Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-27 St. Catharines, Ontario

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal

Article: St. Catharines, Ontario State: Closed Requested By: Snickerdo, Other Parties: Yankees76,Snickerdo, Trappy Mediated By: Jem Comments: Mediation resolved; changes accepted 11:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Mediation Case: 2007-01-27 St. Catharines, Ontario 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Mediator response 1.3 Compromise offers 1.4 Discussion

[edit] Mediation Case: 2007-01-27 St. Catharines, Ontario

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Snickerdo 08:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

St. Catharines, Ontario, on the :talk page, and on users' talk pages

Who's involved?

Snickerdo, Trappy and Yankees76

What's going on?

There is a dispute as how how the the article should be worded. I will admit, I have lost my head over his strong-arm tactics, threatens of bans (he's not an admin, so I don't know what's up) and other things. Trappy and I have tried to reason with him, but he does not get it. I am now getting very annoyed with his posts on my :talk and his repeated edits. We need this dealt with before it escalates further, and I would appreciate any input from you guys before this gets worse.

What would you like to change about that?

Tell Yankees76 to back off, stop acting like he is an administrator and recommend that he accept the input from others involved on an article on how it should be presented. We understand we do not own the page, but we find his methods quite arrogant.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

Oh please, let it be known you're involved. In fact, I'm posting that I am bringing in outside involvement onto the article :talk right now.

[edit] Mediator response

I'm willing to take this case, seeing as my other case is drawing to a close and this doesn't appear to be massively complex in terms of what is being argued over. Jem 15:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

• The fact about obesity rates should remain in the "City Issues" sections. Whilst justified in the demographics section, it is not strictly population. Moreover, we have all agreed that the term carries potentially negative connotations, and as such it is perhaps best placed in a section dedicated to the city's problems.

• The term "fatetst city" should not be used in isolation. The phrase suggested here:

"Based on research performed by Statistics Canada in 1998 and 2001, CTV, the Globe and Mail and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation have dubbed St. Catharines as Canada's 'Fattest City'". This could be preceeded with a phrase along the lines of "St. Catharines has a noted obesity/health problem etc, and then adding the 57.3 stats along with 3 (agreed) citations.

would be appropriate, as it reports on media speculation and also factual information.

• Stopping all of these personal attacks once and for all, and move on for the good of the article.

These compromises appear to be accepted by all parties in principle, and at this stage it is just the working out of the fine details that need to be done. This should hopefully be resolved soon. Jem 17:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

All implemented, case closed. Jem 11:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion