Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/November 2006/SFTVLGUY2

Wikipedian filing request:



Other Wikipedians this pertains to:



Wikipedia pages this pertains to:



Questions:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
 * Answer: Yes

'''How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)'''
 * Answer: Content dispute

'''What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.'''
 * Answer: Discussion page for Downtown and

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer: A resolution to the problem.

Summary:
When I created the article Downtown, it was my intent to discuss its origins as a tune written specifically for Petula Clark and its history - charting, awards - as it pertains to her recording of it. I have no objection to other editors enhancing it by including - within the text - mention of notable cover versions. But I see no reason to include infoboxes pertaining to or sub-headings to discuss subsequent versions. If this became standard policy for every song, the articles pertaining to them would become epic in length. However, Rimmers persists in adding a separate section, infobox, and to the article. How is info about Bunton's previous albums and singles or citing articles pertaining to her significant here? His sole reason seems to be his apparent obsession with Bunton and the Spice Girls, since he doesn't find it necessary to add separate sections and infoboxes pertaining to the other cover versions cited within the article, which would be the case if he were defending standard Wiki policy. I feel an infobox should be reserved for the originator of a song or the individual with whom it is associated most closely, and subheads for each additional version are unnecessary and simply lengthen rather than enhance the article. As reasonable as I've been in discussing this issue on the discussion pages for both Rimmer and the article, he continues to vandalize the article, reverting it several times a day. Thank you.

Discussion:
Although not your advocate, I have posted what I hope is a satifactiry solution on the talk page of the article in question. If this is OK, could you post here to say so (if you no longer require the AMA)? Thanks -- M a rtinp23 20:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree your solution was satisfactory but, based on other opinions posted on the "Downtown" discussion page, I'm confused as to whether or not there's a general consensus yet re: how this issue should be handled. I still maintain an Emma Bunton template listing her previous efforts belongs in an article about her and not a song she happened to record forty-two years after it was written. Rimmers clearly is not defending the inclusion of extensive details pertaining to ALL cover versions, only Bunton's, due to his obsession with her and the Spice Girls. In reviewing his own discussion page, it appears he has a history of editing that has sparked other controversies as well, and his attitude is always the same - don't tell him what he can or can't do, he's going to do it his way, no matter what.


 * So, where do we stand on this particular issue? I have edited the article in a way I think reasonable people will consider a sensible solution. Your opinion and guidance are appreciated. Thanks! SFTVLGUY2 13:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Followup:
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
 * Answer:

Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
 * Answer:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
 * Answer:

If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
 * Answer:

If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything?
 * Answer:

AMA Information
Case Status: closed

Advocate Status:
 * Bushcarrot
 * User handled dispute by him/herself. Bushc a rrot ( Talk·Desk ) 21:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)