Jump to content

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Yashovardhan Dhanania (talk | contribs) at 08:23, 10 December 2017 (→‎Talk:Survivor: Ghost Island discussion: requested protection). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"WP:DRN" redirects here. Not to be confused with WP:DNR.
"WP:DRN" redirects here. For the "Deny Recognition" essay, see WP:DNR.
    Welcome to the dispute resolution noticeboard (DRN)
    Shortcuts

    This is an informal place to resolve small content disputes as part of dispute resolution. It may also be used as a tool to direct certain discussions to more appropriate forums, such as requests for comment, or other noticeboards. You can ask a question on the talk page. This is an early stop for most disputes on Wikipedia. You are not required to participate, however, the case filer must participate in all aspects of the dispute or the matter will be considered failed. Any editor may volunteer! Click this button to add your name! You don't need to volunteer to help. Please feel free to comment below on any case. Be civil and remember; Maintain Wikipedia policy: it is usually a misuse of a talk page to continue to argue any point that has not met policy requirements. Editors must take particular care adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. This may also apply to some groups.

    Noticeboards should not be a substitute for talk pages. Editors are expected to have had extensive discussion on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) to work out the issues before coming to DRN.
    Do you need assistance? Would you like to help?

    If we can't help you, a volunteer will point you in the right direction. Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, objective and as nice as possible.

    • This noticeboard is for content disputes only. Comment on the contributions, not the contributors. Off-topic or uncivil behavior may garner a warning, improper material may be struck-out, collapsed, or deleted, and a participant could be asked to step back from the discussion.
    • We cannot accept disputes that are already under discussion at other content or conduct dispute resolution forums or in decision-making processes such as Requests for comments, Articles for deletion, or Requested moves.
    • The dispute must have been recently discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) to be eligible for help at DRN. The discussion should have been on the article talk page. Discussion on a user talk page is useful but not sufficient, because the article talk page may be watched by other editors who may be able to comment. Discussion normally should have taken at least two days, with more than one post by each editor.
    • Ensure that you deliver a notice to each person you add to the case filing by leaving a notice on their user talk page. DRN has a notice template you can post to their user talk page by using the code shown here: {{subst:drn-notice}}. Be sure to sign and date each notice with four tildes (~~~~). Giving notice on the article talk page in dispute or relying on linking their names here will not suffice.
    • Do not add your own formatting in the conversation. Let the moderators (DRN Volunteers) handle the formatting of the discussion as they may not be ready for the next session.
    • Follow moderator instructions There will be times when the moderator may issue an instruction. It is expected of you to follow their instruction and you can always ask the volunteer on their talk page for clarification, if not already provided. Examples are about civility, don't bite the newcomers, etc.
    If you need help:

    If you need a helping hand just ask a volunteer, who will assist you.

    • This is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and advice about policy.
    • For general questions relating to the dispute resolution process, please see our FAQ page.

    We are always looking for new volunteers and everyone is welcome. Click the volunteer button above to join us, and read over the volunteer guide to learn how to get started. Being a volunteer on this page is not formal in any respect, and it is not necessary to have any previous dispute resolution experience. However, having a calm and patient demeanor and a good knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines is very important. It's not mandatory to list yourself as a volunteer to help here, anyone is welcome to provide input.

    Volunteers should remember:
    • Volunteers should gently and politely help the participant fix problems. Suggest alternative venues if needed. Try to be nice and engage the participants.
    • Volunteers do not have any special powers, privileges, or authority in DRN or in Wikipedia, except as noted here. Volunteers who have had past dealings with the article, subject matter, or with the editors involved in a dispute which would bias their response must not act as a volunteer on that dispute. If any editor objects to a volunteer's participation in a dispute, the volunteer must either withdraw or take the objection to the DRN talk page to let the community comment upon whether or not the volunteer should continue in that dispute.
    • Listed volunteers open a case by signing a comment in the new filing. When closing a dispute, please mark it as "closed" in the status template (see the volunteer guide for more information), remove the entire line about 'donotarchive' so that the bot will archive it after 48 hours with no other edits.
    Open/close quick reference
    • To open, replace {{DR case status}} with {{DR case status|open}}
    • To close, replace the "open" with "resolved", "failed", or "closed". Add {{DRN archive top|reason=(reason here) ~~~~}} beneath the case status template, and add {{DRN archive bottom}} at the bottom of the case. Remember to remove the DoNotArchive bit line (the entire line).
    Case Created Last volunteer edit Last modified
    Title Status User Time User Time User Time
    Neith In Progress Potymkin (t) 13 days, 19 hours Potymkin (t) 1 hours Potymkin (t) 1 hours
    Riley Gaines Closed Lisha2037 (t) 10 days, 4 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 23 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 23 hours
    Chechil Closed Lemabeta (t) 4 days, 9 hours Kovcszaln6 (t) 4 days, 8 hours Kovcszaln6 (t) 4 days, 8 hours
    Algeria In Progress Potymkin (t) 4 days, 6 hours Kovcszaln6 (t) 27 minutes Kovcszaln6 (t) 27 minutes
    Turntablist transcription_methodology Closed WikiSkratch2000 (t) 3 days, 22 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 19 hours Robert McClenon (t) 3 days, 19 hours
    Collatz Conjecture Closed 45.50.231.56 (t) 2 days, 23 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 17 hours Robert McClenon (t) 2 days, 17 hours

    If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options.
    Last updated by FireflyBot (talk) at 18:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]



    Current disputes

    Talk:HyperLogLog

    – Discussion in progress.

    Have you discussed this on a talk page?

    Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

    Location of dispute

    Users involved

    Dispute overview

    I'm having an edit war with Retimuko over some terminology on the page. The word "cardinality" is used incorrectly in one of the sources, and Retimuko appears to be unwilling to accept that and let me fix its usage in the article.

    Have you tried to resolve this previously?

    We have discussed the issue on the talk page, but do not appear to be reaching a resolution.

    How do you think we can help?

    I don't think Retimuko is acting maliciously, I think they're just misguided. A third party stepping in and confirming that the usage is in fact incorrect would probably resolve the issue.

    Summary of dispute by Retimuko

    I believe this is a case of some mismatch in terminology between some literature on the theory of multisets and literature on count-distinct problem in applied math. There is a large body of research into the count-distinct problem, including Flajolet's 2007 paper about HyperLogLog algorithm, using terminology described in the article. I believe we have to practice a descriptive approach as opposed to prescriptive. If reputable sources use this terminology, we must not just use another terminology in the article. At the very least the discrepancy must be explained somehow. I stated my points an proposed a compromise on the talk page, and I believe that this dispute has been opened way too early in the process when the discussion has just started. I don't mind any involvement of a moderator or just a third opinion. Retimuko (talk) 08:22, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:HyperLogLog discussion

    Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.
    Apologies for having not checked the progress.I will be starting handling this within 12 hours.Winged Blades Godric 18:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought I should wait for KingSupernova to present sources as initiator of this dispute, but on the second thought here are a few papers from prominent researchers in the field published in reputable sources:
    1. (for completeness, the subject of the article in question) Flajolet et al, HyperLogLog: the analysis of a near-optimal cardinality estimation algorithm. Relevant quote: "...algorithm for estimating the number of distinct elements, known as the cardinality, of large data ensembles, which are referred to here as multisets..."
    2. Graham Cormode. "What is Data Sketching, and Why Should I Care?". Communications of the ACM (CACM), 60(9):48-55, 2017. Quote: "... determining the cardinality of quantities: we might ask, in a data set that has many different values, how many distinct values are there of a certain type?"
    3. Robert Sedgewick. Cardinality Estimation. Princeton University. Qoute: "Cardinality counting: Q. In a given stream of data values, how many different values are present?"
    4. Stefan Heule et al. HyperLogLog in Practice: Algorithmic Engineering of a State of The Art Cardinality Estimation Algorithm. Google Inc. Quote: "Cardinality estimation is the task of determining the number of distinct elements in a data stream."
    I am sure there are more if needed, but these should suffice I would think. Retimuko (talk) 06:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm....Waiting for the other side to chime in.Winged Blades Godric 18:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Survivor: Ghost Island

    – New discussion.

    Have you discussed this on a talk page?

    Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

    Location of dispute

    Users involved

    Dispute overview
    User keeps removing information that has sources on the web. Using a search engine, the cast for the upcoming season is revealed. User VietPride10 insists that the the finale must air before the cast is posted but that's not true. So far, this is the only person to remove the content from the page after I kept reposting it. A DRN was requested days ago, but closed due to lack of a talk page discussion. Now, after an extended discussion on the talk page and a 3 day protection of the article itself no resolution has been reached.

    Have you tried to resolve this previously?

    The page was locked for 3 days but after the same user have been removing disputed content on the account that the source he relies on hasn't confirmed the content

    The IP user continually adds unsourced information that cannot be backed up by any of the sources on the article. VietPride10 (talk) 18:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    How do you think we can help?

    explain that there are many sources in the info posted.

    Summary of dispute by VietPride10

    As an editor of Survivor articles, it is always the precedent to add the information from the upcoming seasons of Survivor, after CBS officially announces it. In addition the cast is only added after CBS officially releases the cast, as the biographies and ages of the contestants can be added. Even though, the last three/four seasons of Survivor have had the cast spoiled far in advanced, the precedent was to always wait for CBS to officially release the contestant information. However, this user has decided not to comply and follow the precedent, and continues to add unsourced information about some of the contestants (who are made-up and not supported by any sources whatsoever), and will constantly revert my edits trying to prevent unsourced information on the article. VietPride10 (talk) 18:03, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Summary of dispute by 100.37.125.19

    Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.

    Talk:Survivor: Ghost Island discussion

    Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.
    Yes, if someone could make the article semi-protected, that would be very helpful. VietPride10 (talk) 03:10, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Roy Jones Jr. and Location of Foxwoods Resort Casino

    – New discussion.

    Have you discussed this on a talk page?

    Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

    Location of dispute

    Users involved

    Dispute overview

    User:JMichael22 and myself disagree on how Foxwoods Resort Casino should be labelled on professional boxing record tables, specifically Roy Jones Jr., which subsequently affects 100+ other articles. User:JMichael22 maintains that the venue should be displayed as being in the Indian reservation of Mashantucket, Connecticut; I maintain that it should be displayed as being in the town of Ledyard, Connecticut, in which Mashantucket is located.

    MOS:BOXING/RECORD, specifically the Location element, has long stipulated that fight locations are to be labelled as "[venue] (arena, stadium, hall, etc.), [city or town], [state], [country]". Areas within a city (boroughs, suburbs, reservations, etc.) are overly specific and should be omitted for brevity on a wikitable.

    Have you tried to resolve this previously?

    We have discussed extensively at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing, with both of us providing numerous WP:RS confirming that either descriptor (Mashantucket, CT; Ledyard, CT) is valid. Sources include primary and secondary. Overall, this is a labelling issue on which we cannot agree.

    How do you think we can help?

    Mediate on whether Foxwoods Resort Casino should be labelled, in professional boxing record tables, as being specifically in the reservation of Mashantucket, CT; or generally in the town of Ledyard, CT. Bearing in mind that labelling it as Mashantucket would somewhat disrupt the consistency set forth above in MOS:BOXING/RECORD, namely the convention of "[venue]/[city]/[state]/[country]".

    Summary of dispute by JMichael22

    Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.

    I found it very simple the Foxwwods Resort Casino sits on the Mashantucket tribal land it is owned and controlled by the Mashantucket tribe. it is declared on numerous sources that the Foxwoods Casino is located in Mashantucket, CT. The Official website and social media accounts including Twitter and Facebook state the casino is located in Mashantucket. The Land is within Ledyard but has nothing to do with the town, it stands on its own as a Native American controlled and owned venue which is located on their land Mashantucket and is not under US government control. Ledyard is a town under US government control. Something that I feel makes things clear if the casino was part of Ledyard, CT then the Native American tribe wouldn't own the land it stands but that is not the case the tribe owns the land it is on and does infact through multiple sources refer to the Casinos location as Mashantucket, CT JMichael22 (talk) 20:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Roy Jones Jr. and Location of Foxwoods Resort Casino discussion

    Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.
    • Volunteer note - There has been adequate discussion at the project talk page. The filing editor has notified the other editor. A third editor has been involved in the discussion and should be notified. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard&oldid=814684710"