→Arbitration request on greek/albanian zones: this request has been declined and will be archived at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Declined requests - clerk |
|||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
*'''Decline''' per Wiz, Risker etc. Definitely other steps to be taken before coming here [[User:Casliber|Casliber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 21:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC) |
*'''Decline''' per Wiz, Risker etc. Definitely other steps to be taken before coming here [[User:Casliber|Casliber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 21:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
*'''Decline'''. Not a case for arbitration. Please follow Risker's suggestions. [[User:FloNight|FloNight]][[User talk:FloNight|♥♥♥]] 14:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
*'''Decline'''. Not a case for arbitration. Please follow Risker's suggestions. [[User:FloNight|FloNight]][[User talk:FloNight|♥♥♥]] 14:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
==Arbitration request on greek/albanian zones== |
|||
'''Initiated by ''' [[User:Sarandioti|Sarandioti]] ([[User talk:Sarandioti|talk]]) '''at''' 12:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=== Involved parties === |
|||
<!-- use {{admin|username}} if the party is an administrator --> |
|||
*{{userlinks|Sarandioti}}, ''filing party'' |
|||
*{{userlinks|Balkanian`s_word}} |
|||
*{{userlinks|I Pakapshem}} |
|||
*{{userlinks|Alexikoua}} |
|||
*{{userlinks|Athenean}} |
|||
<!-- The editor filing the case should be included as a party for purposes of notifications. --> |
|||
There is a dispute regarding names of the cities of [[Berat]], [[Sarande]], [[Konitsa]], [[Gjirokaster]], |
|||
[[Paramythia]], [[Delvine]], [[Arta]], [[Himare]], [[Preveza]], [[Ioannina]], and certain sentences in [[Himare]], [[Sarande]], [[Delvine]], [[Gjirokaster]]. The main disputes are: if medieval ancient names should be in lead, albanian names in lead in zones that were albanian populated in modern eras and part of albanian(Arta, Preveza,Konitsa, Ioannina) principalities or pashaliks, medieval/ancient names on cities([[Berat]], [[Paramythia]], and if greek names should be added in no substantial greek populated cities [[Delvine]], [[Gjirokaster]], [[Sarande]], [[Berat]], minority numbers and origin issues in himare, delvine, gjirokaster, and sarande city. All the results to a mutual agreement have resulted in edit-warring or either insults and provokation(Athenian), blank accusations(Alexikoua) 3RR block for 24h(Sarandioti) |
|||
;Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request |
|||
<!-- All parties must be notified that the request has been filed, immediately after it is posted, and confirmation posted here. --> |
|||
*Diff. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alexikoua#Arbitration_case]] |
|||
*Diff. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Athenean#Arbitration_case]] |
|||
*Diff. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Balkanian`s_word#Arbitration_case]] |
|||
*Diff. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:I_Pakapshem]] |
|||
;Confirmation that other steps in [[Wikipedia:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] have been tried |
|||
<!-- Identify prior attempts at dispute resolution here, with links/diffs to the page where the resolution took place. If prior dispute resolution has not been attempted, the reasons for this should be explained in the request for arbitration --> |
|||
*Link 1 [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Himarë#Demographics.2C_greeks.2C_albanians_of_Himara]] |
|||
*Link 2 [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Konitsa]] |
|||
--[[User:Sarandioti|Sarandioti]] ([[User talk:Sarandioti|talk]]) 12:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=== Statement by Fut.Perf. === |
|||
Just a recent content dispute involving inexperienced editors, not ripe for Arbcom. Some of the participants have asked me to mediate (or according to their words, even "arbitrate") the issue; I would have already taken this in hand if I wasn't so occupied with the other case. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 12:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=== Statement by Sarandioti, I Pakapshem === |
|||
In [[Konitsa]] should be added the albanian as 1) it was part of the albanian populated regions in greece even in the 20th century prior the WWII. The same policy has followed in most other areas which were populated by Albanians in greece like [[Margariti]], [[Paramithia]], [[Philiates]]. [[Arta]], [[Preveza]], [[Ioannina]] should have in addition their albanian names in lead, as they were parts of the albanian principalities and janina capital of the pashalik of ali pashe tepelena and were also populated by Albanians. In [[Konitsa]] even the Aromanian name is added, and the greek editors [[User:Alexikoua]], [[User:Athenean]], keep removing the albanian name which corresponds to actual minority zone, and also one of the notable firures of the town was an Albanian of the 20th century Faik Konica. So how can we not have the albanian name in 1)town which was aprt of albanian populated area 2)one of its 2 notable figures was albanian but have the aromanian name of the town? In [[Berat]], [[Paramythia]] the medieval/ancient names should be moved from lead to a lower section. In [[Delvine]], [[Himare]] [[Gjirokaster]], [[Sarande]] [[Berat]] cities/towns the greek names should be removed because greeks do not form even a substantial minority in the cities but only in 99 villages around the other cities they form minorities except for [[Berat]] where no greeks are present at all. Source: U.S. Department of State - Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1994:Albania. This is the official source. Alexikoua and Athenean try to add greek names by speculations or by unreliable sources like tom winnifrith. This is the OFFICIAL document accepted even by the GREEK STATE itself, so how can 2 editors say "this is not correct let us change this". THe point is to talk with official facts. Regarding [[Himrare]] except the greek name a sentence claiming Himariots are ethnic greeks living in the area since antiquity. However, Cantacuzene the Byzantine nobleman recorded Himariots as Αλβανοι αυτονομοι νομαδες(albanian autonomous nomads)[http://books.google.com/books?id=SGYGAAAAQAAJ&pg=RA1-PA24&dq=chimariotes]. And also many other later historians of the 19 century recorded them as albanians[http://books.google.com/books?id=kYKzLpmWcMgC&pg=PA22&dq=chimariotes]. The source of athenian is again tom winnifrith, who is related to searching for vlach and greek speaking minorities. But even if he was a NPOV source, he just speculates for ancient origin of Himariots, does not attibute his beliefs to anything else than his own instinct. Of course one would say "but these are outdated sources" But lets think about this. The denonym Albanian was always ethnically related, it was never something related to religion or language. This is not a fragile term or a scientific issue. --[[User:Sarandioti|Sarandioti]] ([[User talk:Sarandioti|talk]]) 13:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=== Statement by {Party 3} === |
|||
=== Clerk notes === |
|||
:''This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.'' |
|||
*Recuse - as I have taken administrative action in against a party of this case. [[User:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#4E562C;font-weight:bold">Tiptoety</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#FFDB58">talk</span>]]</sup> 20:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=== Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (0/7/0/0) === |
|||
*'''Decline''', content dispute that is not yet needing arbitration. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:Jayvdb|John Vandenberg]] <sup>'''([[User talk:Jayvdb|chat]])'''</sup></span> 13:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Decline''' per John. If an experienced administrator (perhaps a clerk) could help steer these parties toward mediation, that would be helpful and appreciated. [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] ([[User talk:Newyorkbrad|talk]]) 13:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Decline'''. Per Newyorkbrad. [[User:FloNight|FloNight]][[User talk:FloNight|♥♥♥]] 13:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Decline'''. --[[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] ([[User talk:Vassyana|talk]]) 15:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Decline''' [[User:Wizardman|<span style="color:#060">'''''Wizardman'''''</span>]] 17:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Decline''' [[User:Casliber|Casliber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 11:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Decline''' per Newyorkbrad. [[User:Risker|Risker]] ([[User talk:Risker|talk]]) 22:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Seeyou == |
==Seeyou == |
Revision as of 17:06, 11 June 2009
Requests for arbitration
St. John's University (NY) Article
Initiated by Newyorkborn (talk) at 14:04, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Involved parties
- newyorkborn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- 208.120.47.96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
For the past two years, a "contributor" (IP Address 208.120.47.96) has repeatedly prevented other contributors, including myself, from making minor edits to the St. John's University, NY, page that eliminate irrelevant and biased language. By viewing the Discussion Page for St. John's University, you will see that the user in question (IP Address 208.120.47.96) has continuously reversed edits by many contributors who have questioned the information 208.120.47.96 has inserted. By looking at his/her Talk Page, you will see that this user has been blocked in the past for "edit wars." My current request follows my efforts, over the past few days, to add neutral, factual edits about campus housing and to revise a negative reference to a 43-year-old magazine quote that adds nothing to the topic (about a faculty strike in 1966). The contributor reversed by edits again this morning and threatened me with being blocked if I tried another edit. Please help.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:St._John%27s_University_(New_York)
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St._John%27s_University_(New_York)&action=history
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Newyorkborn
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.120.47.96
Statement by Newyorkborn
For the past two years, a "contributor" (IP Address 208.120.47.96) has seemed to exercise illegal "ownership" over the page for St. John's University, NY, preventing myself and others from making minor edits that eliminate irrelevant and biased language. As the Discussion Page for St. John's University shows, the user in question (IP Address 208.120.47.96) has continuously reversed edits by varied contributors who have questioned the information 208.120.47.96 has inserted. As the user in question's Talk Page shows, he/she has been blocked in the past for "edit wars." This current arbitration request follows my recent efforts to add minor, neutral, factual edits about campus housing and to revise a negative reference to a 43-year-old magazine quote that adds nothing to the topic (a 1966 faculty strike). The contributor reversed my edits again this morning and warned that I'd be blocked if I tried another edit. Please help.
Statement by {Party 2}
Statement by {Party 3}
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.
Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (0/3/0/2)
- Comment - I have just protected the article due to edit warring between the two purported parties here. I would ask that more experienced editors please review this content dispute and assist in sorting out the basic facts, perhaps with an RFC or third opinion. This does not appear to be ripe for arbitration, but does need some community assistance to sort out. Risker (talk) 18:53, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Decline, though acknowledging that community intervention is definitely needed as stated above. Wizardman 20:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: Requesting assistance from an administrator here per Risker. On hold for now, though I hope this can be resolved well short of arbitration. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Decline per Wiz, Risker etc. Definitely other steps to be taken before coming here Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Decline. Not a case for arbitration. Please follow Risker's suggestions. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Seeyou
Initiated by Jeremy (v^_^v Cardmaker) at 18:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Jéské Couriano (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), filing party
- Seeyou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Famousdog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Ronz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- PSWG1920 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- SamuelTheGhost (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
Practically every step attempted has been an RfC or informal mediation; part of the issue is abuse of such by Seeyou. As such, every RfC and MedCab case filed will be listed here:
- RFAR March 2 2007 - Rejected
- Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-02-10_Bates_Method
- RFAR April 24, 2007 - Rejected
- RFAR December 11, 2007 - Rejected
- Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-01 Bates method
- Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-01-07 Bates method
- Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-28 Bates method
- Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Seeyou initiated March 27, 2008
- Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-08-03 Bates method
Statement by Jéské Couriano
Seeyou has been disruptive as regards Bates method and POV forks thereof that he tends to create for the past year-and-a-half, abouts. I initially got involved with the article after a bunch of open proxies targeted it; looking at the talk page then I had noticed that Seeyou was hurling accusations of bias on the talk page, especially towards Famousdog (talk · contribs), whom he was accusing of meatpuppeting on behalf of another user who'd only ever edited the article once. As I detailed in this user-conduct RfC, Seeyou has been less than collegial for most of the time he's been on the article.
Long story short: Seeyou has been accusing editors of loads of behavioral no-nos: payola, sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry, and, most recently, deliberate insertion of original research. In each instance he has given zero proof for his accusations, while in the meanwhile violating several rules himself, particularly WP:Canvassing ([6], [7] as examples) and WP:Assume good faith. He has twice created POV forks of Bates Method in an attempt to circumvent the consensus, and has canvassed heavily, so much so that he is under sanctions specifically prohibiting him from making such edits ([8]). He has constantly posted "Objective reader" sections (links given are examples, but not the full extent) on the talk page and screamed foul whenever they were removed, including overuse of RfC templates on Talk:Bates method ([9], [10], [11] as examples). He has constantly used RfC and MedCab as his own personal pitbulls against editors in revenge for filing RfCs or mediations against him; see the MedCab cases above.
Even more recently, Seeyou has been threatening to bring the underlying content dispute to Arbitration, despite several editors warning him that the ArbCom does not interfere in such. So far as I am concerned, the only actual content dispute is in Seeyou's mind; the consensus was reached long ago and thus far only Seeyou has claimed otherwise.
I urge the ArbCom to accept this case and to focus on the behavioral aspects, particularly as regards Seeyou in re Bates method. -Jeremy (v^_^v Cardmaker) 20:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
In re SamuelTheGhost's statement
Samuel, I feel obligated to point out that I have tried to be very careful to stay out of the content dispute, since I (α) do not know anything about the Bates method and (β) am incredibly leery of editing in areas that are political, polemic, or under ArbCom sanction (in this case, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience). From what I saw as an outsider looking in, there was a consensus, so please understand that I mean no misinformation by my statement regarding a consensus. My main concern is Seeyou's behavior, which hasn't been collegial what-so-ever and in many cases has been downright childish. -Jeremy (v^_^v Cardmaker) 23:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Statement by Famousdog
I have to agree with everything that Jeske has said above. I have frequently been the victim of accusations of sockpuppetry ([12],[13]) and conflict of interest ([14],[15]) with regards my editing of the Bates method article. Despite my attempts to find a compromise ([16]) and the fact that I originally pointed out the suspicious proxy behaviour that Seeyou then accused me of ([17]) Seeyou has consistently assumed bad faith towards me. Seeyou is clearly scientifically illiterate ([18]) and has preferred to attempt circumvention of the fact that his (fringe) POV is not represented on Wikipedia by the creation of various POV forks and, lately, by simply attacking other editors on his talk page (the only forum he has left).
One final note. I realise that the anonymity of Wikipedia is one of its strengths, but I would be more than willing to reveal my true identity to a third party, if it will help to resolve this dispute. I have a PhD in vision science, work in an Optometry department and I have published extensively in peer-reviewed journals on various aspects of the visual system. I suspect Seeyou will not be so forthcoming with regards the source of his expertise, but perhaps he will take this opportunity to establish his credentials. Famousdog (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Statement by SamuelTheGhost
I was the one against whom Seeyou made the most direct accusation of WP:COI (even though he can't spell my username). To explain what he said there, there is a document, the Woods report, whose general contents and conclusions we all know. Seeyou wrongly believes that it is crucial to his arguments. I have a copy. He blames me for the fact that the full text is not available on the web.
Just for the record, I have no WP:COI regarding Bates Method and Seeyou has no grounds to suppose that I have.
I must contradict what Jéské Couriano said above. There is a long-running content dispute about the balance of the Bates method article. In policy terms, an over-strict interpretation of WP:RS has been used as a major argument to infringe both the spirit and the letter of WP:NPOV. Amongst other matters, this has been used to prevent mention of the content or even in most cases the existence of pro-Bates literature and websites. The relative stability that has been achieved represents the balance of forces amongst the editors, rather than a genuine consensus, still less a true WP:NPOV.
Seeyou is frustrated by this situation, but has not dealt with it well. Instead of trying to get some sensible use of pro-Bates literature he has demanded that we recognise the primacy of his favourite authors. The other editors have strongly different positions from each other. Instead of seeking agreement from some of those editors on specific modest points, Seeyou has repeatedly accused them of being united against him, which of course has eventually become true. The record of his bad bahaviour is, regrettably, given accurately above. It is difficult to know what to do, but it has to be admitted that the project would be better off without him. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Statement by {Party 3}
- Placeholder statement section for User:Seeyou. AGK 11:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Query from AGK
Coren writes that,
MedCom opines that this is strictly a behavioral issue
I don't think this case has been the subject of formal mediation. Could you clarify what you mean? AGK 13:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.
- Recuse I mediated this article a long time ago for medcab. MBisanz talk 20:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Absent developments, this case will be opened on or after 10am tomorrow morning (UTC). AGK 11:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Seeyou has not edited since 7 June, and has thus presumably not seen Jéské's 8 June notification of this RfAr. A small delay to the opening of this case might be in order, to allow Seeyou to make a statement (if s/he logs on within the next day or so). AGK 11:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have e-mailed Seeyou via Emailuser with a notification of this thread. AGK 13:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter (7/0/0/1)
- Awaiting statements. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Although the likely outcome here is acceptance, my preference would be wait another day or two to see if Seeyou posts a statement. Newyorkbrad (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Presumptive Accept; multiple attempts to solve the problem failed and MedCom opines that this is strictly a behavioral issue. — Coren (talk) 21:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept. Wizardman 21:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept: Roger Davies talk 09:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept: — Rlevse • Talk • 10:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept. John Vandenberg (chat) 11:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept to look at all parties. FloNight♥♥♥ 12:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Accept Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)