Is this arbitration about disruptive behavior, guideline interpretation, or both? --Serge 18:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I thought guideline interpretation but it has certainly shifted to more personal issues - and that's putting it lightly. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- In spite of all the details and side complaints, I think it just comes down to: Does TV:NAME have consensus? The whole situation is just a couple editors refusing to accept an obvious consensus. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's about consensus - whether it was reached. And also possibly about whether wikiprojects have the power to trump naming conventions. The result i'm hoping for is just a decleration that we got consensus, and that people should respect consensus. --`/aksha 23:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- In spite of all the details and side complaints, I think it just comes down to: Does TV:NAME have consensus? The whole situation is just a couple editors refusing to accept an obvious consensus. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search