Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-21 Opie and Anthony

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Mediation Case: 2006-03-21 Opie and Anthony

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 Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.


[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Tufflaw 16:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Where is the issue taking place?
Opie and Anthony
Who's involved?
Primarily User:Tufflaw and User:Attention whore, with many first-time anonymous editors getting involved as well
What's going on?
The article is about a radio talk show on satellite radio. The dispute is whether information should be included in the article that one of the DJs (Anthony) is currently (allegedly) dating a woman who previously appeared on the show and engaged in oral sex with a former intern of the show. While there is audio available of this encounter, there is no citable evidence that Anthony is currently dating this woman. It should also be noted that essentially an "invitation to vandalize" this page was posted at [1].
What would you like to change about that?
Pursuant to WP:LIVING and WP:VERIFY, I believe that this information should not be included in the article. The article was protected two weeks ago following a revert war, and currently contains the disputed information. Significant discussion was held at the article's talk page to no avail. I posted an RFC with no response.
If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
I have no problem being open about this, any contact can come at my talk page or on the article's talk page, where I will be linking to this page.
Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
Yes

[edit] Mediator response

  1. Could you (both, individually) please tell me:
    • in an encyclical context, why is/is not the sex life of the subject relevant?
    • in an encyclical context, why it is important to mention who Anthony is dating?
  2. Is either assertion citable? I'm not asking for "proof", I'm asking for a citation. (Rolling Stone Magazine or whatever)
-- Fullstop 15:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence

The disputed content can be found at this diff [2] Tufflaw 16:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.


[edit] Comments by others

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.


[edit] Discussion

  1. I don't believe the sex life of the subject is relevant or important in terms of this article. It has nothing to do with the show itself, nor does it bear any importance to a encyclopedic record of the show or of Anthony himself. If Anthony made it an issue with respect to the show, I would agree that would certainly make it relevant, but he hasn't and therefore I submit it isn't.
  2. To my knowledge, neither of these assertions are citable.
-- Tufflaw 17:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

here is the audio [3]

Since User:Attention whore et al. are not willing to participate in mediation, I'm closing the case with the following comment(s):
  • Wikipedia is not a fan-site (see also: WP:NOT)
  • It is Wikipedia policy that articles only include verifyable information.
  • Edits which could be considered defamatory or libellous ought to be reported, with details of the article and error, to the info team.
In view of the potential for damage to Wikipedia's integrity, I suggest that - should such edits continue - you make a request for page semi-protection .
-- Fullstop 17:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)