Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-24 Video CD

Who are the involved parties?

 * Rcooley
 * AtaruMoroboshi
 * 202.7.183.131

What's going on?
I removed some unsourced content from Video CD, along with a statement that I said was of "questionable accuracy" as it was based off of metrics from 2003. I particularly took issue with the statement "Overall, the popularity of VCD is actually increasing" - as it was based off of a document containing specific sales data from 2003. I provided detailed reasoning for all changes and proposed changes. It seems we are spinning our wheels, most recently Rcooley adding back much of the removed content without discussion. The talk page details this. I feel we need some impartial third parties to add clarity to the situation.

Rcooley has largely worked on this article, and mentions the work he's done on the article at his user page. I understand his consternation with the issues I've brought forth, but I've been accused of "Flying in the face of WP policy." I have genuine concern about the validity or some of these statements as they lacked sourcing, or were just plain OR. (i.e. VCDs are better because there is no region coding). I feel there may be some ownership issues as well.

202.7.183.131 has contributed to this dialog as well, though his interaction with Rcooley wasn't always civil.

I've been accused of POV editing, and Rcooley states that my removal (and subsequent discussion) of content constitutes Original Research on my part.

For my part, I stated "Article ownership issues aside. You seem to be responding in general frustration to my concerns."

What would you like to change about that?
As I've suggested to Rcooley I believe there are several steps which can be taken to address this. 1) With regard to the section "Advantages Over DVD" I suggested a table "The table is not to "assert advantages of VCD." It would be a factual comparison of two formats and their specs. Yes, there will be multiple columns, For example, take a look at the table in This table or this one to get a better idea of what I mean." It would eliminate any need to say X is better than Y because Z, by just having a factual comparison chart.

I've also stated I would support re-integrating the following single sentence back into the article. Reworded to better reflect what the actual cited source is saying.

Original: "However, VCD has simultaneously seen significant new growth in emerging economies like India, Indonesia, South America, Russia and Africa as a low-cost alternative to DVD. Overall, the popularity of VCD is actually increasing"

Suggested change: "In 2003, VCD has simultaneously saw significant new growth in emerging economies like India, Indonesia, South America, Russia and Africa as a low-cost alternative to DVD.''"

Statement that do not have sources, and appear as broad original research, such as stating "VCD is also a very popular format for karaoke in East Asia, where picture quality is not a paramount concern" for a reason that it's better than DVD - should not be re-introduced to the article unless sources can be found to support the claims.

Mediator notes
I'm going to keep this on the VCD talk page, if no-one minds. Xavexgoem (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok - I've posted a section on the VCD talk page Talk:Video_CD AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to close this - VCD and this casepage are still on my watchlist. Xavexgoem (talk) 01:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion
After two weeks of non-productive discussion, I re-added the deleted content with additional citations, and minor rewording to make the statements VERY directly reflect those citations. AtaruMoroboshi immediately reverted it. The wording he insists on is much narrower than the citations suggest/support. Why he does not want "worldwide popularity" mentioned is mystifying to me. He admits "region-free" is an advantage of VCD over DVD, but objects to it, and removed it never the less. I did not object to the comparison table he suggested, but he did not elaborate on the idea when asked, and also took no action to create it, nor add it (or anything else, at all) to the article. I restored the original, with minor changes and citation, in lieu of having nothing at all (indefinitely). I never re-introduced the disputed statement about Karaoke, nor have I suggested doing so. The talk page makes it clear I am utterly indifferent. Rcooley (talk) 19:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Rcooley, thank you for participating in the mediation. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If I was uncivil I apologise. What we are lacking is more recent data to establish the growth or decline of VCD since 2003. The data we have suggests growth in some regions, and stagnation or decline in others. That VCD remains a popular format for karaoke I believe warrants inclusion in the article, and I'm sure this could be sourced. The "region-free" business can also be worked in, but it is not necessarily an advantage over DVD. Hollywood, for instance, has largely ignored VCD in part because of its lack of DRM, and this means many titles are not legally available on the format. Which leads me to my next point: there are titles available on VCD that are not available on DVD and vice versa. It's a tie. 202.7.183.131 (talk) 07:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)