Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-21 XPLANE article dispute

Mediation Case: 2006-11-21 XPLANE article dispute
Please observe Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

 * Request made by: Dgray xplane 19:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * The "XPLANE" page on Wikipedia.


 * Who's involved?
 * Myself (a Wikipedia newbie) and a Wikipedia editor named Veinor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Veinor)


 * What's going on?

1. The entry has been in existence since 2004 with very little change. A few days ago I added a link to my blog. As Founder and CEO I thought it was appropriate, especially since my blog is respected in the professional community. 2. The link was deleted by an editor who (it appeared to me) acted in a knee-jerk manner without examining the issue. Regardless, not only was the link deleted but the entire article was marked for deletion, based on the claim that the company was not notable. 3. I did not attempt to re-enter the blog but attempted to initiate a discussion with the editor, whose responses were curt and showed no knowledge of the subject. 4. I attempted to improve the article by adding facts that I believed make the company notable. 5. The editor responded to my edit by marking the content as advertising/self-promotion and marking it for deletion on that basis also. 6. I must admit this has got me heated up at this point and I am trying to restrain myself.

1. I would like to see a conversation based on facts 2. I would like to include people in the conversation who are either recognized in the field of information design, or at least understand its dynamics 3. I would like to see suggestions for improvements to the article -- I think it can be improved significantly but I feel marked as biased at this point (admittedly I am not objective) 4. While I believe he started this process in good faith, at this point I don't believe the editor's point of view is any less biased than mine. He appears to be backed into a corner and defending his point of view to an absurd degree.
 * ''What would you like to change about that?


 * Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
 * ... I can be reached at dgray@xplane.com and am happy to work discreetly or in the open.

Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.



Discussion

 * I do not believe Mediation Cabal is an appropriate place for this, as this is a dispute over an AfD and not a content dispute. I would recommend the requestor pay a visit to Deletion_review. Note that I feel the version at User:Dgray xplane/XPLANE would constitute an adver-article and would be inappropriate for Wikipedia. However, if XPLANE is indeed notable, I would suggest that the requestor edit User:Dgray xplane/XPLANE to tone down the NPOV violations currently there before listing at WP:DRV. Reading other Wikipedia articles on corporations may be helpful. Gzkn 12:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Gzkn: Thanks. Question: When an article is posted for deletion review, is it the article that is in question or the process behind the decision to delete?Dgray xplane 13:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, I'd like to offer a quick apology for bringing this to an inappropriate forum. I am a newbie here; thanks for your patience. Dgray xplane 17:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. In answer to your question: it can be both, which is what I think is going on at Deletion_review/Log/2006_November_24. Gzkn 03:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * ThanksDgray xplane 16:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)