Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/VeryVerily
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Case Open
Please do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case. Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.
Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.
Contents |
[edit] Statement of complaint
VeryVerily is endlessly reverting a controversial passage of the PNAC page. His version demolishes a strawman of the opposing side of the discussion, and falsely paints the issue as being resolved in favour of his own interpretations when in fact it's a matter of much debate even in mainstream media sources.
He also accuses me of just reverting everything he does, which I feel is a bit unfair because he was the first to revert (04:44 on the 25th of September). My version presents both sides of the issue, his presents only his own and the strawman.
I've tried to be reasonable but he just doesn't seem interested in any opinion but his own. He seems determined to make the article conform to his own worldview.
VeryVerily "rejects" mediation on the grounds it will be a waste of time and that the discussion isn't complete (when in fact, as a glance at the discussion page will reveal, it's just going around in circles). Is there anything that can be done? I'm a new Wikipedian and this annoying dispute is completely ruining my enjoyment of this place. Thanks. CK 13:10, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Statement by affected party
Utterly frivolous. Arbitration is obviously premature. His claim about me being the first to revert is demonstrably false. VV 22:57, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The remainder of the former content of this page has been moved to talk.
[edit] Preliminary decision
[edit] Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/1/0)
Accept, mediation requested but refused, Fred Bauder 12:56, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)Recuse Fred Bauder 00:48, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)- Accept, though I hope a little more evidence will be presented? But what there is is sufficient to accept, I judge. Jwrosenzweig 14:20, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Accept. Mediation was refused, and while I would be inclined to ask if this was an isolated incident, the sheer number of arbitration complaints concerning VeryVerily would seem to indicate that this wasn't. →Raul654 20:47, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Accept. James F. (talk) 16:20, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Accept --the Epopt 13:16, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
