Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:57, 3 February 2005

• ]

Part of Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution

Ultimately, the content of Misplaced Pages is determined by making progress toward a community consensus. However, the size of Misplaced Pages prevents community members from actively following every development. As a result, sometimes it's useful to request broader opinions from the rest of the community.

This page is a way that anyone can request other wiki-ists to help them resolve difficulties and disputes in articles or talk pages. Anyone may visit any of these articles, to help them reach agreement. A good quality RFC can help contributors resolve differences, add different insights, give comments and opinions how others might see some wording, and so on.

It will help the RFC process if everyone who lists something on this page tries to help out at least one other page listed here.

Overview

When to use RFC

• RFC is appropriate when you want other wiki-ists to visit the page, to allow a consensus or a better quality of decision, to help resolve a dispute or break a deadlock.
• If you simply want peer review of an article, then list it at Misplaced Pages:Peer review.
• If the dispute involves allegations that a user has engaged in serious violations of Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, create a subpage for the dispute. Use the subpage to elaborate on the allegations.

How to use RFC

• To request other users to comment on an issue, add a link to the Talk page for the article, a brief neutral statement of the issue, and the date.
• Don't sign it, don't list the details, and don't submit arguments or assign blame.
• On the Talk page of the article, it can help to summarize the dispute.

General hints for dispute resolution

• Whatever the nature of the dispute, the first resort should always be to discuss the problem with the other user. Try to resolve the dispute on your own first.
• For disputes over user conduct, before requesting community comment, at least two people should have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and failed to resolve the problem.
• Don't forget to follow Wikiquette. Wikiquette is more important in resolving a dispute, not less.

Article content disputes

Please only list links to talk pages where two or more participants cannot reach consensus and are thus stalling progress on the article. Discussions with no new comments in over two weeks old may have dried up, in which case please talk to the people involved to determine whether the problem was resolved.

Items listed on this page may be removed if you fail to try basic methods of dispute resolution.

List newer entries on top — do not sign entries.

• Talk:Progress Report of the United Nations Mediator on Palestine - Dispute over whether a quotation is "famous", or should be characterized that way.
• Talk:Blitzkrieg - Dispute over inclusion of material.
• Talk:Robert Byrd - Disagreement between two users over the truthfulness of additions to the article and whether they constitute POV. Discussion has not been productive.
• Talk:Post-invasion Iraq, 2003-2005 The article formerly called Occupation of Iraq, 2003-2005 was renamed Post-invasion Iraq, 2003-2005. Some editors agree with the change; some don't. Comment would be helpful.
• User_talk:Wik - (please don't comment on that page directly) - dispute over whether a link to User:Vandalbot should be placed on the page. Please make comments on User_talk:Vandalbot.
• Talk:Bahá'í Faith - Baha'is and non-Baha'i cannot agree on placement of certain info and photos and the wording of a section title.
• Talk:Jewish ethnocentrism - Very troubled article; needs some non-partisan editors.
• Talk:The Powerpuff Girls - Two users are in a dispute over how the article should be categorized.
  • May have already been resolved. Peter O. (Talk) 23:46, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Talk:Internet Explorer - Persistent neutrality dispute, with editors on both sides of an issue accusing the other of being blinded by bias. Editors on both sides taking an "edit-war first, explain on the talk page later" attitude.
  • One side had announced his resignation. Peter O. (Talk) 23:46, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Talk:Race - Dispute between one user and other editors. Revert war (user has reverted the page 4x in three hours, 5x in 22 hours). Some editors remove dispute tags while there is an outstanding and lengthy dispute.
• Talk:Gundam Mark II — no dispute, it's just that the anonymously-written entry lacks vital information which I can't provide.
• Category talk:Intercollegiate athletics - the contents of this category is inaccurate relative to its description, and perhaps too US-centric.
• Talk:Historical revisionism One user is adding information. Another user is reverting most additions because he thinks they are POV. An email sent by one party to the other has been published on the talk page. As it seems that only three people are involved in the discussion a few more voices might help to establish a consensus.
• Talk:Primitivism Article in very poor condition. Personality conflict has resulted in reverts which are stiffling progress. Outside parties would likely recieve less hostility. Talk:Primitive communism is also involved.
• Talk:America's_Army issues over whether two definitions of the game should be listed should be listed, or only one.
• Talk:2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities - There is debate over how the articles should be structured, especially the main page (should it be replaced with a summary article drafted separately, or edited and filtered down into a summary?).
• Talk:Nineteen Eighty-Four: Issues of original research and Don't disrupt the wiki to prove a point.
• Talk:Mainland China: Whether to include the significance of the term "mainland China", to distinguish from Hong Kong and Macao because of the One Country, Two Systems provisions.
• Talk:1944: Where is the line (and should there be one) for births and deaths listed in the year articles?
• Talk:U.S. presidential election, 2004: Should it be stated that the Minnesota 'faithless elector' is believed to have been accidental?
• Talk:Surrealism: Dispute over who is to define "surrealism", repeated removals of material.
• Talk:Eastern philosophy: The inclusion of maoism in the category that the article describes is controvercial, also there was a bizarre redirect to Talk:Eastern culture which created a good deal of confusion.
• Talk:Charlottetown Accord: Flagged as neutrality dispute by an anon user on Jan 1; user has provided no further information as to what their concern is.
• Talk:Chernobyl: Dispute over inclusion of mugwort and wormwood in the article.
• Talk:Killian documents: Dispute concerning whether experts have determined the documents to be forgeries.
• Talk:World Chess Championship: Concerning pictures and how to place them.
• Talk:Estimates of the Palestinian Refugee flight of 1948: 472,000 is not estimate
• Talk:Polygamy#2Wives.com: Should the article on polygamy contain a link to a site with personal ads "for people looking to meet single women seeking polygamy"?
• Talk:President of the Palestinian Authority: Should the title of the article use "President" or "Ra'ees" (or perhaps "Chairman")? 19:52, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Talk:Israel: Should the second sentence read "It has a parliamentary system ..." or "It is a parliamentary democracy ..."?
• Talk:Hearing impairment. On the placement of Deaf and Deafness in relation to Hearing impairment or the "Deaf" culture.
• Talk:Open gaming. Two users disagree on the content of the article. One user thinks that a certain passage is necessary, factual, and relevant to the article. Another user thinks the disputed passage is irrelevant and highly POV. Attempts at rational discussion between the two parties have not been fruitful. It is hoped that a community consensus would aid in resolving the dispute.
• Talk:Natural monopoly. One editor and one admin seem to be exerting an untoward amount of control over the article, including the admin unprotecting an article which was protected because of back-and-forth reverting in which he was involved. Dispute resolution in the talk page is stalled, with the controlling faction apparently under the belief that WP:NPA doesn't apply to them.

Page was protected (by a different admin) to stop a revert war over one user insisting on the insertion of a badly-written paragraph with very little relevant content. User was not amenable to reasonable argument (which along with said editor's ignorance of a well-defined economic term incidentally led to the WP:NPA issues). So rather than leave the page protected indefinitely, the admin who had been involved in editing unprotected the page. The disputed paragraph (now grown even more unwieldy) has been allowed to stand, so what exactly is the issue here?? Yes, the article is still a mess, which is why I posted it on WP:PR. Rd232 08:36, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Talk:Polish-Soviet_War A POV notice. RfC suggested, as there is still no consensus. Thank you for your comments.
• Talk:2003 Invasion of Iraq Is it POV to refer to the Saddam Hussein government as a "regime"?
  • It's not just Saddam; we should consider use of the word in general, a subject raised at Misplaced Pages talk:Neutral point of view#"Regime".
• Talk:Intelligent design Two users have requested dispute resolution. One claims the page to be a "bad faith fraud." POV concerns, much reverting going on.
• Talk: Mestizo. Validity of statistics.
• Talk:Joshua A. Norton. Is referring to this gentleman as "Emperor of the United States" throughout his article misleading or appropriate? Is humorously referring to a faux emperor's reign, decrees, etc. misleading and contrary to the facts?
• Talk:Christian views of homosexuality - an extensive essay about the Eastern Orthodox views of sin and sexuality in general evades touching the subject of the actual Eastern Orthodox views of homosexuality.
• Talk:Perverted-Justice.com - dispute between two article versions.
• Talk:Elton John: should the article use hyphens instead of dashes?
• Talk:QuakeAID - is it a violation of the NPOV policy for the article to state that QuakeAID "fraudulently misrepresents themselves"?
• Talk:Global warming - Continuous complaints from new users about quality and readability of article and related articles. Continuous fighting on talk pages of all articles involved between self-proclaimed expert user acting as "owner" of the pages and new users wanting to contribute.
• Talk:Political views of Lyndon LaRouche - Neutrality dispute.
• Talk:Free-content#Bloating_of_the_article – Regarding the bloating of the article.
• Talk:Male circumcision - POV dispute.
• Talk:Republican Party (United States) and [[Talk:Democratic Party (United States) - A variety of controversial changes: Should articles repeatedly blame slavery on the Democratic Party? Should information about the history of the Republican Party be remove? etc.
• Category talk:Languages of Misplaced Pages Projects - Should the content of this category be changed from articles about languages to articles about wikipedia projects in that language? No real dispute, I'm listing this here because "category talk:" usually does not get much attention.
• Talk:Macedonian Slavs - Should we cite a population estimate that some people disagree with?
• Talk:Chip Berlet - The individual about whom the article is written, who is a journalist, has become a Misplaced Pages editor, and complained that the article was overly critical. The talk page is somewhat overly partisan on this issue, and neutral participants might help put things in perspective. The page was recently rewritten in an effort to make it more NPOV. Which version is more neutral? The new one from January 8 or the old one from January 2 ?
• Talk:Sollog - an argument between critics and supporters of Sollog (members of the Temple of 'Hayah, accused of being Sollog's sock-puppets), mostly about the accuracy of quake predictions and the NPOV
• Talk:List of Palestinian children killed by Israelis in 2004 - What should have been a plain list of names has suddenly turned into a full-out edit war with proselytizing that will end up as long as the list. Also, note that the article is to be transwikied.
• Talk:List of Quebec television series - The question has been raised whether List of Quebec television series should be merged into List of Canadian television series; the consensus was to keep them split, but one user insists on merging them.
• Talk:Frankfurt School - Should Kevin B. MacDonald be listed as a "notable critic" of the Frankfurt School in the absence of any evidence of his being cited or regarded as such?
• Talk:Abraham Lincoln - Should the section on Lincoln's sexuality be removed from the main page?
• Talk:List_of_music_videos_by_year Should the article be split imediately into the yearly lists or not until it's finished? The issue was voted on, and the clear majority agreed to split it. Still, an anonymous user reverts the page, when some videos are moved to yearly lists.
• Talk:2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities - This page has grown to nearly 130KB. What would be the best way to reduce the size while maintaining news and sources?
• Talk:Charles Darwin/Lincoln There is an ongoing dispute about the inclusion of a ten word sentence about Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin sharing a birthday. What would the best resolution of this dispute be?

Article dispute archive

Comment about individual users

This section is for discussing specific users who have allegedly violated Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. In order to request comment about a user, please follow the instructions to create a subpage in the appropriate section below. Disputes over the writing of articles, including disputes over how best to follow the NPOV policy, belong in the Article content disputes section above.

Before listing any user conduct dispute here, at least two people should have tried to resolve the same issue by discussing it with the subject on his or her talk page or the talk pages involved in the dispute. This must involve the same dispute or concern the same disputed type(s) of activity, not different ones.

Once the request for comment is open, these two people must document their individual efforts, provide evidence that those efforts have failed to produce change, and sign the comment page. Requests for comment which do not meet these minimum requirements after 48 hours from creation are considered "uncertified" and will be de-listed. The subject RFC page will also be deleted, unless the subject has explicitly requested it to be retained.

General user conduct

Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges or the choice of username. To list a user conduct dispute, please create a subpage using the following sample listing as a template (anything within {...} are notes):

• /Example user - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts; do not sign entry.}

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

• /User:24.168.66.27 Allegations: personal attacks, excessive POV pushing. See Talk:Surrealism.
• /User:Daniel C. Boyer Allegations: personal attacks, attempts to use Wiki to promote websites, inserts attacks in articles. See Talk:Surrealism and edit history of Mary Ann Caws

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

• /CheeseDreams - Allegations: personal attacks, disruption of Misplaced Pages.
• /WikiUser - Allegations: gratuitous incivility, making false accusations of racism and vandalism, disruptive behaviour, violation of 3RR, POV editing.
• /62.52.37.xxx - Allegations: gratuitous incivility, accusing others of POV, disrespect toward other contributers.
• /JonGwynne - Allegations: gratuitous incivility; POV pushing
• /William M. Connolley - Allegations: POV editing, disrespect toward other contributers, lack of civility, poor wikiquette, and engaging in chronic and sustained RV edit wars.
• /Iasson - Allegations: Disruption of VfD and creation of articles to forward his own PoV on VfD policy.
• /Invalid user name specified - Allegations: Disruptive username, improper accusations of vandalism, disruptive talk page behavior.
• /ExplorerCDT - personal attacks, creating nonsense and hoax articles, lying on VfD to attempt to keep a hoax page from being deleted.

Use of administrator privileges

This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by Misplaced Pages:Administrators. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, and blocking or unblocking users. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the General user conduct section above. To list a dispute, create a subpage using the following sample as a template:

• /Example admin - Allegations: {one or two short sentences giving the dry facts; do not sign entry.}

As with disputes over general user conduct, at least two people must certify that they believe there is a legitimate basis for the complaint. If the listing is not certified within 48 hours of listing, it will be deleted.

Candidate pages - still need to meet the two person threshold
List newer entries on top

Approved pages - have met the two person threshold

Choice of username

If you believe someone has chosen an inappropriate username under Misplaced Pages's username policy, you may create a subpage here to discuss whether the user should be forced to change usernames. However, before listing the user here, please first contact the user on his or her talk page and give them an opportunity to change usernames voluntarily.

New listings here, please

• user:AdminsDeath -- Not to sound staunchy, but as an admin, I take offense to this. Even I wasn't an admin, or if we didn't have admins, I'd still feel a little awkward working around someone who's username could easily be an ambiguous death threat. -- user:zanimum
  • Forgot to talk to the user first, so ignore this until I get a response. -- user:zanimum
    • Seems user is blocked indefinitely for inappropriate username. -- Chris 73 Talk 01:57, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

User dispute archive

General convention and policy issues

Some proposed conventions and policies can be found at Category:Misplaced Pages policy thinktank.

List newer entries on top

• Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)/proposed revision 1) proposes "BC" and "AD" (in contrast with "BCE" and "CE") as standard for Misplaced Pages, 2) apparently encourages linking of years, and 3) encourages linking of units of measurement, among other changes. It also reverses the style of many of the dates used within the guide (such as "February 12" to "12 February"). See Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) for discussion. Maurreen 01:36, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Misplaced Pages talk:Edit summary. Edit summary is now required. How do we inform editors? See also Template talk:Edit summary. Hyacinth 04:57, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers) - Putting out feelers on a naming convention for subunits of governments around the world.
• Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Drugs/General/Naming of drug pages - The question is whether All drug pages should be named according to their International Nonproprietary Name
• Misplaced Pages:Ethics and law - I'd like to encourage ideas about possible guidelines or principles for questions of privacy and related issues.
• Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment#Deleting_uncertified_RFCs - Should the manner of handling uncertified RFCs be altered?
• Misplaced Pages:Disabling edits by unregistered users and stricter registration requirement
  • Inactive. Problem turned out to be difficult to articulate. Peter O. (Talk) 19:20, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Misplaced Pages talk:Arbitration policy/Proposed amendment ratification vote - Should the "Snowspinner Amendment" be removed and subjected to a separate vote?
• Misplaced Pages:Divulging personal details - Discussion of when to include personal details of people who have chosen to remain anonymous.
• Wikipedia_talk:Avoid_weasel_terms should we use weasel words?
• Misplaced Pages talk:Protection policy - Should we implement a software change so that pages in the user namespace are only editable by that particular user?
• Misplaced Pages:Preliminary Deletion - Not sure if this is the place, but comments on this proposal to add another type of deletion would be appreciated.
• Misplaced Pages talk:Cleanup/Leftovers#Leftovers_system - Not a dispute, but I would like more opinions from people in a discussion on a somewhat backwater talk page.

Resolved convention disputes

• Editorial validation
• Misplaced Pages dispute resolution