*1.* We have no arbcom on es.wiki. *2. *I was choosen as a checkuser by our last arbcom *3.* Now, the community created a different process to appoint checkusers(After more than 3 years or so).
Teofilo, if the community has decided to go without an arbcom and leave things like the way they are, I suggest you accept it. Asking the removal of checkuser rights without community support is indeed a bad move. Alhen @alhen_ alhen at wikipedia, wikihow, wikispaces, and most places. Promotor de Wikimedia Bolivia 00-591-79592235 2012/11/3 Teofilo <teofilow...@gmail.com> > A group of French admins is threatening me of what they call a "block > with consequences" in the case I would perform any "similar move", a > move similar with what I did which they interpret as "disrupting > Wikipedia to illustrate a point" (1). > > As the wording is totally vague ("similar move") this deprives me of > the right to express myself on community matters. My freedom of speech > on community matters is being denied. > > What I did, was a request to stewards on meta to remove access for all > current French Checkusers as a consequence of the French Wikipedia > switching from the "wiki with arbcom" to the "wiki without arbcom" > status (2). > > So I am under threat, because I tried to enforce the checkuser policy, > which provides different access procedures according to whether the > wiki is with or without arbcom (3). > > Would it be possible to provide some kind of protection to users > making requests on meta in reference to WMF policies ? > > Would it be possible to have some kind of "meta-arbcom" that would be > a supreme court responsible for guaranteeing a set of fundamental > principles, such as freedom of speech ? > > References: > > (1) > http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discussion_utilisateur%3ATeofilo&diff=84877524&oldid=84615519 > (2) > http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests/Permissions&oldid=4347135#per_CheckUser_policy.23Checkuser_access.2C_all_current_checkusers_on_fr.Wikipedia.org_.28wiki_without_an_Arbitration_Committee.29 > (3) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser_policy#Access_to_CheckUser > > See also: > > > http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Prise_de_d%C3%A9cision/Checkuser > [The community vote in 2005 where checkusers where agreed by only a > very short majority (52.4%)] > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l