|
__TOC__
== NonLvl-aspersions2 aspersion non-caseheaders at WP:)ARCA ==
Can we please reformat ARCA to use lvl-2 headers for cases rather than lvl-3? A page with only one lvl-2 header makes the header rather useless. (No page should ever have only one lvl-2 header.) Also, the lvl-2 header says the same thing as the lvl-1 header (the page title), making it further useless. If every case request was a separate lvl-2 (instead of a lvl-3), it would be much easier to read on mobile (right now it's kind of impossible to read on mobile because you have to scroll past ALL of the cases to get to the one you want). And you'd be able to collapse the individual ARCAs in the V-22 TOC (currently, can't be done). PS: in reality, what renders as a level-2 header is actually a level-1 header (which, I believe, shouldn't be used at all), and what renders as level-3 headers are actually level-2 headers (the headings of the individual ARCAs), but the point is that the page renders it as one level-2 followed by multiple level-3, and so the request is to reformat the page to remove the level-1 header, so the level-2 headers will actually render as level-2. Thanks, [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 17:28, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
{{@ArbComClerks}} Why is this still up after seven arbs declined it, the last ''72 hours'' ago? Has something exciting happened?! [[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:red">——Serial Number 54129</span>]] 20:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case]] (ARC), [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment|/Clarification and Amendment]] (ARCA), [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions|/Motions]] (ARM), and [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement|/Enforcement]] (AE) each have one level-1 header so that [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests]] (RFAR), which transcludes each of those subpages, will have those four level-1 sections.
:Wikipedia is ''always'' exciting. [[User:Deepfriedokra|-- Deepfriedokra]] ([[User talk:Deepfriedokra|talk]]) 20:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:However, those level-1 headers could be included only at RFAR rather than at the subpages, such as by putting them in <code><includeonly></code> tags<!--
::I believe it should be shortly archived by a trainee clerk. [[User:Dreamy Jazz|Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">'''Jazz'''</i>]] <sup>''[[User talk:Dreamy Jazz|talk to me]]'' | ''[[Special:Contribs/Dreamy Jazz|my contributions]]''</sup> 22:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
or by using the following:
:::{{Done}}. [[User:SilverLocust|SilverLocust]] [[User talk:SilverLocust|💬]] 23:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC) ▼{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment||
= [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment|Requests for clarification and amendment]] =
}}
-->. That is already done for AE.
:That would certainly make it easier to navigate on mobile, since mobile only collapses the highest level of section headers on a page. But this would also remove the header from desktop, and people may find the header useful to the extent "Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment and Clarification" and "Requests for amendment and clarification" are a bit different. (I don't believe {{tl|If mobile}} would work; the hidden level-1 header would still prevent level-2 headers from being collapsible.)
:A {{tl|Fake heading}} could be put there instead to preserve the current appearance on desktop—
::<syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext"><includeonly>= [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment|Requests for clarification and amendment]] =</includeonly><noinclude>{{If mobile||{{Fake heading|sub=1|Requests for clarification and amendment}}}}</noinclude></syntaxhighlight>
▲: ::{{Done}}—though it wouldn't show up in the table of contents. [[User:SilverLocust|SilverLocust]] [[User talk:SilverLocust|💬]] 2308: 1800, 22 JulyAugust 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks, @[[User:SilverLocust|SilverLocust]], the edit you made fixed the problem for me. Now I can comment at many more ARCAs--hey, wait, why did you self-revert? 😄 [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 15:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
:::Sounds more like cause for an arbitrator to revert the change. 😁 I don't have any substantive input on requests (since clerks [[WP:AC/C#Remit|do not participate substantively in arbitration decisions]]), so there is less reason for me to read everything once I'm fairly sure an edit isn't disruptive. [[User:SilverLocust|SilverLocust]] [[User talk:SilverLocust|💬]] 16:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
:I agree this was annoying while I was on the committee. [[User:Izno|Izno]] ([[User talk:Izno|talk]]) 15:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
== WordAccessibility countof comments ==
Regarding [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#c-Primefac-20240908194000-Conduct in deletion-related editing: Arbitrator views and discussion|this comment]]: if one of the clerks would like to copy edit it so it begins with a <syntaxhighlight lang="wikitext" inline>*:</syntaxhighlight>, it would be appreciated. In its current form, the list style of the first-level list item changes from * to : and back to *, which causes screen readers to make extra list end/start announcements. Alternative, a [[User:Isaacl/On wikitext list markup#New paragraph within a list item|pb template can be added]] to separate the two comments instead, which would further minimize the number of list start/end announcements and be a bit closer to the current visual appearance. [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 18:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
[[WP:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment/preload-amendment]] says <code>You can use http://www.wordcounter.net/ to check the length of your statement.</code> Could someone clarify those instructions as to whether it applies to source code or preview text? This affects piped bluelinks. [[Special:Contributions/142.113.140.146|142.113.140.146]] ([[User talk:142.113.140.146|talk]]) 15:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:Text shown on the{{fixed}}, pagethanks. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 1512:4150, 2515 JulySeptember 2024 (UTC)
::Taking a turn - wonder if https://wordcount.toolforge.org/ is stable enough to use instead of sending people to that external site? — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 16:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Probably. Clerks also will use [[User:L235/wordcount.js]] for quick checking of these things. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
::::{{re|Xaosflux|Primefac}} There being 3 different tools is concerning. What happens if one party is accused but claims another tool supports them? One tool should have priority. [[Special:Contributions/142.113.140.146|142.113.140.146]] ([[User talk:142.113.140.146|talk]]) 16:47, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::I suppose "count the words on the screen" wins...., with all sorts of bickering of what a "word" is- but realistically, extensions are routinely approved if needed... — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 16:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
::::::Btw, [[WP:ARC]] suggests yet distinct https://www.countofwords.com/ and [[User:GoldenRing/wordcount.js]]. GoldenRing's tool shows no buttons after pasting in DevTools, and L235's one only says "1 words" in Vector 2022. Human counting and bickering is even more vague, but at least we agree on displayed text only. Looking at precedent, <s>striken</s> and off-screen/non-shown {{t|cot}} also seem to be ignored and uncounted.
::::::I suppose ArbCom is !declining to chose a specific tool, and mooting it because extensions. [[Template:Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia:Arbitration|Rambling contributions are less effective]] anyway. [[Special:Contributions/142.113.140.146|142.113.140.146]] ([[User talk:142.113.140.146|talk]]) 17:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Word limits are also not intended to be interpreted overly strictly. No-one is going to get sanctioned for a statement that is ~5 words over the limit where the author has clearly tried to be as concise as possible, but one the same length that is very rambly could result in a formal note from the clerks. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 00:16, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::::That said I've just checked the same text (SMcCandlish's preliminary statements in the Venezuela case, excluding links and signatures) in 15 different word counting tools (not including the .js options above that I don't have installed) and got 6 different word counts: 333 (wordcounttool.com), 337 (wordcounter.ai), 338 (the most common answer, including MS Office 365 on teams, LibreOffice and the linux command line wc tool), 342 (Google Docs and wordcounter.net), 343 (wordcounttools.com) and 361 (toolforge and countofwords.com). A 30-word difference is a lot more than I was expecting to be honest. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 00:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
== Template for referrals from AE ==
With there being an official ability of AE admins to refer cases to ArbCom in the Contentious Topic procedures, it would be helpful to have a template that meets those needs as the existing two templates are awkward fits. Thanks for considering, [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 17:28, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
:Or just let us post a link to the AE report without a bunch of templates? Please? [[User:ScottishFinnishRadish|ScottishFinnishRadish]] ([[User talk:ScottishFinnishRadish|talk]]) 17:31, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
::I think ArbCom is going to need more than a link to be useful and someone will need to identify and notify parties. But perhaps ArbCom would be willing to let clerks do that, with only a minimal of paperwork from the AE admins. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 17:35, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
:Building on this: I was obviously think of @[[User:Red-tailed hawk|Red-tailed hawk]] clearly needing a bunch of time before filing [[Special:Diff/1240826671|this request]] when making this suggestion. And while I understand why he's doing it, having the uninvolved administrators at AE lumped in with the people those administrators are referring to ArbCom seems strange and feels like it makes it harder for the committee to sort out what's going on. [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 17:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
::I've tried to format it logically. Some more guidance on this would be helpful, going forward. — [[User:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">Red-tailed hawk</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">(nest)</span>]]</sub> 18:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
:::You've formatted this in a good way, Red. Thanks for taking care of it this time. Agreed that a template would be useful, and the fact that you've done this request this time will be useful learning in what such a template should contain or omit. Best, '''[[User:L235|KevinL]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]] '''·''' [[User talk:L235#top|t]] '''·''' [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 18:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
|