Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
Article | Sicani, Malta, Template:Malta topics, perhaps other Malta-related articles |
Status | closed |
Request date | 07:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC) |
Requesting party | Unknown |
Parties involved | kwamikagami (talk · contribs), Cradashj (talk · contribs), The Ogre (talk · contribs) (minor input), Coren (talk · contribs) (3rd opinion respondent) |
Mediator(s) | Xavexgoem (talk) |
Comment | closed; other party blocked as sock. |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases|Sicani, Malta, Template:Malta topics, perhaps other Malta-related articles]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|Sicani, Malta, Template:Malta topics, perhaps other Malta-related articles]]
Request details
Who are the involved parties?
What's going on?
- The issue: Who the Sicani were, what were their connections to Iberia (this is perhaps no longer an issue), and what were their connection, if any, to Malta.
- Behavior: Myself, with minor support by The Ogre and full though brief support from Coren (3rd party opinion), opposed to Kyarichy, Cradashj, and numerous anon IPs. I initially responded to a complaint that unsupported allegations were being added to the Sicani article. (I do not remember the complainant to add to the list of interested parties.) My attempts to add fact tags to the allegations were met with often irrelevant and in any case unreliable references, such as family webpages and sources that mention Sicily but not the Sicani. I removed the faux sources and unsourced claims, and have gotten frustrated with what I can only think must be pretense to misunderstand the verifiability guidelines. Kyarichy, Cradashj, et al. do not address the concerns I have raised, only tell me that I am POV pushing, falsifying history, etc. I have myself engaged in edit warring, and once blocked the Sicani article for 24 hrs in an attempt to let things cool down. That article is now fine, but when I attempted to make the same corrections to Malta-related articles today, Cradashj reverted me.
I sought a 3rd-party opinion, and Coren answered. He sided with me (though warned me about my behaviour), and stated that the references did not support the claims, and even if they did they were not reliable. Cradashj believes that what he does after that opinion does not need to take it into consideration, even though he is using (or at least restoring) some of the same refs.
- The evidence: Reliable references state that the Sicani were believed by the Greeks to be the oldest (or to perhaps be the oldest) of three ethnicities in Sicily at the time of Phoenician and Greek colonization ca 1000 BC. Thucydides states that the Sicani came from Iberia. (I believe that at the time "Iberia" included Gaul, but would have to verify this.) Archaeological evidence shows that Sicily was settled ca 8000 BC, that Gozo & Malta were settled ca 5000 BC from Sicily, and that there was Minoan contact with Sicily (pottery etc.).
- The OR: From this, Kyarichy, Cradashj, et al. maintain that the Sicani were the original inhabitants of Sicily in 8000 BC, that it was they who settled Malta in 5000 BC, and (previously, based on a mention in an unreliable source) that the Sicani language had Iberian connections. Coren concluded that none of this was encyclopedic. I have insisted that any such claims be removed unless a reliable reference can be found. Personally, I would be most interested if any of it were true.
What would you like to change about that?
Kyarichy, Cradashj, et al. do not, or perhaps will not, understand Coren or myself, and claim to have consensus to add these claims. I would like help getting them to understand and accept the Wikipedia verifiability guidelines.
Mediator notes
I'll move the discussion here for the time being. All editors stay civil yadayada you know the rest. Xavexgoem (talk) 17:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
On hold 'til I get responses from folks. Will close if nothing within arbitrary # of days. Hope no-one minds Xavexgoem (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Administrative notes
All involved parties should note that there has been sock puppet disruption in this case. All the IPs and User: Kyarichy[1] are sock puppets of indefinitely banned users.--Yolgnu (talk) 01:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Here's another banned user who's used almost the same wording[2] (though not disruptive): User:Soprani. In case there are any dots that still need connecting. kwami (talk) 02:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Please don't remove this discussion. It's for reference, and I don't want to have to edit the page or go through the history to read it Xavexgoem (talk) 17:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
Discussion
- Cradashj is the sole remaining editor who's supported these edits. Unless they respond (I just dropped a second note on their talk page), I don't think we have anything to discuss. kwami (talk) 02:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- This user (Cradashj) has been blocked indefinitely as being the sock of an Arbcom banned user (Yorkshirian), now indefinitely banned for evading the previous Arbcom one year ban. (See here for checkuser evidence.) So this matter seems to completely collapse now. DDStretch (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)