AlexandrDmitri (talk | contribs) →MOS:JP – Romanization for words of English origin: Removing as declined (mathematically impossible) |
→Involved parties: add Timid Guy as Involved party to both the TM article controversies and the AE |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
*{{userlinks|Will Beback}} |
*{{userlinks|Will Beback}} |
||
*{{userlinks|Edith Sirius Lee}} |
*{{userlinks|Edith Sirius Lee}} |
||
*{{userlinks|TimidGuy}} |
|||
<!-- The editor filing the case should be included as a party for purposes of notifications. --> |
<!-- The editor filing the case should be included as a party for purposes of notifications. --> |
||
Revision as of 14:50, 21 September 2010
Requests for arbitration
Transcendental Meditation 2
Initiated by — Keithbob • Talk • at 03:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Keithbob (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- Littleolive oil (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Bigweeboy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Jmh649 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Will Beback (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Edith Sirius Lee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- TimidGuy (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
Statement by User:Keithbob
I respectfully request that the Committee accept this case for Arbitration and engage in a self described “periodic review” of editor conduct as stated in the TM Arb decision. [1] I believe that the complex nature of the behavioral issues and the historical nature of this topic (ie. prior ArbCom) requires that these matters be addressed by the Committee, rather through community forums or at WP:AE.
I have attempted to minimize my involvement in controversial issues and have generally stayed away from the very contentious, main article of Transcendental Meditation. For example, since the close of TM ArbCom I have made only 12 edits to the Transcendental Meditation article (compared to 115 by Littleolive oil and 95 by Will Beback) [2] and only 27 Talk Page edits (compared to 330 by Will Beback).[3] At the same time, I have observed sudden and disturbing changes in that article and protracted controversies on the Talk Page as well as patterns of disruptive behavior, on it and related articles.
I suggest that a ‘periodic review' is sorely needed:
- In light of protracted disputes on the Transcendental Meditation article and their community forums such as RfC and mediation. [4][5][6] (Sweeping changes were made to the article during the second day of the RfC seen here.)[7]
- To examine what appears to be an inappropriate Arbitration Enforcement procedure and case. [8]
- To respond to ongoing patterns of disruptive behavior by Jmh649 and Will Beback that have contributed to the creation of a hostile editing environment on the Transcendental Meditation and related articles. Here are a few recent examples:
- Expressing superiority, ownership and the pushing of incorrect interpretations of policies and guidelines
- “Wikipedia should be written by people independent of the subject at hand (see WP:COI and by those who contribute broadly to the encyclopedia.” Jmh649 [9]
- “I edit boldly and will continue.” Jmh649 [10]
- “If the community supports one version over another with the only people disagreeing with the changes being a group with ties either financially or personal to the topic at hand than yes we will go with the version supported by the wider community. One does not need consensus of all editors involved.”Jmh649 [11]
- “There are millions of other articles on Wikipedia - it's not necessary for you to edit the MUM article.” Will Beback [12]
- “I see you haven't edited the article in a long time, which is appropriate.” Will Beback[13]
- “Given the ArbCom case, MUM faculty and other highly involved members of the TM movement need to pay close attention to the policies, especially when there's an issue of adding or keeping positive material, or deleting or arguing against negative material.” Will Beback [14]
- “Yes the three of you agree but you also all practice TM. Now please get some outside input.” Jmh649 [15]
- "I trust this is now settled and we won't have to spend another month discussing LoPinto." Will Beback [16]
- Expressing superiority, ownership and the pushing of incorrect interpretations of policies and guidelines
Thank you for your due consideration of this matter.
Statement by User:Jmh649
This has been discussed recently a number of times. Here by LittleOlive [17] and here by Edith [18]. The first was closed as being the wrong forum. The second was denied with discussion taking place here [19].
BTW only 6 edits have been made to Transcendental Meditation article in the last two weeks and 5 to the talk page ( all involving routine maintenance ). None of the last 50 edits have been a revert with edits from a number of the parties involved including KeithBob. I have not edited any article or talk page regarding TM for more than 500 edits. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Statement by User:Bigweeboy
As Keithbob stated in his initial request, the previous TM Arb decision outlined that there should be “periodic reviews” of editor conduct. As several months have elapsed since the TM Arb case was concluded, and in recent weeks there have been some "sudden and disturbing changes" in TM articles without consensus, and examples of disruptive behavior on the part of some editors, I feel that now would be a good time to have the first "periodic review" of the aforementioned involved editors conduct. --BwB (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Statement by {Party 3}
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by non-recused Clerks.