User:Ben MacDui/AGF Challenge 2 Exercise Answers

2.5 How long is yours?
What should Wikipedia do?

One of the great strengths and weaknesses of Wikipedia is that an inept student has the same number of votes as a seasoned professor. Excellent for bringing arrogant know-alls down to earth, but it can be frustratingly difficult to deal with persistent troublemakers who choose to ignore the basic rules of engagement. There are numerous dispute resolution steps that could be taken in dealing with the User concerned. He could be asked to "take a break". A request for help at Wikiquette alerts may provide some experienced support. Ultimately a ban may be needed.

How should Wikipedia describe the length of this DVD?

Unless and until a reliable source as defined at WP:NOTE is found that suggests anything other than 75 minutes, that is what the article should say.

What policies are involved here?

Above all WP:V - and WP:CITE, WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:NOTE etc.

Should anyone be allowed to edit Wikipedia according to what they have asserted is The TRUTH

No. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth".

Is it a violation of WP:IAR to require a WP:RS

The idea that WP:IAR can be "violated" is interesting. Indeed the whole concept of WP:IAR hints at logical paradoxes. If one ignores this policy completely is one in breach or following it to the letter? In this case I can see no reason to suppose that ignoring the need for a reliable source is likely to improve Wikipedia. Thus, we can ignore IAR.

How many hours of editor time should Wikipedia spend to deal with this?

As few as possible. If WP:V has been explained repeatedly to this user and they simply ignore it, they are verging on trolling, and should be dealt with fairly and expedititiously, but not fed.

2.7 No original research!
Analysis

AppleButtEr is not in violation of WP:OR or WP:SYNTH. "Editors may make straightforward mathematical calculations or logical deductions based on fully attributed data that neither change the significance of the data nor require additional assumptions beyond what is in the source."

AppleButtEr's actions

RunOff's actions are unacceptable but on the assumption that AppleButtEr is not an admin, he is in a weak position. There are possible intermediate steps such as a request for help at Wikiquette alerts but I can't see any reason not to raise the issue at WP:ANI.

Time to be spent

Assuming other admins are now involved, there are several possible outcomes and actions, which will depend on the details. The report to WP:ANI will probably result in an RfC. RunOff's actions are a serious beach of trust, but perhaps this is out of character and conceivably there may be mitigating personal circumstances. At the very least RunOff should be asked to "take a break" from the article. On the other hand he may be a persistent offender who has provided further proof of his unacceptability as a sysop. I am out of my depth here, but in these circumstances the community needs to take whatever time is required to remedy the situation. Admins running amok are potentially a very serious problem.