295:. They are a record of discussions which took place regarding user behaviour and Knowledge (XXG) matters, some of which relate to past ArbCom activity, and might be potentially useful to future ArbCom activity. What I particularly like about Knowledge (XXG) is the accountability and record keeping that takes place - I see no need to undermine that accountability, especially on pages that record difficulties that users had with other users, or with the Knowledge (XXG) system. This stuff is too valuable to destroy.
22:
242:
174:
276:
believe are no longer necessary. However, I'm not sure if there is even any need to retain archived meeting pages, or even the case pages filled out by users. I had to place the
Request for Comment page on the talk page since the main AMA page is protected. I would like to hear what everyone else thinks about this.
402:
I have a communicative disability, I am being bullied. I feel I have no voice. I tried the Admin
Noticeboard and the discussion was closed, I tried the dispute resolution and it was closed without resolution. The bully is back trying to hide evidence of an 8 year long unresolved dispute. Where do I
387:
As a former member of this group I saw what was right with it and got out as a whole lot was going wrong with it. I think it important to keep it around so people can read it and learn from it, they won't if it's blanked (and I would add the prior AFDs failed so blanking is inappropriate anyway). I
319:
I have no idea why the page was wiped (let alone protected), since there's no obvious reason for it that I could see (I can speculate that it's due to the opponents of the proposal "dancing on it's grave", but you can't say stuff like that on
Knowledge (XXG) since we're all supposed to "AGF"! *roll
275:
The
Association of Members' Advocates has been inactive and tagged as historical since May 2007. I feel now that there is very little content of the AMA on Knowledge (XXG) that is still required. I have tagged several pages, redirects and images for deletion over the past couple of days which I
109:
because of these issues, just that I would have liked to have a more transparent and clearer process with average user's input, not only admins, arbs & Ed. Assistance members (well, they had to give their opinion because of the shameful abduction-attempt from some of us)... This is the only
104:
Yes, you're right... sighs... I try not to think on this anymore: although I understand (not agree) the reasons behind the process, it must be said that it had irregularities. Yes, AMA would have been shut down sooner or later, but I think the haste of many led them to make some mistakes: the
379:
I've resurrected these pages to look similar to what they looked like when the project went dark so there is a better historical record of the organization. This is mainly because of a proposal that pretty much is the same as what AMA was. I think it better to keep the information around so
383:
The talk page archive was an absolute disaster and used two numbering systems (i.e. Archive 2 and
Archive2 both had something in them). I have completely fixed the archives so they are chronological and under the standard numbering system and are now searchable.
380:
interested parties can see what happened as opposed to wiping it and someone recreating it without any prior reference. Some other pages were wiped and redirected, I have resurrected those and put "historical" at the top.
55:
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
153:
139:
105:
improper MfDs, discussions everywhere else than RfC and a historical tag put by one user in the name of community. No, I don't think AMA's closure was
320:
eyes*). Just in case anyone's curious though, what was apparently the last version of the proposal prior to this being marked historical is located
126:
363:
338:
407:
397:
368:
349:
The page has been unprotected, and I've reverted it to the state it was in at the time it was marked historical.
343:
308:
285:
258:
234:
209:
189:
165:
133:
114:
98:
84:
For whatever reason, the historic note says that reform failed to surface "after several months". It was two. -
64:
68:
194:
Why? That category is for special user accounts. This page is not a user page. Or am I missing something? --
217:
147:
281:
130:
88:
393:
359:
334:
305:
70:
185:
254:
161:
66:
21:
292:
93:
277:
227:
202:
85:
404:
389:
352:
327:
298:
111:
181:
324:. Of course, someone will probably come along and wipe the history now (*sigh*).
250:
157:
195:
110:
complaint I keep: I'm not sure which was the average users' consensus. --
291:
I would disagree. These pages do not meet the criteria for deletion -
223:
Would someone please remove the category - it is for user accounts.
71:
15:
321:
154:Category:Knowledge (XXG) contact role accounts
140:Category:Knowledge (XXG) contact role accounts
8:
388:hope this proves useful for folks. --
7:
125:...if I could provide a link to the
14:
240:
172:
20:
408:18:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
375:Resurrecting for Memorializing
1:
259:00:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
235:14:20, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
152:Please add this user page to
210:22:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
190:17:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
166:01:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
134:13:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
398:17:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
423:
369:14:16, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
271:Request for comment on AMA
344:19:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
315:Whole proposal in history
309:01:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
286:14:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
115:06:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
99:00:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
121:I was wondering...
112:Neigel von Teighen
97:
77:
76:
414:
403:go to for help?
367:
355:
342:
330:
307:
301:
248:
244:
243:
233:
230:
222:
216:
207:
200:
180:
176:
175:
151:
91:
72:
24:
16:
422:
421:
417:
416:
415:
413:
412:
411:
377:
357:
353:
332:
328:
317:
299:
296:
273:
241:
239:
228:
224:
220:
214:
203:
196:
173:
171:
145:
143:
131:Gp75motorsports
123:
82:
73:
67:
29:
12:
11:
5:
420:
418:
376:
373:
372:
371:
350:
325:
316:
313:
312:
311:
272:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
263:
262:
261:
142:
137:
122:
119:
118:
117:
86:Keith D. Tyler
81:
78:
75:
74:
69:
65:
63:
60:
59:
31:
30:
25:
19:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
419:
410:
409:
406:
400:
399:
395:
391:
385:
381:
374:
370:
365:
361:
356:
348:
347:
346:
345:
340:
336:
331:
323:
314:
310:
306:
303:
302:
294:
293:WP:DEL#REASON
290:
289:
288:
287:
283:
279:
270:
260:
256:
252:
247:
238:
237:
236:
232:
231:
219:
218:editprotected
213:
212:
211:
208:
206:
201:
199:
193:
192:
191:
187:
183:
179:
170:
169:
168:
167:
163:
159:
155:
149:
148:editprotected
141:
138:
136:
135:
132:
128:
120:
116:
113:
108:
103:
102:
101:
100:
95:
90:
87:
80:Historic note
79:
62:
61:
58:
57:
53:
49:
45:
41:
37:
33:
32:
28:
23:
18:
17:
401:
386:
382:
378:
318:
297:
274:
245:
225:
205:(Discussion)
204:
197:
177:
144:
124:
106:
83:
34:
26:
278:Wikiwoohoo
390:WGFinley
364:Contribs
339:Contribs
300:SilkTork
127:WuA page
27:Archives
107:illegal
354:V = IR
329:V = IR
251:JPG-GR
182:Ruslik
158:Sladen
229:neuro
198:Bduke
394:talk
360:Talk
335:Talk
322:here
282:talk
255:talk
246:Done
186:talk
178:Done
162:talk
156:. —
129:? --
405:Kaz
94:AMA
396:)
362:•
351:—
337:•
326:—
284:)
257:)
249:-
226:—
221:}}
215:{{
188:)
164:)
150:}}
146:{{
54:,
50:,
46:,
42:,
38:,
392:(
366:)
358:(
341:)
333:(
304:*
280:(
253:(
184:(
160:(
96:)
92:(
89:¶
56:6
52:5
48:4
44:3
40:2
36:1
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
