Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions

Is this arbitration about disruptive behavior, guideline interpretation, or both? --Serge 18:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought guideline interpretation but it has certainly shifted to more personal issues - and that's putting it lightly. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

In spite of all the details and side complaints, I think it just comes down to: Does TV:NAME have consensus? The whole situation is just a couple editors refusing to accept an obvious consensus. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Statement for the record by a relatively uninvolved party

Various claims have been made in this dispute that the poll didn't matter because discussion ensued. I would like to go on record here as being one of the people who chose not to participate at all in the original poll (and who actually still hasn't taken a side on the substance of the argument), for two main reasons:

• The dispute, as well documented in the Evidence, fell very quickly into personal attacks and highly bitter interactions in general. This chronic incivility continues even now, as exemplified here, and I have seen little to no intervention by admins to admonish people to stay civil. It seems like anything goes, and any outside observer would clearly see that a number of edits by people involved in the dispute have been retaliatory and vindictive, in that they've touched and challenged unrelated articles that were edited by their "enemies". I view this behavior as shameful, even if any particular challenge is "right" in terms of principle.
• The poll was a moving target, with lots of changes.

Subsequently, I was disheartened from future participation both by the ongoing, unmitigated tone of the overall discussion and then by Wknight94's immediate, defensive, and then very personal attacks on me here, here, and here, when I voiced my opinion on how the dispute was going and my dismay at people's behavior.

Maybe I'm still new here, but still, I've amassed some 2,500 edits in a little over a year. Yet, I have never seen a discussion on Wikipedia go quite so badly in terms of civility.

I believe that the ongoing extremely personal nature of the discussion and the general behavior in this dispute have driven participation away, and want to voice that belief. As I've stated, here, I am greatly curtailing my editing in Wikipedia as a result of this dispute and the behavior I've seen, particularly on the part of some admins.
-- PKtm 22:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)