Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-20 Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | Unknown |
| Mediator(s) | PhilKnight (talk) |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases|]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|]]
Request details[edit]
There is a difficult dispute regarding the Website testimonials vs "praise" section of this article.
Additional request details added by Boodlesthecat[edit]
Additional relevant info:
- The edit history shows the dispute being between Gni plus the two IP's he also edits under (67.158.119.138 and 24.91.135.162 and assorted other editors.
- Gni is documented to have edited Wikipedia from a computer in CAMERA's offices at a minimum of 35 times, and likely far more.
- Gni and the at least two other identities he edits under are single purpose accounts devoted to adding and defending the CAMERA perspective in the CAMERA article and related articles.
- This apparent conflict of interest is in discussion at WP:COIN here and WP:ANI here (where Gni was advised to stop editing CAMERA and CAMERA-related articles; advice which he has rejected).
- 3RR edit warring by Gni report is here
- Gni's use of an IP registered to CAMERA to dodge a block noted here.
Given these open issues regarding the serious conflict of interest Gni has, I see the filing of this case as a distraction from that far more pertinent issue. As such, I will not, at least pending resolution of the Conflict of Interest issue, participate in this mediation. Boodlesthecat Meow? 02:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Response to Boodlesthecat's false allegations[edit]
I'm sorry to see that Boodlesthecat is attempting to skew this request -- which I tried hard to draw up with neutral language -- with patently false information. So I feel obliged to respond to his erroneous accusations.
- Boodles seems to suggest that the dispute is between me on one side and assorted other editors on the other side. This is false. Some other editors have tended to agree with me; others have tended to disagree with me but are in accord with me on some points; and a few editors, including Boodlesthecat, seem to reflexively revert any additions I make.
- He seems to be very confused when claiming that I am "documented to have edited Wikipedia from a computer in CAMERA's offices at a minimum of 35 times, and likely far more." What he's clearly done is count the total number of edits made from the IP address that he traces to the CAMERA office and wrongly assume that, because on a couple of occasions I've edited from that IP address, any edits from that IP address are therefor mine. His argument obviously hasn't been thought out very much.
- It takes a serious assumption of bad faith to conflate forgetting to log in with trying to dodge a block.
- I'm not sure what he intends to prove by citing the edit warring block. This was the first and only time I have been blocked for this; and the block was successful in teaching me not to edit war. But if blocks are relevant, then I should point out that Boodlesthecat is hardly innocent of being blocked.
- Finally, it is extremely unfortunate that Boodlesthecat is using COI allegations as a way to avoid mediation on a content dispute, being that WP:COI clearly notes that "using COI allegations to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is frowned upon." I hope your services will still be offered to mediate between me and other editors who have weighed in on the questions raised in this mediation request. One might then hope (against hope) that Boodlesthecat will go along with any consensus reached. Thank you.Gni (talk) 15:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Who are the involved parties?[edit]
The sharpest dispute is between GNI and Boodlesthecat, though 68.23.8.245 has also weighed in.
What's going on?[edit]
It is exceedingly difficult to reach consensus on how this section should be laid out, on whether an comment by Ed Koch about the subject of the article constitutes praise, on whether the source of Koch's comment constitutes a reliable source, and on whether quotes about CAMERA found on the CAMERA website are reliable. There is also a dispute over how the Koch quote should be introduced. It is currently introduced as a "Testimonial[] on CAMERA's website," but GNI (me) asserts this is highly misleading since the CAMERA website isn't the original source. The footnote leading to the original source has been removed. Additionally, as a result of the aforementioned, there is a dispute over which subheadings to use for this section. One side suggested as a compromise "Praise" for the Koch quote plus whatever other praise might turn up, "Testimonials..." for the quotes found on the website, and "Criticism" for the criticism. The other side removes the "Praise" subhead and bundles the Koch quote with the testimonials.
What would you like to change about that?[edit]
This dispute is related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and perhaps predictably, it's been seemingly impossible to resolve. I hope that the Cabal can help resolve this dispute so as to avoid a slow-motion revert war.
Mediator notes[edit]
Administrative notes[edit]
Gni has been restricted from editing the article - refer to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Log of blocks and bans.--PhilKnight (talk) 07:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
Can this be closed? PhilKnight (talk) 07:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'll close the case, unless anyone objects. PhilKnight (talk) 07:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)