Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-11 Final Fantasy X
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Request for cabal mediation
[edit] Request Information
- Request made by: User:Renmiri 22:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- The deletion of four pages (Final Fantasy X Battle Ultimania, The Art of Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy X DVD, Final Fantasy X-2 DVD)
- What's going on?
- This issue is resolved as far as I am concerned because Sean apologized and seemed to understand my issues with the way he deleted 4 pages I created. But for the record
- 4 pages I created were erased by Sean with no warning
- No help was offered to retrieve the lost content (I knew how but other new users may not) Sean did not know my level of Wiki knowledge and nevertheless never offered to retrieve my content
- Instead of help, a threat was made as it can be seen on the 2nd message Sean left at my talk page However, I will nominate these articles for AfD, if necessary,.. A threat on the second time we talk does sound intimidating to me
- No mention of merge requests or of other kind of recourse for me was made by Sean
- In spite of often repeating he never deleted anything Sean never bothered to verify if I knew about retrieving my content on the revision history and never explicitly said that it was possible and the steps I could take. After erasing all my hard work, the minimum I expected was an offer of help to retrieve it.
- He accused me of attempting to insert highly nuanced articles into Wikipedia, which I most certainly did not
- I mentioned how frustrated his actions were making him feel and his only answer was to patronize me with my patience is wearing thin and repeated mentions of ad hominen attacks. I do not understand how me mentioning my frustration qualifies as an ad hominen attack.
- I decided to take the matter of my pages to the project page, as I did not feel my interactions with Sean were being productive. I feared they were devolving into a turf fight and I wanted no part of it. Sean considered that a personal offense. Again, as a newbie I was trying to get some help and all that Sean could respond was with increased anger. THAT is intimidating. A less bold newcomer would have backed down.
- Sean kept on posting messages in my page getting even more agitated and I finally had enough and opened this mediation. Only then Sean started admitting his comments were over the top. Which confirms to me that this mediation was the right thing to do.
Anyhow, Sean apologized and wishes to move on, and so do I so I believe this matter is resolved Renmiri 18:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- What would you like to change about that?
- I believe Sean comes across very aggressive, intimidating and rude to newbies and that was the main reason I took this to mediation. I sincerely think the way he acted with me would have scared away a more timid newbie. I think he understood that and that is why I'm leaning to closing the case as resolved
- If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
- kila01 at yahoo dot com
- Would you be willing to mediate yourself and accept an assignment as a mediator?
- It seems I and Sean did this already Template:Grin
[edit] Comments by others
[edit] Old case
I seem to recall reading about not biting the newcomers which I surely feel Seancdaug DID NOT follow by deleting four pages (1, 2, 3, 4) I spent a lot of time doing without a single message and without leaving it for consensus. This is definitely NOT the experience I had so far with other users here on Wikipedia. I even said so to Sean's talk page (below), which he completely ignored and proceeded to accuse me of personally attacking HIM This is so frustrating! I had blogged about how wonderful it was to help build Wikipedia, but Sean is destroying my enthusiasm so I wil blog a correction: Don't ever get close to Wikipedia! Renmiri 20:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri All in all, a very frustrating experience!
Renmiri 21:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- PS: It is not the erasing of content that got me upset, it is HOW it was done. If you look at the Spira page I had a sizable portion of content rejected and erased by Piccolo but I did not mind since every time he did it he provided me with a good explanation and took some of my suggestions to mind. Sean OTOH erased all 4 pages w/o a note and only gave a reason AFTER I posted a request on his page to stop erasing my pages. And the remarks he made, such as the patronizing my patience is wearing thin, which at 42 I seldom need to hear from someone young enough to be my son. As proof about how I don't mind the content "reject" I present my blog post, posted yesterday, way before this mess started Renmiri 21:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- I do apologize for the "my patience is wearing thin" remarks, which were, in hindsight, ill considered and prone to misinterpretation. The comment referred only to the fact that I felt that I was being misrepresented by Renmiri's claims that I had "deleted" his contributions, even after I had asked him to stop. I did not intend for it to possess any meaning beyond that, but it was patronizing, and I do regret having said it, even so. I'm not sure how my (or your, or anyone else's) age enters into the picture at all, though. As for the other complaints, I did attempt to explain my reasoning on Renmiri's talk page, and in my edit summaries. If I did not go into much detail, it was only because I felt that my reasons were adequately captured in both the Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy style guide, and in sundry Wikipedia guideline, policy, and essay pages. Given Renmiri's relatively recent arrival on Wikipedia, I admit I should have been more clear to begin with, but I did try to correct my mistake subsequently by contacting him on his talk page. – Seancdaug 21:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- My age entered into the picture because anyone older than 5 would feel patronized by that remark. I am long past that age and did not appreciate being treated as such. I accept Sean's apology but I want to caution him to not be so hasty with newcomers next time. Comments like that may be misinterpreted as threats and intimidate newcomers. Were it my first page at Wikipedia I myself may have just left with the firm decision of never collaborating with Wikipedia ever again. Fortunately my experience in other prior pages edited was much different and very enriching so I decided to stick around and make sure another newbie doesn't get treated as I was.
- Comparing my experience with Sean with my other "deleted" page: The Lost Cities of Spira (Final Fantasy X, X2): After I posted it, someone put a "merge" suggestion on the page, not just erased all my content. Sean may say it's not erased, but for a newbie it might as well be, as most newbies would not know how to retrieve their work after such a radical editing. The merge request guided me to the Spira page where I added some content. The page's main author took some of it but rejected most of the detail. But never without notes, and never with insulting remarks. I ended up agreeing with Piccolo and following his suggestion to move my detail to Wikibooks, a suggestion that Sean did not bother to make even after "zapping" hours of my work. The way Piccolo and the other user handled my "fancruft" page taught me a lesson that was pleasurable to learn and left me being a big fan of Wikipedia. Sean OTOH needs to learn to be nicer to newbies.
- I remember Lost Cities of Spira situation, because I was the editor who posted the merge notice [1]. In that case, I posted the notice because of the length of the article, and the recognition that a merger would have to involve cutting some information. In the more recent cases, however, the articles in question were so short (and all tagged as stubs), that I saw no problem with simply adding the information to the broader subject articles: the only detail I omitted was information present in other articles (the opening paragraph here duplicated information present here). Once Renmiri made his disagreement known, I did leave a note explaining my position on his talk page. Some time into that discussion, I asked him to please refrain to posting to various talk pages that I had "deleted" his edits, and was souring all of Wikipedia for him, which I was interpreting, under the circumstances, as a personal attack. It was only then that I was accused of "biting the newbie," which shocked me, considering that my initial intentions were prevent the sort of no-holds-barred pile-ons that traditionally accompany situations such as this. I understand, and deeply regret, that my actions did not come across that way, but I contend that I was only being bold and to prevent a wider controversy (in which, quite clearly, I have failed spectacularly...). – Seancdaug 22:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Also, in the cases mentioned, I explicitly tried to avoid "erasing" content, as well. While I feel that the articles in question are unnecessary, the information contained within them was good, and I did not redirect any of the articles in question without merging the information into the main articles (Final Fantasy X or Final Fantasy X-2, in this case). – Seancdaug 21:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Well, as I said in Sean's page, we can not agree on this. I feel the pages are necessary and he feels they are not. After my iterations with him I am unwilling to give up on the pages based solely on his word. I know how to retrieve the pages but I am refraining to do so out of respect to Wikipedia. I do not want to start an editing war. Hopefully someone else from the FFX project can chime in and clarify the issue. Renmiri 22:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- In all fairness, that does not strike me as a subject for which we need to involve the mediation cabal. In light of our talk page discussion, I did post a {{mergewith}} notice on the offending pages, and there is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Final Fantasy X-2 to gauge consensus on the matter. To be blunt, it doesn't really matter what either you or I think is "necessary" or not: if consensus holds that we keep the articles, then I'm fine with that, and you have said that you are following the same principle. This is, it strikes me, the sort of thing that happens on Wikipedia all of the time: I was bold, you objected, we discussed, and having failed to reach consensus between the two of us, the discussion was opened up to a wider audience. I am not asking you to "give up" on anything based on my word, and, honestly, I never was. I explained why I felt that a wider debate was ultimately pointless, based on past experience, but even from the beginning I made clear my willingness to open up such a discussion, if necessary. The problem addressed by this request, as I understood it, resulted from an unfortunate exchange of accusations that emerged from our initial discussion (I said you were violating WP:NPA, you said I was violating WP:BITE). Am I wrong on this? – Seancdaug 22:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Bold is fine reckless is not. As I mentioned, your comments might be viewed as intimidating to a new user. I made you aware of how they were coming accross and how it was affecting my experience at Wikipedia and not only you did not respond but started saying I attacked you. You got the bold part down pat, now perhaps this mediation will make you learn to better respect newcomers like me. Most newcomers would not know how to retrieve a page that has been made a redirect and would have been even more frustrated than I was. You did not, at any point transfer the erased content to the discussion page or my talk, nor you ever offered to help me retrieve it. There was no helpful suggestion to move to Wikibooks, only a threat to put it up for deletion. A less bold newcomer would have been intimidated into dropping out the subject entirely. You mentioned your intention of keeping those discussions private between you and me. No, I still want my pages reviewed, but this mediation request is not about the pages fate, it is precisely about the way you conducted the ordeal. Renmiri 23:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- I do not understand how I was being "reckless," though. The section you link to refers to "large changes or deletions to long articles on complex, controversial subjects with long histories." None of the articles in question were complex (they were all stubs), and none of them had long histories. To be sure, they did prove controversial, but I had no way of knowing that at first. Once you made your disagreement clear, I did attempt to engage you in discussion. During that discussion, I said some things I now realize I should not have said, and I regret that my comments came across as intimidating (as an aside, can I ask what comments, specifically, you're talking about? Not to "call you out" or anything: I want to be sure that what I think I did wrong jibes with what you think I did wrong, to prevent future problems like this). But I maintain that a project of the size, scope, and activity of Wikipedia, not every change can, or should, be debated at length. Since I was not doing anything other than moving information from one location to another, it did not strike me as necessary to open a wide discussion. If I had known my boldness would create such a mess, I would have done so. But I had no way of knowing that beforehand. Your points about my behavior are well taken, and I will be more careful in the future. Nonetheless, I have explained (four times, now) what I meant when I accused you of personally attacking me, including at least one time before I made the accusation. Given that you flatly ignored me, and continued to misrepresent my actions (you were calling them "deletions" as late as your first comments to this page), what else was I to assume? I will certainly endeavor to show more respect to newcomers, but I would hope that this mediation impresses upon you that willfully ignoring the polite requests of other editors, regardless of experience, is hardly a sign of respect. In addition, I am not on trial, here: this is a mediation request, designed to resolve a dispute. I would hope that you would at least be open to acknowledging that, for all my many missteps, this should ideally be a give-and-take affair. – Seancdaug 23:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I didn't want to "keep these discussions" private. I was merely objecting to the fact that you were blatantly posting ad hominem attacks against me on other pages. That was wildly uncalled for, profoundly uncivil, and I am still left wondering what kind of behavior I committed to deserve such treatment. There is a difference between keeping a discussion private (which talk page discussions clearly are not, anyway) and keeping a discussion civil. – Seancdaug 23:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- I do not understand how I was being "reckless," though. The section you link to refers to "large changes or deletions to long articles on complex, controversial subjects with long histories." None of the articles in question were complex (they were all stubs), and none of them had long histories. To be sure, they did prove controversial, but I had no way of knowing that at first. Once you made your disagreement clear, I did attempt to engage you in discussion. During that discussion, I said some things I now realize I should not have said, and I regret that my comments came across as intimidating (as an aside, can I ask what comments, specifically, you're talking about? Not to "call you out" or anything: I want to be sure that what I think I did wrong jibes with what you think I did wrong, to prevent future problems like this). But I maintain that a project of the size, scope, and activity of Wikipedia, not every change can, or should, be debated at length. Since I was not doing anything other than moving information from one location to another, it did not strike me as necessary to open a wide discussion. If I had known my boldness would create such a mess, I would have done so. But I had no way of knowing that beforehand. Your points about my behavior are well taken, and I will be more careful in the future. Nonetheless, I have explained (four times, now) what I meant when I accused you of personally attacking me, including at least one time before I made the accusation. Given that you flatly ignored me, and continued to misrepresent my actions (you were calling them "deletions" as late as your first comments to this page), what else was I to assume? I will certainly endeavor to show more respect to newcomers, but I would hope that this mediation impresses upon you that willfully ignoring the polite requests of other editors, regardless of experience, is hardly a sign of respect. In addition, I am not on trial, here: this is a mediation request, designed to resolve a dispute. I would hope that you would at least be open to acknowledging that, for all my many missteps, this should ideally be a give-and-take affair. – Seancdaug 23:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Bold is fine reckless is not. As I mentioned, your comments might be viewed as intimidating to a new user. I made you aware of how they were coming accross and how it was affecting my experience at Wikipedia and not only you did not respond but started saying I attacked you. You got the bold part down pat, now perhaps this mediation will make you learn to better respect newcomers like me. Most newcomers would not know how to retrieve a page that has been made a redirect and would have been even more frustrated than I was. You did not, at any point transfer the erased content to the discussion page or my talk, nor you ever offered to help me retrieve it. There was no helpful suggestion to move to Wikibooks, only a threat to put it up for deletion. A less bold newcomer would have been intimidated into dropping out the subject entirely. You mentioned your intention of keeping those discussions private between you and me. No, I still want my pages reviewed, but this mediation request is not about the pages fate, it is precisely about the way you conducted the ordeal. Renmiri 23:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
- In all fairness, that does not strike me as a subject for which we need to involve the mediation cabal. In light of our talk page discussion, I did post a {{mergewith}} notice on the offending pages, and there is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Final Fantasy X-2 to gauge consensus on the matter. To be blunt, it doesn't really matter what either you or I think is "necessary" or not: if consensus holds that we keep the articles, then I'm fine with that, and you have said that you are following the same principle. This is, it strikes me, the sort of thing that happens on Wikipedia all of the time: I was bold, you objected, we discussed, and having failed to reach consensus between the two of us, the discussion was opened up to a wider audience. I am not asking you to "give up" on anything based on my word, and, honestly, I never was. I explained why I felt that a wider debate was ultimately pointless, based on past experience, but even from the beginning I made clear my willingness to open up such a discussion, if necessary. The problem addressed by this request, as I understood it, resulted from an unfortunate exchange of accusations that emerged from our initial discussion (I said you were violating WP:NPA, you said I was violating WP:BITE). Am I wrong on this? – Seancdaug 22:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, as I said in Sean's page, we can not agree on this. I feel the pages are necessary and he feels they are not. After my iterations with him I am unwilling to give up on the pages based solely on his word. I know how to retrieve the pages but I am refraining to do so out of respect to Wikipedia. I do not want to start an editing war. Hopefully someone else from the FFX project can chime in and clarify the issue. Renmiri 22:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
-
-
To sum up: I apologize that I have represented myself in a way that Renmiri feels is disrespectful. I recognize his complaints, and I promise that I shall be more careful in the future. My feelings regarding the way that I have been treated by Renmiri aside, that was the substance of this request, correct? The issue regarding the final disposition of the articles in question is now being discussed before a wider group, and both Renmiri and I have agreed to abide by the consensus that emerges from that discussion. Barring further intervention on the behalf of a mediator, or a future complaint, I have said my peace here. – Seancdaug 00:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I am all for resolving this issue and moving on
but I do not feel Sean is really listening to what I'm sayingand now I do feel he got the message. I do not regret opening this mediation though: finding out if his actions are what Wikipedia thinks is the correct way to treat contributors was a key issue to me. I felt this great body of work the Wikipedia is deserved better.
For the record here are my issues with the way this thing was handled by Sean
- 4 pages erased with no warning
- No help was offered to retrieve the lost content (I knew how but other new users may not)
- Instead of help, a threat was made as it can be seen on the 2nd message Sean left at my talk page However, I will nominate these articles for AfD, if necessary,.. A threat on the second time we talk does sound intimidating to me
- No mention of merge requests or of other kind of recourse was made by Sean
- In spite of often repeating he never deleted anything Sean never bothered to verify if I knew about retrieving my content on the revision history
- He accused me of attempting to insert highly nuanced articles into Wikipedia, which I most certainly did not
- I mentioned how frustrated his actions were making him feel and his only answer was to patronize me with my patience is wearing thin and repeated mentions of ad hominen attacks. I do not understand how me mentioning my frustration qualifies as an ad hominen attack.
- I decided to take the matter of my pages to the project page, as I did not feel my interactions with Sean were being productive. I feared they were devolving into a turf fight and I wanted no part of it. Sean considered that a personal offense. Again, as a newbie I was trying to get some help and all that Sean could respond was with increased anger. THAT is intimidating. A less bold newcomer would have backed down.
- Sean kept on posting messages in my page getting even more agitated and I finally had enough and opened this mediation. Only then Sean started admitting his comments were over the top. Which confirms to me that this mediation was the right thing to do.
Anyhow, Sean apologized and wishes to move on, and so do I so I believe this matter is resolved Renmiri 18:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Renmiri
