Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-08-29/Genetic algorithms: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Per suggestion of user Andrevan, changed Keki Burjorjee to Keburjor on this page to preserve privacy (Mediation Cabal pages are erroneously showing up in Google searches) |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{medcabstatus
|article={{SUBPAGENAME}}
|status=
|date=17:25, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
|requester=[[User:
|parties=[[User:
[[User:Glrx]]
[[User:Chaosdruid]]
Line 17:
====Where is the dispute?====
The dispute is primarily on the discussion page of the article on Genetic Algorithms [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genetic_algorithm#Should_all_reference_to_the_Generative_Fixation_Hypothesis_be_removed.3F]. Parts of the discussion can also be found at [[User Talk:
====Who is involved?====
*[[User:
*[[User:Glrx]]
*[[User:Chaosdruid]]
Line 34:
When pressed to provide evidence that I'm incapable of being objective about the edit, [[User:Glrx]] asks for evidence of "prominent adherents" of the the scientific hypothesis I've put forth. In other words, Glrx asks for evidence of the ''notability'' of this hypothesis. In doing so, Glrx conflates the Wikipedia concepts of ''weight'', which applies to article content, and ''notability'', which applies to article existence. The nutshell box at the top of [[WP:N]] prominently states that the Wikipedia guideline on Notability applies to article ''existence'', not article content. The filters for article content are [[WP:V]], [[WP:NOR]], and [[WP:NPOV]], none of which are violated by the edit. Pointing this out to Glrx makes no difference.
Other neutral editors have agreed that the mere mention of the new hypothesis on the [[Genetic algorithms]] page does not violate [[WP:UNDUE]], and could quite possibly be very helpful to readers of the article, especially since the reigning hypothesis in the field is known to have significant flaws. None of this has made an impression on Glrx, who acts like he is the final authority on what does and does not belong in Wikipedia, and on who can and cannot post material to a given article. Additionally he feels no obligation to respond to my questions, or my invitations to him to enter into formal mediation [[WP:RFM]]. His one word response to the latter was "Sigh". [[User:
====What would you like to change about this?====
Line 51:
* Accept [[User:ErikHaugen|ErikHaugen]] ([[User talk:ErikHaugen|talk]]) 17:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
* Accept — [[User:Parent5446|Parent5446]] [[User talk:Parent5446|☯]] <sup class="plainlinks">([{{fullurl:User talk: Parent5446|action=edit&preload=User:Parent5446/MediaWiki/TalkPageMessage§ion=new}} msg] [[Special:Emailuser/Parent5446|email]])</sup> 23:25, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
* Accept. [[User:
* Accept [[User:Chaosdruid|Chaosdruid]] ([[User talk:Chaosdruid|talk]]) 14:18, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
* Decline [[User:Glrx|Glrx]] ([[User talk:Glrx|talk]]) 20:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Line 59:
::I will mediate if acceptable to all parties. Again, please indicate such here. [[User:Robotnick2|Robotnick2]] <sup>[[User talk:Robotnick2|Messages?]]</sup> 14:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
* I accept, [[User:ErikHaugen|ErikHaugen]] ([[User talk:ErikHaugen|talk]]) 17:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
* Thanks, I accept. [[User:
* I accept, — [[User:Parent5446|Parent5446]] [[User talk:Parent5446|☯]] <sup class="plainlinks">([{{fullurl:User talk: Parent5446|action=edit&preload=User:Parent5446/MediaWiki/TalkPageMessage§ion=new}} msg] [[Special:Emailuser/Parent5446|email]])</sup> 02:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
* Decline. History [[User:Robotnick2]] and [[User:Anikin3]]. [[User:Glrx|Glrx]] ([[User talk:Glrx|talk]]) 03:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
::And your reason for rejecting [[User:Hipocrite]] was? [[User:
::Yes, I was wondering that. In addition, what in my history makes you think that I would not be a valid mediator? [[User:Robotnick2|Robotnick2]] <sup>[[User talk:Robotnick2|Messages?]]</sup> 11:28, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
----
Line 68:
Does this still need a mediator? I (1234r00t {{user2|1234r00t}}) volunteer to help solve this issue if it is still a problem [[User:1234r00t|<span style='color:#383132'><i><b>Mr R00t</b></i></span>]] [[User Talk:1234r00t| <span style="color:#46520C"><sup><i>Talk</i></sup></span>]] [[Special:Contributions/1234r00t|<span style="color:#46520C"><sup><i>'tribs</i></sup></span>]] 05:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
* A mediator is not needed. The case should should be closed because the issue is moot. Although I disagree with the above characterization of the dispute, the matter has been resolved.
:* Great, I'll close it. [[User:1234r00t|<span style='color:#383132'><i><b>Mr R00t</b></i></span>]] [[User Talk:1234r00t| <span style="color:#46520C"><sup><i>Talk</i></sup></span>]] [[Special:Contributions/1234r00t|<span style="color:#46520C"><sup><i>'tribs</i></sup></span>]] 23:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest Mr R00t. The current consensus does indeed seem to be that the edit should not be made. Of course [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]], and your involvement may bring about such a change. However, even if it does, I don't believe that two disputants, Glrx and Oli Filth, are capable of looking beyond the COI to the real issue here---whether the interests of the article's readers are being served. And, one of them, Glrx, has a fondness for reverting the edit even when the consensus doesn't align with his ideas of what should and shouldn't be included. I've decided to withdraw from this dispute because it seems pointless to carry on. [[User:Keburjor|Keburjor]] ([[User talk:Keburjor|talk]]) 03:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
===Administrative notes===
| |||