Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-16 impossible conditions

Mediation Case: 2006-07-16 impossible conditions

Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

Request made by: Francis Schonken 16:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

Wikipedia talk:Verifiability

Who's involved?

Besides myself, user:SlimVirgin

What's going on?

• SlimVirgin removed a comment I had posted on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability diff
• I warned SlimVirgin on her talk page that that is unacceptable behaviour, and kindly requested her to undo her deletion of my comment on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability diff
• SlimVirgin replied on my talk page: "Please do not post to my talk page again. I would prefer if you would confine your comments to the article or project talk pages instead." diff
• Yeah, that's impossible, no?

What would you like to change about that?

1. That my comment to Wikipedia talk:Verifiability would be restored as I posted it. Here's the diff with which I posted that comment: diff
2. That user talk pages can be used for what they are for, which, as far as I know, includes trying to get differences between two persons solved. Help:Talk page#Etiquette advises against sending "go away" messages: "Redirecting your user talk page to another page [...] or to send a "go away" message [...] can also be considered a hostile act." - I'd like to see a commitment from SlimVirgin to live up to that in the future.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

If by "work discreetly" you mean: "give this no more noise than strictly needed", of course, work as discreetly as possible.

My wiki-e-mail is activated. My real life e-mail address can also be found via my user page, on the page that appears after clicking the "This is me too!" link on my user page.

Personally, I'd however prefer not to handle this by e-mail. I had an e-mail exchange with SlimVirgin some months ago, that resorted to nothing. I think the Wikipedia system and its (user) talk pages are much more suited to resolve such issues. In particular, the issue I presented above involves someone trying to thwart that by imposing impossible conditions regarding the use of talk pages.

Mediator response

I'll take this case. Thε Halo ^Θ 10:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Discussion

While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.

Hi there SlimVirgin, I've taken the case that Cowman was talking about. Right now it looks straight forward enough to just be on your's and Francis Schonken talk page. However, if you feel that Wikipedia talk:Verifiability would be a better place to discuss this, we'll talk there. However, it seems that there shouldn't be too many problems with this. Thanks for your time. Yours, Thε Halo ^Θ 11:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi there Francis, I'm the mediator who has taken your case. I've had a look and the matter seems quite straight forward, so I think that it would be best for now to talk on yours and SlimVirgin's talk pages. We will hopefully sort this out soon. Yours, Thε Halo ^Θ 11:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. After looking at all of the evidence given to me, I think that there are two main problems.

1. That your edit summery for removing his comments wasn't clear enough, and (as cowman's said above) your use of the default revision summery made it look like you thought he was committing vandalism. This was obviously just a misunderstanding and a brake down in communication, but I think it would help you you explained why you removed his edits.
2. After you removed his edits, Francis responded in, what might be considered, a rash way, by leaving you an offical looking warning for a misunderstanding. Then you responded rashly by telling him not to post on this page. Again, this was a simple communication brake down, and one that can be easily fixed.

As I suggested, I think a simple explination would sort this whole mess out. Thε Halo ^Θ 11:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your offer of help, Halo, but I won't be taking part. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC) As such, case closed