Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-01-10/The Circus (film)

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Article	Template:The Circus (film)
Status	New
Request date	15:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Requesting party	Jack Sebastian (talk)
Parties involved	User: Jack_Sebastian, User:Slatersteven. [User:ScottyBerg]], User:Hobit. [User:Big_Bird]], User:Koppapa. [User:LuckyLouie]], User:MikeAllen. [User:Erik]]

[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab new cases|Template:The Circus (film)]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|Template:The Circus (film)]]

Request details

Where is the dispute?

The Circus (film)

Who is involved?

• User: Jack_Sebastian
• User:Slatersteven
• User:ScottyBerg
• User:Hobit
• User:Big_Bird
• User:Koppapa
• User:LuckyLouie
• User:MikeAllen
• User:Erik

What is the dispute?

The dispute surrounds the inclusion of text noting (and/or detailing) the October, 2010 reporting of an Irish filmmaker seeing a person in a premiere film of Charlie Chaplin's film, The Circus. In the 1928 footage, a woman walks past the camera, listening and talking into what appears to be a cellular phone. The initiator of the YouTube video, an Irish filmmaker then suggested that the woman might be a time traveler. After millions of internet hits, the story was noticed by major news outlets across the world. It was notable and significant media coverage of the event. All of the citations were from top tier media outlets (like CNN, ABC News, NYT, etc.) meet our criteria for inclusion (WP:CITE, WP:N, WP:RS, WP:V).
The point of contention is any whether any mention of the event belongs in the article and if so, to what extent. The discussion was initiated by a now indef-banned user. The larger group of editors feel that no mention is warranted, while the smaller group (of which I am a part) feels that some mention of it should remain within the article as is or - at best - expanded slightly within a cultural references section or the like.

What would you like to change about this?

I think we need to mention the event in the article - not go hog wild and get all nerdy about it, but simply explain all the hubbub. Wiki page stats and internet numbers seem to indicate that thousands of users came to the article looking for details about the event in the article and found little there.

How do you think we can help?

Simply point out the policy aspects of inclusion versus exclusion. Personality friction may have made that observance more difficult, and someone uninvolved might do the trick.

Comment by slatersteven

I should point out that I have crated a page that this material can be include on with far less concern over weight and fringe issue, and I which the material can be coved in detail. Time travel urban legends and that the materail is in the Circus article as a see also link The_Circus_(film)#See_also that the nominator insistes must be a descriptive line of text, against consensus. Also see Noticeboard#Notability_of_.27time_traveler.27_film_in_The_Circus. Indeed this (which I would argue does exactly what he wants, mentiones the basic nature of the story) [[1]] does not appear to be enough. .Slatersteven (talk) 13:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

I can't believe this is still going on. I first took a ride on this horse at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion and got off it after it was beaten pretty much to death. It rose from the dead a few months later on the article Talk page and I foolishly suggested it might better find resolution at Notability/Noticeboard discussion where it quickly got beaten to death once again. Since this was (and still is) nothing more than a refusal by one editor to accept consensus, I decline to participate, and will steer clear of this article, this editor, and this dispute in the future. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:01, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

This will make it hard to proccede, what would you sugest Arbcom?Slatersteven (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)