Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/February 2007/Mishlai
Case Filed On: 16:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedian filing request:
Other Wikipedians this pertains to:
Wikipedia pages this pertains to:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
- Answer: Yes.
How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)
- Answer: Content dispute
What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.
- Answer: None.
What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
- Answer: I am new to Wikipedia and seeking guidance on which dispute resolution methods would be the most appropriate 1st step.
In essence I don't think that a particular block of text belongs in this particular article, and I advocate moving it. I think the talk page will be clear enough on the nature of the dispute. It seemed from WP:DR that 3rd party might be an appropriate next step, but the dispute is only *mostly* between 2 people, and I don't know how this works. It isn't representation that I seek, but an explanation/clarification of policy.
Update: Neigel von Teighen, thanks for opening the case. As you'll see I'm sure, the status has changed a little. It's pretty clearly not between 2 editors now, and as far as I can tell Hypnosadist is the only one advocating his viewpoint on the matter. The content issue itself may in fact be resolved now, I'm not sure. Any thoughts/clarifications you have on WP:DR are still appreciated. Thanks. Mishlai 14:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:
Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
Case Status: closed
- --Neigel von Teighen 14:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)