If someone wants to work on making ACOT's width flexible, I think that would be awesome, but with current stuff I am reluctant to sign up for doing that myself. Happy to let you do the honors of reinstating your edit; also happy to do it myself. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: Idea just popped into my head the other night: Why not just redirect it to Template:ArbComOpenTasks? -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Done BOLDly; if anyone has objections revert (and I waive the prohibition on reverting clerks in arbspace for this particular edit). HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 06:44, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: Idea just popped into my head the other night: Why not just redirect it to Template:ArbComOpenTasks? -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 05:43, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
- Parameters to set widths on pages, or arbitrary floats, inhibit display at mobile resolution. Setting width is a no-go from that perspective. Setting a different kind of float is possible in TemplateStyles and if that's pursued should be pursued there. Izno (talk) 04:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, it was an idea. Happy to keep it around if people find it useful :)Forcing all three into a table looks even worse on my screen. It forces ACOT to be super narrow. I think your proposed edit (moving the least relevant item to drop below) is the least bad option which does not involve reïnventing the wheel. If someone wants to work on making ACOT's width flexible, I think that would be awesome, but with current stuff I am reluctant to sign up for doing that myself. Happy to let you do the honors of reinstating your edit; also happy to do it myself. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- I find A/C a very helpful page to access ArbCom recent changes without having to load a whole noticeboard. Seemingly many others do too. Would there be some way to make ACOT's total width flexible? At the moment it looks like all the widths are hardcoded. Alternately, this works. It's a little ugly with the DR template down there, but putting three sidebars together is gonna look a little ugly no matter what. Or as a third option, you could force all three boxen into a table. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Tamzin, I am a Vector 2010 user; probably should've though to check the default skin! I don't see enough space to have it left-aligned while still keeping the other two sidebars. Thinking
- @HouseBlaster: What skin are you using? I'm using Vector-22. Checking now, it does align left in Vector. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)