Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-05-04 History of London
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Mediation Case: 2006-05-04 History of London
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
- Where is the issue taking place?
- ...Talk:History of London, Historical London travel guide, User talk:RHaworth.
- Who's involved?
- ...User:Greg Lindahl, User:RHaworth, to a lesser extent myself and user:BL Lacertae.
- What's going on?
- I've accidentally stumbled into a brewing storm over a potential fork of the article History of London. The details are on its talk page. I know I'm hopeless at mediation, but this needs someone to look at it before it gets much more heated. Greg Lindahl is attempting to create a new article called Historical London travel guide, which seems at first sight to be a fork and also looks like something better suited to WikiTravel than to Wikipedia, atleast in that format and with that title. He seems to be doing this against the wishes of at least some of those involved with History of London, notably Roger haworth. Greg created the article as one sentence and a bundle of headings - very small even by stub standards, especially given that that one sentence was obvious in the extreme (something like "London is a city with a long history."). BL Lacertae redirected it to History of London - Greg reverted to the one sentence stub. Emma (BL) asked me for a second opinion and I too redirected, explaining my reasons at Talk:History of London. Greg hasn't taken these reversions particularly well and has started resorting to name-calling.
- What would you like to change about that?
- I've suggested to Greg that he starts the new article in a sandbox. At least that will give others the chance to see whether it is a genuinely useful Wikipedia article. Roger has suggested that it is more suited to WikiTravel. In either case, I don't think that starting with a one-sentence stub and a title which conflicts with WP:NOT is a good move.
- If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
- the discussion hasn't reached my Usr talk page yet.
- Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
-
- This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
- what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.
- As I said above, I'm lousy at mediating!
[edit] Mediator response
Hi there. I looked into this case and it appears that much has already been added to the article at Historical London travel guide that appears to be excelling away from stub-status. Do you think mediation is still necessary? I think everyone is simply being a bit too hasty and is jumping to conclusions before the article has even had a chance to grow. The only thing at the moment I can say is for everyone to calm down and be civil. Do you still need mediation? Cowman109Talk 19:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Probably not - as I said, when the problem occurred it simply contained one line and empty headers. it appears to be considerably bigger than that now. I am a bit concerned about the breaches of WP:CIVIL on the History of London talk page and RHaworth's user talk page, though. Grutness...wha? 01:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. Grutness...wha? 02:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Update 02:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, it seems that Historical London travel guide is now undergoing a WP:AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Historical London travel guide. It looks like formal channels are being followed. Cowman109Talk 02:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with {{Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence}} for misconduct and {{Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence3RR}} for 3RR violations. If you need help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil.
Wikipedia:Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.
[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.
