Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-12-09 Post-credits scene
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | ||||||||||||
|
Contents |
[edit] Request details
[edit] Who are the involved parties?
myself (Kimpire), Someguy0830, and two IP-only editors (71.247.88.225 and 71.247.138.244) whom I suspect may all be the same person under different addresses.
[edit] What's going on?
Edit war between the IP-only editors and Someguy0830 over a dispute between Someguy0830 and myself that had already been resolved by WP:3O. The issue is whether a list of films with a scene after the credits, already deleted as both a category and a list, is still noteworthy enough to be inserted into the article. WP:3O (Firefoxman) said not unless WP:DR is performed, and this decision does not appear to have been accepted by the IP-only editors.
[edit] What would you like to change about that?
I'd frankly like for the list to be reinstated, but I accept WP:3O and ending the edit war is my only goal at the moment.
[edit] Mediator notes
[edit] Administrative notes
[edit] Discussion
Clarified intro a bit. It should be noted that the IP editor is taking no effort to actually fill in the table, instead merely adding empty headers, not only on this page but on movie pages. The editor never responds on talk pages, to warnings or the one block that has resulted from them, and only uses edit summaries which reiterate the title in some way. Regardless of how this plays out, I do not believe he will ever respond to any questions, nor will he change his actions. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 08:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I will meditate this case. Firstly, I would suggest that you both stop editing the page during the case. Firstly, I would like to know what date this started. What the IP appears to be doing is actually vandalizing the page. The list, however, has to have a judgement made on the talk page about whether it can stay or go. I will not do that. When you are done, give me a link. Regards -- Whiteandnerdy111 (talk) 19:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Near as I can figure, this same IP has been adding and readding the same list since August 10 (the AfD closed August 4) and has been contributing to it for far longer than that. The list has been reverted countless time since then, first by another user and more recently me. Short of semi-protection (which I should note only stalls the IP; he returns almost immediately to continue), I see no way to end this. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
It seems like the IP editors are not responding. There's not much to mediate if one side doesn't respond. On the other hand, if they keep making semi-constructive edits, they may be acting in good faith.
Sometimes new/IP editors don't know they have a personal talk page. In that case, there are a couple of tricks you can use that have been known to work.
- You can try to reach them by doing null edits and/or reverts and leaving a message for them in the edit summary.
- If they keep editing a particular location, you can leave an html comment for them personally, which they will see once they click "edit" and want to start typing. (Don't forget to remove such comments after a while).
In general, if you leave a nice, friendly personal message hidden like that, they'll likely be surprised and amazed when they find it, and with a bit of luck, they'll also feel honored that you took so much trouble to reach them (hey, you can hope right?).
Message content should probably include a pointer to the article talk page, and/or to the IP users personal talk page. (Note that ip talk pages are somewhat tricky and unreliable to use, especially for dynamic ip users, so article talk might be the best you can hope for at first.)
See if you can get them to respond, (and/or leave me a quick message on my talk page, the next time the ip "vandal" strikes, and I'll do it for you ) --Kim Bruning (talk) 08:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I should note that I've tried before, as have others, and have gotten nowhere. Under 71.247.88.225, the user collected quite a number of warnings over the span of months, mine included, and never responded to one. I've informed the most recent one of this case, but I doubt he'll be any more responsive than he was to the block. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 11:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. Log out and check to see how the current anon talk interface works. Note how Devs haven't given it much attention recently.
- Before giving up, try the two alternate methods as a last resort. If that doesn't work, we'll just have to block, I guess. --Kim Bruning (talk) 12:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I left the hidden comment. He edits infrequently, so it'll probably be a few days before we can tell if he's read them (or ignored them). — Someguy0830 (T | C) 16:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, it's clear now he either isn't paying attention or simply has no intention of responding. He's blanked the hidden comment and restored the list. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 08:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could still try to directly address them "Dear 71.247.88.225, we're trying to reach you!", or refer them to the local talk page. That's about all we can do though. If you run out of patience now, just request a block at the admin's noticeboard for incidents, and that should be fine. --Kim Bruning (talk) 11:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. We'll see what comes of it. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 18:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Nope. I put up a notice. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 22:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could still try to directly address them "Dear 71.247.88.225, we're trying to reach you!", or refer them to the local talk page. That's about all we can do though. If you run out of patience now, just request a block at the admin's noticeboard for incidents, and that should be fine. --Kim Bruning (talk) 11:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
-
