Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case: Difference between revisions
Gerda Arendt (talk | contribs) →Comment from Alanscottwalker: Comment from Gerda Arendt (possibly involved), DYK that there is infobox opera? |
Gerda Arendt (talk | contribs) →Comment from Gerda Arendt (possibly involved): clarify after edit conflict |
||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
=== Comment from Gerda Arendt (possibly involved) === |
=== Comment from Gerda Arendt (possibly involved) === |
||
On top of what Orlady described above, the latest development (which possibly made uninvolved Ched post) goes even further. Project opera developed an infobox for operas, {{tl|infobox opera}}, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera&diff=560406950&oldid=560306022 added to the MOS] on 18 June. It complies with the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-07-10/Dispatch|Signpost article]]'s request for brevity. However, almost every effort to actually use it is met with removal and time-consuming discussions, instead of showing it to our readers and let them participate in discussion and improvement. I was involved in creating the template and in inserting it. For an example, read talk (and history of article and talk) of [[Don Carlos]]. For more examples, look at the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox|list of open discussions]]. I actually don't know what ArbCom could do to stop this, in the interest of our readers. I made several attempts to seek agreement, [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Duplication of information wanted|last here]]. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 15:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) |
On top of what Orlady described above, the latest development (which possibly made uninvolved Ched post) goes even further than biographies of classical music composers and performers. Project opera developed an infobox for operas, {{tl|infobox opera}}, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Opera&diff=560406950&oldid=560306022 added to the MOS] on 18 June. It complies with the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-07-10/Dispatch|Signpost article]]'s request for brevity. However, almost every effort to actually use it is met with removal and time-consuming discussions, instead of showing it to our readers and let them participate in discussion and improvement. I was involved in creating the template and in inserting it. For an example, read talk (and history of article and talk) of [[Don Carlos]]. For more examples, look at the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox|list of open discussions]]. I actually don't know what ArbCom could do to stop this, in the interest of our readers. I made several attempts to seek agreement, [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera#Duplication of information wanted|last here]]. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 15:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
=== Clerk notes === |
=== Clerk notes === |
||
Revision as of 15:04, 12 July 2013
Requests for arbitration
- recent changes
- purge this page
- view or discuss this template
| Request name | Motions | Initiated | Votes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infobox | 12 July 2013 | {{{votes}}} |
| Case name | Closed |
|---|---|
| Conflict of interest management | 13 Apr 2024 |
| Mzajac | 7 May 2024 |
| Request name | Motions | Case | Posted |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amendment request: Conduct in deletion-related editing | none | (orig. case) | 30 April 2024 |
| Clarification request: Palestine-Israel articles 4 | none | (orig. case) | 13 May 2024 |
| Amendment request: Article titles and capitalisation | none | (orig. case) | 13 May 2024 |
No arbitrator motions are currently open.
Use this page to request the committee open an arbitration case. To be accepted, an arbitration request needs 4 net votes to "accept" (or a majority). Arbitration is a last resort. WP:DR lists the other, escalating processes that should be used before arbitration. The committee will decline premature requests. Requests may be referred to as "case requests" or "RFARs"; once opened, they become "cases". Before requesting arbitration, read the arbitration guide. Then click the button below. Complete the instructions quickly; requests incomplete for over an hour may be removed. Consider preparing the request in your userspace. To request enforcement of an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. To clarify or change an existing arbitration ruling, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. This page is for statements, not discussion.
|
Infobox
Initiated by Ched (talk) 7:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Involved parties
- Ched (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
- username2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- username3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- username4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request
- Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried
Statement by Ched
I don't really know how to do this, and I don't know who to name as parties to the case. Still, I think at least some of the committee members are aware of the issues involved with the infobox situations. There are multiple RfC discussion to link to, and many threads available should the committee be willing to look at a case. In particular I would ask that the committee view the thoughts of the people active in the classical music area as a beginning point. I understand that it is not within the committees remit to determine content, but rather to resolve disruption. Said disruption can easily be demonstrated in an evidence stage. I ask the committee to assist me in determining the scope and parties of this case. — Ched : ? 07:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Statement by Rschen7754
This is long overdue. --Rschen7754 08:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from The ed17
While I'm aware of what this dispute is about and who it is between, though only in the most basic terms, most editors here will not. Far more context (or at least links? Something?) is needed. Nothing against you, Ched. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from PumpkinSky
As this is Ched's first RFAR filing, I ask that arbcom allow him sufficient time to put the RFAR together.PumpkinSky talk 11:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from uninvolved Wehwalt
This has gone on too long. I don't like the way you've dealt with content contributors, but this is causing the project to bleed. Get on with it.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from Orlady (noninvolved)
This is about the long-standing battles at WikiProject Classical music (also WikiProject Opera) on the topic of whether infoboxes should be permitted to be included in biographical articles about composers and musicians. This recent ANI discussion is indicative of the nature and magnitude of the dispute: [1]. I cannot elucidate the dispute because I have not followed the battles, but it appears that the parties are unable to resolve it on their own, and I am sure that the ongoing disruption discourages some other prospective contributors from working on classical music and opera articles. I can testify that I learned that it would be best to stay away from the whole topic back in 2007 (six years ago) when my innocent efforts to add an infobox to an article about a singer were reverted for violating the rules of the Opera project (never mind that the singer also worked in musical theatre and film). --Orlady (talk) 13:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from Alanscottwalker
As I recall, the policy on infoboxes says its up to individual article consensus, and the policy on projects is that they can create and promote consensus on such individual article format matters. So, good luck, but it does not look like there is a sweet spot for you in current policy re this, so this case needs conduct diffs, and conduct policy breaches, and prior steps re conduct, etc. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC) Oh, and it also needs parties involved in the above other things it needs. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:52, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Comment from Gerda Arendt (possibly involved)
On top of what Orlady described above, the latest development (which possibly made uninvolved Ched post) goes even further than biographies of classical music composers and performers. Project opera developed an infobox for operas, {{infobox opera}}, added to the MOS on 18 June. It complies with the Signpost article's request for brevity. However, almost every effort to actually use it is met with removal and time-consuming discussions, instead of showing it to our readers and let them participate in discussion and improvement. I was involved in creating the template and in inserting it. For an example, read talk (and history of article and talk) of Don Carlos. For more examples, look at the list of open discussions. I actually don't know what ArbCom could do to stop this, in the interest of our readers. I made several attempts to seek agreement, last here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Clerk notes
- This area is used for notes by the clerks (including clerk recusals).
Infobox: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/0/0/2>
- I haven't the slightest idea what this request is about; that said, Ched, since this is your first AR, you may ask a clerk for assistance to format it correctly. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- From reading too many ANI threads, I know all too well what the request is about. Awaiting further statements before voting. It would be helpful if statements could address, at least in general terms, how ArbCom might help resolve this longstanding problem if we accept the case (which based on how long this has been going on, I am tentatively inclined to do). Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)