Talk:Arbitration Committee/Election processes

No Arbitration Committee in the Bulgarian Wikipedia[edit]

I've removed the following from the content page:

====Bulgarian====
* Bulgarian

because currently there's no Arbitration Committee in the Bulgarian Wikipedia. There was a proposal to organize one, but no consensus was reached and the idea died out. The page linked here is just a short note that explains what an Arbitration Committee is and that the project doesn't have one. --Daggerstab 14:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay, thank you very much for that. Cirt (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea[edit]

This is a good thing to be documenting. It's surprising no one did this before. Durova 18:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. bibliomaniac 1 5 03:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Cirt (talk) 04:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Title of the page[edit]

I was confused by the title, which can be read as ((Wikimedia Arbitration Committee) election processes) or (Wikimedia (Arbitration Committee election processes)). I propose that the title be changed to Election processes of wikimedia arbitration committees, or wikimedia arbitration committees election processes. Hillgentleman 10:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to the second suggestion. Cirt (talk) 16:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

negative votes on en wn[edit]

I've never heard of that before. I was under impression that negative votes for arbcom were non-exisitant as we like all the people who got nominated to run. Bawolff 07:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

per n:Wikinews:Arbitration Committee/Elections January 2007, I'm going to change that line. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bawolff (talk • contribs) .

keeping information fresh[edit]

each project's committee described here should have "as of" dates for the descriptions. –SJ + help translate 03:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disbanded[edit]

The Croatian and Portuguese ArbComs are disbanded. Should we remove their election process? If not, I think we must somehow flag them as inactive, maybe by a red cross. 4nn1l2 (talk) 22:10, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]