Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-04 Derek Acorah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | ||||||||||||
|
Contents |
[edit] Mediation Case: 2006-10-04 Derek Acorah
Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Mediation Cabal: Coordination Desk.
[edit] Request Information
- Request made by: Paul Moloney 13:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- Derek Acorah
- Who's involved?
- User:Topov,User:Paulmoloney,User:Stevepaget
- What's going on?
- ...
Topov has repeatly removed all critical material about Derek Acorah. They have added spurious warnings to my own user page User:Paulmoloney accusing me of linking to spam and of vandalism. Despite repeated attempts, they refused to enter into discussions on the article's talk page Talk:Derek Acorah.
- What would you like to change about that?
- ...
I would like Topov to stop vandalising my user page and to stop reverting the Derek Acorah page. I would like them to get involved in discussion about what _should_ be on the page.
- Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
- ...
[edit] Mediator response
Case taken. Everyone is welcome to post any comments, additional information, or suggestions here. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 16:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.
[edit] Discussion
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Personally, I think that well-sourced criticism belongs on this page, as it has a direct relevance to Acorah's position in society. If it turns out that he does not have the abilities he claims, then the public deserves to know about it. The criticism which Topov seeks to remove is from a source inside the programme, relating to an incident which is publically known.
Secondly, and I realise that there may be neutrality issues regarding the source, I think that a reference to the Berry Pomeroy incident should be here, as it relates directly to Acorah's claim that he knows nothing about the haunted locations in advance, and it also comes with documentary evidence. Stevepaget 10:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree. The problem with these shows is that, like the palm readers on the pier and the medium shows which have become so popular, people want to believe. Personally, I find the shows really amusing and an obvious sham but enjoy them because I don't take the high moral ground (life's too short). However, if you watch them blindly believing the performances and quietly hoping that there is a life hereafter and Nana's not just a pile of bones in the local cemetery, if this is you, then it becomes very offensive and extremely personal when people dare to criticise and doubt the whole thing. Acorah's a lucky man. He's found a niche and is milking it while it lasts.
As to the debate about the page revisions, Paul Maloney's left a Metro Interview link with Yvette Fielding (31/10) which puts an end to Mr Acorah's credibility.
The article now seems quite balanced. Derbydave 07:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Is this mediation still active or can I close it? --Ideogram 10:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
