Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/February 2007/MojaveNC

Case Filed On: 07:33, 22 February 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: Content disputes

'''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: Articles flagged for deletion, flagged for content.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer: I hope that the other editor will be given some guidance as to what is, and what isn't, photography which contributes to a Wikipedia article.

Summary:
This user, during the last month or so, has been posting several (low-quality) photographs onto pages of Utah and the surrounding area. Many of them are of minimal or questionable value to the article they are being posted to. He is stubborn when being post-edited. To wit:
 * A photograph of a hospital, and its lush desert landscaping, in an article about the Mojave Desert. This resulted in a minor edit war.
 * A photograph tonight of a zoomed-in look at the top of Yellowstone Falls — posted at the top of the Yellowstone National Park article
 * A tightly-cropped photograph of an LDS temple posted on the Idaho article
 * A photograph of a freeway exit sign posted on the Interstate 15 article, with a new article created for that freeway exit. The article was deleted.
 * Several minimally useful photographs of the Great Basin, and debate over whether parts of California were in the Great Basin
 * A photograph of a small corner of Lake Mead near Hoover Dam on the Mojave Desert article. I decided not to act on this.
 * A photograph of the Beaver Dam Wash area was fine, but his elevation citation was incorrect — I had to post a ref to a topographic map to convince him of my case

These are in articles that I pay attention to and provide follow-up edits on. There are other examples that I don't care to edit because they're not topics I'm familiar with, but seem to have a similar problem. I had up to now been content to just follow up on what the editor is doing and cleaning up where necessary, but I am concerned after seeing the Yellowstone National Park edits tonight that the editor will continue to post photographs that do nothing to help the reader visualize the topic of the article.

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:
 * I'm looking into this one. SilkTork 19:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * User:Staplegunther has been given guidance on use of images in articles. Monitored editing. Editor is moving in the right direction and contributing in a positive manner, though is still learning! Case closed. SilkTork 16:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)