User talk:GeorgeKelsey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Al Lutz. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. 151.151.73.171 (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MedCab Case

Regarding this MedCab case i suggest you request a third opinion or a reuest for commentfirst. Hope you have some luck solving this dispute. Seddon69 (talk) 23:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Al Lutz. Wordstock (talk) 13:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Al Lutz

I tried to help with the Al Lutz disagreement by leaving a third opinion, but a third opinion is just that and nothing more. If the opinion does not help you reach consensus mediation is your next step and I see that you have initiated that process.

The purpose of mediation is to work toward a consensus among the editors of an article. If you really believe that your section should be included you will need to make your case and work towards a consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, you could consider arbitration, but arbitration won't be considered unless you make a real effort to reach a consensus.

The reason I tell you this is that I think you need to understand that constantly reverting an article without making the effort to support your case is not serving your cause. If you think your section belongs in the article, then you must actively push for a consensus. At this point, your earlier request has been closed and the information archived, so you will have to go to Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-04-01_Al_Lutz and finish filling out the new request if you want your case to move forward. Feel free to use the wording from your earlier request at Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-03-20_Al_Lutz. Good luck. Mmyotis (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)