Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-03 JumpTV

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal

Article: JumpTV State: Closed Requested By: User:Headeditor42 Other Parties: User:Ragib Comments: Not quite sure who the mediator is in this one either. Cowman109Talk 03:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC) Closed, and recomend Arbitration Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 14:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC) Notified via email that the case was solved outside of wikipedia. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 20:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Mediation Case: 2006-07-03 JumpTV 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Mediator response 1.3 Compromise offers 1.4 Discussion 1.4.1 Comments from Ragib 1.4.1.1 Addendum 1.4.1.2 Reply to Addendum 1.4.2 Comments from Headeditor42 1.4.3 Reply to Headeditor 1.4.4 Reply to Ragib 2 Homework: Catch the Cluetrain! :-)

[edit] Mediation Case: 2006-07-03 JumpTV

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Headeditor42 20:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

The JumpTV talk page

Who's involved?

Ragib and myself

What's going on?

Clear instructions were given as to what and how things could be posted regarding the page in question, and now, Ragib, a site admin, has decided not only to abuse his power but to ignore any attempt on my behalf to find out why he continues to delete my work. He has so far made no attempt to actually confront the problem with me in conversation and that has led me to this mediation.

What would you like to change about that?

I would either like Ragib to restore the information that I posted on the talk page or at least give me a valid reason why he keeps removing my edits.

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

You can reach me either on my talk page, or email me. Either way is fine with me.

[edit] Mediator response

Is this case active? I'm not exactly sure if there was a mediator here to begin with. Cowman109^Talk 16:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to close this case and suggest Arbitration as this involves possible admin power abuse, Jimbo's decision, and I doubt that a mediator could do anything to stop this action. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 14:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

Headeditor42 created this case without an official approval from JumpTV. Headeditor42 is not allowed to post on behalf on JumpTV on Wikipedia. JumpTV will continue to adhere to Wikipedia rules and regulations.

Thanks.

Ahmed Gomaa, PhD

Director Online Marketing

JumpTV

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Comments from Ragib

This is a case where Jimbo himself is involved. Let me recapitulate the issues: Headeditor42 (talk • contribs), an employee of JumpTV, started creating a huge number of advertisement pages for JumpTV about two weeks ago. The articles were mostly cut-pasted from JumpTV's website, and would inevitably contain phrases like "Watch TKC TV on JumpTV". I issued him a spam warning asking him to cease his spamming. Later, I received a mail from Ahmed Gomaa, JumpTV's director of Internet Marketing, apoligizing for Headeditor's spamming, and asking whether they can post information about their company.

I forwarded the message to Jimbo, and he replied to both me and JumpTV saying that

I very strongly recommend to you that neither you, nor any marketing employees of your organization, nor any employees or affiliated persons of any kind edit any articles related to your company in Wikipedia.

> We hope you’ll agree that our completion of the JumpTV Channels > articles and the addition of links to the JumpTV article from > existing broadcaster articles on Wikipedia is an appropriate and > beneficial contribution to the Wikipedia project.

I very much do not agree with that. Editorial judgments should be left up to active Wikipedians. You may offer helpful suggestions on the talk pages, but you are forbidden to add any links yourself. If I see that you have done so, I will simply add JumpTv *in full* to our spam blacklist.

To this, Mr. Gomaa replied that

Thanks for the clarifications. I already asked every one in the company to refrain from posting any articles / links related to our company or our partners on wikipedia.

So, I assumed the spamming would cease.

However, he restarted his spamming from yesterday, and posted spam directly taken from their prospectus, as seen from this diff. After I reverted him twice, he has posted this complaint.

I request any arbitrator or mediator to take a look at Jimbo's comments, and seek clarifications from him too regarding whether my actions are wrong. Any email transcripts of the communication between Mr. Gomaa and me or Jimbo is available upon request. Thank you. --Ragib 21:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

As for his comments regarding my avoidance of discussion of the issue, I have issued ample spam warnings to him, and he only responded in his talk page (which is not on my watchlist), and only sent me a note a couple of hours ago. So, his allegation about me not being responsive is not true, nor is his statement that it was agreed to allow spam to be posted in the talk page of articles. Please refer to Jimbo's decision I quoted above. Thank you. --Ragib 21:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I also would like to point out some edits whose deletion due to copyvio made Headeditor complain against me (alleging censorhip!!): Balle Balle, Indonesia TV. These are just two among 20+ spam/copy-pasted pages created by Headeditor as part of their Internet marketing campaign. --Ragib 22:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addendum

Some more interesting interactions from JumpTV:

• this and
• this, and
• this, and
• this. Further,
• this.
• this

Thanks. --Ragib 01:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to Addendum

You can post as many slandering links as you like, but did you notice that in those links there's a post by me, graciously asking you to help me fix what needs to be fix. Funny how there's never a reply in any of the version of the links that you included.

You know what's also funny? A bunch of those links that you made (especially the last few of them), had NOTHING to do with me. That's neither my ip nor my username. It would be nice if you checked your work first before accusing, like you have in the past, considering you're an admin on this site, and set an example for many others. Cheers! --Headeditor42 04:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I just pointed out JumpTV's effort in hiding the warnings left in your user page. It doesn't take too much time to figure out Mr. Ahmed Gomaa deleted the warnings from your user page. Also, the IP resolves to toronto, Ontario. It is extremely improbable that another editor from Toronto would make the same pattern of edits (i.e. spamming pages) from Toronto, JumpTV's headquarters. --Ragib 04:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

So now you're assuming that because the ip address that you pointed out is from Toronto, Ontario (with a population of over 4.5 million) that it has to be me? I applaud your noble attempt, but I assure you that that edit was NOT made by me. Furthermore, I fail to see how a removal of comments by members of JumpTV that are superior to me have any weighing on the situation at hand. It would really be nice if you could PLEASE try and concentrate on the situation that you're currently trying to address, and discuss the situation as it applies to me. Thank you again for your comments, and I really hope mediators get assigned to this case soon. Cheers! --Headeditor42 04:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments from Headeditor42

Allow me to respond to what Ragib has said point by point.

In regards to his comments about me creating a "huge number of advertisement pages for JumpTV", I would say that creating pages for online services that exist outside and independent of JumpTV is neither a crime nor spam. While he is right that I may have posted information that was paraphrased or taken directly from the JumpTV information pages regarding those channel on the pages that I created, I was VERY careful that I made NO mention of JumpTV in those descriptions to keep with Wikipedia rules of staying neutral. Furthermore, any of the pages that may have seemed like they were not neutral, I tried to edit the content, where Ragib decided instead to just delete any and all edits that I made.

Where Ragib refers to "and would inevitably contain phrases like "Watch TKC TV on JumpTV"", he is somewhat either stretching the truth, or deciding not to include the proper amount of information: any internal link back to the JumpTV page was made in a completely different section than the description of the page beign created altogheter, and was placed under the heading "See Also", which does not, in any way, go against the spamming rules of Wikipedia. In addition, Ragib forgets to mention that I added stubs to those pages that had less than suffincient informatin on them so that that users from wikipedia could also add information to those pages, and many of them did, but still resulted in Ragib completely deleting any information from those pages and making them impossible (to my knowledge) to restore.

Ragib is telling the truth that he submitted a spam warning on my talk page, to which I adhered until receiving further information from director of Internet Marketing of JumpTV. Ahmed then sent me information regarding his conversations with Ragib and Jimbo to the same effect as the information that Ragib posted above. The only thing that I would like to point out is a single sentence that Ragib himself pasted above:

You may offer helpful suggestions on the talk pages

In this way, the current situation, where Ragib has repeatedly, with no further information than "you are still spamming", deleted information that I placed on the Talk page for JumpTV, and according to the above explanation, we should be allowed to post information regarding the company on the talk page, which is the ONLY thing that I have done since the previous situation. I purposefully made clear that I posting the information directly from the prospectus, and like I mentioned to Ragib on my Talk page, I did not just copy/paste the entire thing, as the full length prospectus is more than 150 pages long.

It is interesting to me how Ragib continues to refer to any edit that I make as spam, to further only his own case, where on the Administrator notice board page, others have complained about his ability to act objectively and not like an elite of wikipedia. The fact that Ragib feels it necessary to point again to an edit that I made under the impression that he and Jimbo would approve, according to the above statements made and agreed upon by them, makes me wonder what exactly he's trying to achieve here.

Additionally, his comment that I only posted a request for him to view my Talk page and reply to my question regarding his most recent deletion of my edits is completely out of line, since every line of communication that we have had so far has taken place on my Talk page, and the reply that I placed there was made long before this afternoon.

Finally, in reply to Ragib final note regarding the Balle Balle page, and the accusation of copyright info, he never even thought of asking me if I'm an employee of JumpTV, and then when I told him that I was of my own accord, all he did was competely deleted the page, making it impossible, even now, for me to see what he was refering to as me "spamming".

Ragib needs to understand that comprimises need to be made, and the fact that his actions prove to be nothing less than a vendetta against me leave me powerless to learn from my mistakes, many of which could have been avoided if Ragib would have planned on helping me instead of accusing me every single time.

Ragib, I look forward to working this problem out with you, and I've done anything to personally offend you, I apologize, but I feel that you have no right to treat me the way you have for the past 3 weeks, and the way your continuing to act, according to your member page, is a little below you.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing back from the mediators.

[edit] Reply to Headeditor

• Where Ragib refers to "and would inevitably contain phrases like "Watch TKC TV on JumpTV"", he is somewhat either stretching the truth, or deciding not to include the proper amount of information:

I submit the following link for examination Indonesia TV. Enough said! When a marketing department employee creates 20+ links containing references and suggestion to watch the channel on his company, that amounts to spam by any standard.

• but still resulted in Ragib completely deleting any information from those pages and making them impossible (to my knowledge) to restore.

{{empty}} applies to any article containing a single spam link (clarification: by spam I mean "Watch Channel <insert name> on JumpTV").

• You may offer helpful suggestions on the talk pages

I refer to this edit by Headeditor, which is a copy-past from JumpTV's brochure. The intention to spam here is quite clear.

• It is interesting to me how Ragib continues to refer to any edit that I make as spam, to further only his own case, where on the Administrator notice board page, others have complained about his ability to act objectively and not like an elite of wikipedia. The fact that Ragib feels it necessary to point again to an edit that I made under the impression that he and Jimbo would approve, according to the above statements made and agreed upon by them, makes me wonder what exactly he's trying to achieve here.

Show me! The only complaints I received ever on ANB were from vandals who were blocked by me. Each of those were later upheld by the consensus of other editors/admins. Of course, I am not an "elite" in wikipedia. Being an admin doesn't make anyone "elite".

• Additionally, his comment that I only posted a request for him to view my Talk page and reply to my question regarding his most recent deletion of my edits is completely out of line, since every line of communication that we have had so far has taken place on my Talk page, and the reply that I placed there was made long before this afternoon.

Well, I'm not being employed by a marketing campaign to go ahead and reply to every edit the minute it is made. The point is, you left the note on my talk page Today, and NOT several days ago. If I hadn't replied to it within reasonable time, your claim would hold water. You cannot expect me to reply to you instantly.

Interesting indeed. This shows that you placed the note at 14:49 pm US Central Time. My contributions show a gap between 14:34pm and 16:22pm today (the time I was away), and I only noticed your message after 16:22, and found out your case against me, to which I responded by 16:46pm. So, please stop spreading falsehoods about me not replying to your messages. --Ragib 23:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Finally, in reply to Ragib final note regarding the Balle Balle page, and the accusation of copyright info, he never even thought of asking me if I'm an employee of JumpTV, and then when I told him that I was of my own accord, all he did was competely deleted the page, making it impossible, even now, for me to see what he was refering to as me "spamming".

To this, I submit the following link: Balle Balle. Note that I clearly marked the copyvio text Headeditor cut/pasted from JumpTV's site. Many of his other spam pages have similarly been deleted by other editors, a close look at deletion log will reveal that.

In the end, I'd request you to review your own actions! Being an employee of the marketing campaign, it it understandable that you are interested in making as much buzz for JumpTV as you can. That's ok, but Wikipedia is not the right place to do so. Please take a look at What wikipedia is NOT. Thank you. Mediators, I have notified Jimbo regarding this, and would also like involvement of WP:OFFICE in this matter. --Ragib 22:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to Ragib

• When a marketing department employee creates 20+ links containing references and suggestion to watch the channel on his company, that amounts to spam by any standard

Did I post any links on the JumpTV wiki page to subscribe to those channels? Did I even post a link to www.jumptv.com? The fact that you're trying so hard to connect the issues of the past to this current issue, as opposed to giving me some type of benefit of the doubt takes credibility away from your actions

• {{empty}} applies to any article containing a single spam link (clarification: by spam I mean "Watch Channel <insert name> on JumpTV").

It's funny, I don't remember seeing a single one of those flags on the pages that you completely deleted, without reason, or chance of rebutal.

Well, I didn't delete all those one liner articles (with content: "X is a TV from Y country. See also: Watch X on JumpTV"). You should check with CSD A3, which deals with such article consisting of little or no content, and links to other places. --Ragib 02:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting how you state that the content was simply "X is a TV from Y country. See also: Watch X on JumpTV", as a lot more content existed on those pages originally before you removed them, tagged the page spam, and ready for removal. Come on Ragib, take responsibility for your own actions and the conseqeunces of those actions on other people's work.

I am tired of your constant lies. I would request anyone looking into this to see this diff on Indonesia TV. The only editor of the page was Headeditor42. And the content of the page was "==See Also== * Watch Indonesia TV on [[JumpTV]] ---- {{asia-stub}} {{tv-stub}} . So, stop claiming yourself to be naive, and take at least responsibility of making such edits. Wikipedia logs everything, so no point in making false claims as these. FYI, I didn't mark it as empty, another user did. And I deleted it according to CSD for empty pages. Thanks --Ragib 04:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• The intention to spam here is quite clear.

Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "quite clear"? Because I make every effort to use the code available to me to show that piece I copied and pasted is a direct quote, even giving a link to the page where the original can be accessed. Since you know I'm a JumpTV employee, that means that it's not a copyvio either. The information on the page is purely factual.

• Show me! The only complaints I received ever on ANB were from vandals who were blocked by me

Did you even bother to follow and or read the link that I posted? That bottom part (other than the tidbit that I sectioned off and signed at the end) was NOT added by me. You can check the logs if you don't believe me.

Yes I did. Please read the link yourself. The unsigned message refers to articles related to Wine, Pokers, Dogs, Anime etc ... topics which I have NEVER edited or commented. So, please read before you comment. Thank you. --Ragib 02:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

And they don't necessarily have to refer directly to you, it's a reply by another user regarding your attack on me... I neither know that user nor have I ever affiliated myself with any of the problems he/she describes. He/she simply explains how he/she can relate to my problem, and abuse of power being used by some of the admins on this board.

To refresh your memory, see above where you claim in the link you presented "others have complained about his ability to act objectively and not like an elite of wikipedia. ". Thank you. --Ragib 04:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I'm not being employed by a marketing campaign to go ahead and reply to every edit the minute it is made

And nowhere in my statement did I say that you did, but the fact that all the communication that we've done so far has been on my talk page, and the fact that you did not reply to my talk page, and for the second time removed what I posted was an indication to me that you were willfully ignoring any attempt to discuss the issue with me. If you want, the timestamp from yesterday still exists on my talk page.

As I mentioned, I do not monitor your talk page in my watchlist. If you left a reply on your talk page, fine by me. I was notified of your reply this afternoon, and replied above accordingly. --Ragib 02:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting how you've never had to wait for me to reply to you on your talk page, and you left me the initial message. Furthermore, you never addressed the fact that, earlier on in that date, you once again removed the edit that I made to the JumpTV talk page, yet didn't comment on it on my reply page like you did the first time. Very mature and diplomatic of you Ragib.

So? --Ragib 04:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• To this, I submit the following link: Balle Balle

Once again, since not all of us are admins on this board, we can't see that link, as per my comment before that you made the delete irriversible.

• Note that I clearly marked the copyvio text Headeditor cut/pasted from JumpTV's site

You do realize that you continued to do that, and then deleted previous pages retroactively, even AFTER you found out that I was a JumpTV employee, not even giving me a chance to fix my error?

The truth of the matter is this Ragib, I understand your frustration, and why you must be so angry at my actions, which I've taken full responsibility for, but you have to learn to let go of past occurances, and deal objectively with current issues. The truth is that I no that no matter what I say here, your word will be taken over mine, but I hope, with some minute chance, that someone will recognize the issue I'm facing here, and see it from my perspective. You've been doing this for a long time, and maybe you feel that I have some kind of urge to piss you off - but I don't. All I want to do is inform people to the best of my ability about online resources. I'm not in any way promoting the buying of any such resources, just providing info on what they do (hence, even the lack of link back to jumptv.com, which could have easily been added long ago as an external link). While you may think that you have a perfect grasp on what's happening, and you think I'm using wiki to promote JumpTV, I'm not, whether you want to believe it or not. And as for the "watch [channel] on jumptv", all you had to do was ask me to change that to something more neutral, not make it impossible to do so. Thank you to everyone for your help, and I'm looking forward to hearing back from the mediators regarding this case. Hopefully there will be enough time for them to do so before Ragib's next attack on everything that has a connection to me. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Headeditor42 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Homework: Catch the Cluetrain! :-)

Before continuing, I'd encourage Headeditor42 to check out the 95 theses of The Cluetrain Manifesto. :-)

Perhaps other people here could read it as well and help HeadEditor out? Note that this document -while old- also applies to other online media, so it's definately worth the time. <grin>

Kim Bruning 23:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC) (and now I'm off to bed)

Thank you so much for the interesting link Kim. While I'm a little confused as to the conotation of the link (meaning if it was to support my argument or rebut it), it was definitely an interesting read. I hope that the other users of Wikipedia realize that I am all for the rules, policies, and regulations of Wiki, and that all it takes to show someone the way to do something right is to be kind and polite about it, and maybe even try and show them the way. I've been writen off so far by Ragib as a "spammer" without even being given the chance to explain myself. The first time any of the arguments between he and I started, all he did was refer me to documentation that I had already gone through, and learned nothing new from on a second glance. Then when I asked him to elaborate, he wrote me off again. All it would have taken to help me see the light and open a line of conversation was a little benefit of the doubt on his part towards me, but aparently, even now, that's too much for him to do, and he refers to me only in his closing paragraph, as oppposed to doing so in the body of his argument. Either way, I'm looking for a peaceful resolution where he refrains from deleting everything I post, and all I ask for is some advice on how to do what I'm trying to do in a correct manner. Thank you again Kim.--Headeditor42 23:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe the specific idea Kim is pointing to is this:

"Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone."

Your prospectus is a pitch. At least, I hope it is. If it's not a pitch, it's not a good prospectus. If it is a pitch, it's totally unfit for an encyclopedia article, and posting it is spam. Ashibaka tock 04:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)