Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/WebHamster

I hope I've done this correctly. Please advise if something needs fixing. Noloop (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This RfC/U fails to meet a basic requirement . . .

...so shouldn't the page be deleted?

"In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed [...] The persons complaining must provide evidence...within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 00:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)), [or] the page will be deleted." (Emphasis added.)

For a week now there has been only one complainant. Writegeist (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since ArbCom has accepted the case, it's probably best to let this sit for the time being, as it is part of the evidence they are reviewing. — Ched : ? 19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it could be left in its current state, that would be appreciated. I will be noting at the arbitration case that this RfC was not properly certified and it was also (I think) not listed at the RfC/U page. Carcharoth (talk) 01:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an RfC, not an ArbCom case. Uncertified RfCs are supposed to be deleted. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]