Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-01-11 Charlie Wolf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Request for cabal mediation 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Comments by others 1.3 Mediator response

[edit] Request for cabal mediation

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: McGonicle 01:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

Charlie Wolf article and discussion

Who's involved?

wiki IP 195.92.67.***

What's going on?

I made a substantional rewrite of the above article. The article was in very poor shape, suffering from a very biased point-of-view. It also contained a degrogatory comment about a town in Ireland, and an accusation of Nancy Ann Luft sending the subject of the article hatemail. I considered this potentially libelous, as although the mail had been published on a website, to describe it as hatemail leave the wikipedia open to a lawsuit. I also rewrote a section on the subject's politcal point-of-views, as much of what was claimed was unsubstantiated and had a generally bias and undescriptive tone. I described this in the discussion page. After a few days the anonymous wiki reverted the and claimed they it was censorship. I reverted the edits, and a couple of other Wiki's had an argument with the anonymous individual the discussion page during which the anonymous wiki wrote some rather unsavory things about some Jewish people.

We broke the three revert rule, and I wrote a section on the discussion page requesting that we move the article forward by incorparating the political views into the current version in a proper paragraph, and that the reverted version contained elements that were not suitable for the wikipedia as they were just plain offensive or irrelevent. I also encouraged the anonymous wiki to sign up and get an account. Flame warfare ensued. Many rules broken on either side.

What would you like to change about that?

I would like to move the article forward, and to have the political paragraph I have written expanded by my fellow wiki's into an impartial, and respectable article. The truth is, I cant stand the man Charlie Wolf, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't get a fair crack when it comes to wikipedia. I woudl also like all the meaningless references to people who have no relevence to the subject, and the reference to Nancy Ann Luft, who is just one of many hundreds of people that Wolf has dealt with, and all the loaded reference's to Wolf being Jewish and a "Right Wing Zionist", be removed, toned down, or put into context. Wolf has a lot of ideas about Zionism, which he frequently espouses, yet in the article it is reduced to three words, and has negative connatations. I just want the whole thing to be impartial.

If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?

That's cool, I don't need to be contacted discreetly. I'd be grateful for any help or guidance you can give on this. Good work guys!!!! McGonicle 01:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by others

It seems to me that this is a dispute over two people of different political ideologies over what content to include in the article? Is this a fair assessment? --Cyde Weys _vote^talk 14:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

For what it is worth, I would not agree with that. My politics probably fall nearer to the anonymous poster's than they think. I just do not think what he is saying is presented in context and with NPOV, and as I said a lot of what the anonymous character restores is either potentially libelous, not informative, or just there to satisfy a schoolboy ego. For example, is "notorius Right Wing Zionist" a description that fits with NPOV? There is no attempt to rationalize this supposed "notorioty". Similarly, in the listing of poltical views, there is no attempt whatsoever to put it in any context. I have suggested rewriting elements I removed into the paragrapgh I made from that list, but I was met with accusations of censorship. I have not entered into any politcal discussion with the character, and this is evidenced by the discussion page. I've been explicit in the discussion saying that I do not feel personal politics comes into the ability to write impartial entriies, but the anonymous poster from the outset has tried to challenge edits on a political basis with myself and other contributors. The anonymous poster has made claims to other contributors that they are not in someway capable of making contributions becasue they are American and the certain "kind" of Jew that "gives Jews a bad name". He also accused me amoung others of attempting a "neutralist ambush" which seems to me to acknowledge the fact that the contributor has no intention of maintaining a NPOV. As I say, I do not really like the subject of the article, but I'm just a bit of a stickler for neutrality, as it seemed to me the page had become a tirade against the individual. I hope you do not find my elaborating on the subject offensive, Cyde, and I do honestly appreciate you guys taking the time to look into this. Cheers! McGonicle 15:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I happen to know the man, the myth, the legend, of Charlie Wolf. I've seen Charlie Wolf in his darkest hour, funneling hard alcohol and being a vegetarian. And let me tell you something else about Charlie Wolf. Charlie Wolf is a racist. Charlie Wolf hates children, God, Yahweh, butterflies, puppies, and Asians. In October of '05 Charlie Wolf slapped a woman, Jackie Raseman. They are now still together and receive ballcuzzi's on a consistent basis.

[edit] Mediator response

Mediation withdrawn due to one editor leaving Wikipedia. Remaining editor informed that they can re-open the case at any time. - FrancisTyers 00:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)