User:Wgfinley\Instantnood Advocacy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposed Filing Response
Wally and I will be both serving as advocates for Instantnood, this is a proposed response to Jguk's filing made by his advocate Snowspinner.
Wgfinley and Wally will both be serving as advocates on behalf of disputant Instantnood and file this response as such.
While we concur that arbitration is likely the best forum for this dispute we do not agree to limitation of the scope of the case nor the current title of the case as filed. Instantnood (and his supporters) has (have) been engaged in a project to bring articles, categories, and lists into compliance with the NPOV China Naming conventions [1], We are of the belief these conventions have been meticulously crafted to maintain Wikipedia's commitment to a NPOV in an internationally volatile dispute between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China. as well as the acknowledged 'real-world' system of categorization (which, likewise, is designed to avoid the pitfalls of the China political and legal disputes). Instantnood has simply sought to bring many items into compliance with that policy by use of the votes cited in Jguk's filing; this was specifically designed to be on a case-by-case basis, as cursory reading of the poll results show.
Jguk and his supporters have been unsuccessful in modifying the NPOV China Naming convention[2] and are systematically opposing Instantnood's changes to bring compliance as a means to undermine the convention.[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] Jguk's position, and that of his supporters, is based on the Common Names Naming convention [13]. As the NPOV China Naming convention v. Common Names Naming convention is the heart of this case we believe that the title of this case should be "NPOV China Naming convention" to properly dispose of this matter.
This matter goes straight to the heart of two Wikipedia policies that are in direct conflict with each other concerning the issues of China. We are of the belief, based on Jimmy Wales' position that NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable"[14], that the NPOV China Naming convention should trump the Common Names Naming convention and therefore Instantnood's proposed changes should go forward. The fact that some dispute the NPOV China Naming convention is not germane to the discussion, the convention as it stands should be enforced until a consensus to change it has been achieved. Leaving articles as status quo only enflames the dispute and distracts the participants. If the NPOV China Naming convention is strictly enforced any disputes would then have to originate as a change to that policy as opposed to the wide ranging dispute that exists now.
Therefore, we welcome arbitration of this case as we believe this case should be appropriately titled "Enforcement of Wikipedia Policies" as some direction from the arbcom is needed in such a matter. This case is not about a user being disruptive, taking actions that are not supported by Wikipedia policy, or content -- the opposite is true. This case is about major policies, such as the NPOV policy, not being enforced and becoming a victim of other minor polling policy based actions (VfD, CfD, RfC, etc). The result is a debate strewn across many articles, categories and topics as opposed to centered on the matter at hand, the NPOV China Naming convention. This convention has been disputed, debated, and (for the moment) is settled -- that carefully crafted policy should not be undermined by carrying the debate to individual items.
