Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/April 2007/0-0-0-Destruct-0 3

Case Filed On: 17:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

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: policy violation and 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 on the article's talk page at Taylor_Allderdice_High_School and at my user talk page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:0-0-0-Destruct-0.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer: I wish to determine 1) whether others' efforts to delete my edits are appropriate in this case or not, and 2) which deleted content is worth pursuing in a further dispute resolution process.

Summary:
The previous AMA, Elomis, accepted this case on December 3, 2006. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance/Requests/November_2006/0-0-0-Destruct-0. His assistance was initially helpful to the situation, but as of December 18, 2006 Elomis drastically curtailed his previously energetic involvement in WP altogether. Subsequently, more difficulties arose with the other party to the dispute. The other party offered mediation, but withdrew it a few hours later, then broke a consensus to which he had been a party for weeks and deleted additional material he himself had assisted editing. Naturally, he accompanied his new position with justifications, but he has declared at the Village Pump that he believes mediation worthless and wishes to proceed directly to arbitration.

Despite several requests to Elomis to reinvolve himself, he has weighed in in only the briefest of manners to indicate that he believes the matter is beyond what an AMA can help with. I am concerned, however, that this is a hasty judgment connected to whatever personal reasons he has for withdrawing from WP in general since December 18. I requested a new AMA on February 5, 2007, which case was immediately accepted by Anthonycfc at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Association_of_Members'_Advocates/Requests/February_2007/0-0-0-Destruct-0_2 but in the two months since Anthonycfc accepted the case, he has not taken a single action with regard to the case despite the many contributions he has made to WP in those two months. I am thus requesting a third AMA in the hope that for the first time someone intending to work on the case will accept it, for which I'd be grateful.

I would like the new AMA to advise me as to the degree of speciousness of the other party's deletions and the best manner to proceed. The other party has posted RFC's, but since they have not attracted commentary I would like to hear the AMA's impartial opinion, since that may avoid more drawn out dispute resolution processes. I would also ask for assistance in subsequent dispute resolution processes because I am not expert in the policies and practicalities governing them.

Per the information regarding the AMA's function at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes#Requesting_an_Advocate_.28at_any_time.29 I believe Elomis's brief sentence indicating his services are no longer useful is hastily considered. In particular, the AMA's involvement is specifically recommended for the "later stages of dispute resolution," and "an Advocate will advise you, without representing you. This can be helpful if you are unsure of relevant policies, or if you just want impartial advice on how best to resolve a dispute." Since, however, Elomis has not returned to WP for the seven weeks during which I have been awaiting him, I would like a new AMA to take over the case that Elomis left open at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance/Requests/November_2006/0-0-0-Destruct-0

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:
 * It's not an arbitration, but I'll take it... it's good to change from time to time. --Neigel von Teighen | help with arbs? 13:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)