Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/31 December 2006/TV on the Radio

Mediation Case: 12-31 TV on The Radio Irrelevant EL
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: LilDice 15:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * TV on the Radio


 * Who's involved?
 * Myself and User:Wolfit


 * What's going on?
 * User:Wolfit added a link to a new fansite, I reverted it citing WP:EL


 * ''What would you like to change about that?
 * Wolfit continually reverts my changes ignoring the 3 revert rule and calls me a racist because the band is non-white! I don't think this particular fan-site adds anything to the article, it's just a dead message board and a collection of stuff at other sites -- tour list, review list, interview list, etc. I also feel that Wolfit probably maintains the site or has some interest in it, which goes against WP:EL.


 * Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
 * No, let's do it publically.

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



I'm afraid I am unfamiler with this process so I assume that this is where i should respond?

Your distribution of the fan site cite is highly biased and inaccurate, the site in question contains a large and growing series of interviews, reviews, and media together with a message board to allow - reasoned - discussion about the art in question. To say it is inactive is highly unfair considering that it is only 1 day old!. It is also the only message board and fan site for this band on the INTERNET!.

It contains much information on the art in question and continues to grow - equally like the message board it is only 1 day old. It easily follows the criteria for inclusion as not only does it allow further investigation of the said art but allowed an admin to remove an agreed large amount of extra interview and review inks as they are now all to be found at one place.

I have not said that you are racist - I have no knowledge of your sociopolotical views and indeed have no which to discover them. I have however said that your behavior is strange in this instance. Here i will list why. As have discussed with you in the articles discussion page nearly all "bands" have fan sites listed and indeed these all offer further information on the artists in question. Indeed many have listings for multiple fan sites. This has always been the case with wiki articles and has always remained so. You yourself have worked extensively - and recently - on an entry for two USA "shock Jocks" (the name escapes me but is is clearly visible in your contributions history) and "despite making many edits you have put in that duos fan site!! Secondly, you did not respond to my discussion about nearly ALL bands having=ving a fan site inclusion but instead, incorrectly, cited WIKI guidelines and using these culled ALL external links from this article!. Finally, a few hours before beginning this culling a person with your user name posted a positive message in the message board of the site you seek to remove. A message containing a link to a video that that person - claiming to be you had done! It would - if an admin require, be easy to confirm if this is the case as not only does the board time stamp message but all IPs are logged.

Finally, you have yet again gone into this article and removed links. Yet if you check the history you will se that the last set of changes was not made by me but and ADMIN!!! This was someone I asked in IRC to look at what was happening in this article.

Please note: I haver contacted the admin in question.

Fianlly, I am growing somewhat bored by this - it is New years eve here and i really should be going out and getting very drunk indeed. happy new year to you. --Wolfit 20:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, let's get started. First off I did post on the fansite, I admitted that earlier, so what. I'm glad there is a fan site for TVOTR, I like them quite a bit! Now, what I am really objecting to is the automatic inclusion of the site on the Wikipedia article. I feel the only reason it's being added is to promote the website, if you really cared about the article you would incorporate the information into the article instead of just lazily adding a link to promote the fansite. That's all! Now as to entry for two 'USA shock jocks' and other bands having fansites listed the difference is they are well established and contain a wealth of information. This is a 1 day old website that doesn't contain anything that couldn't be included in the article here. It also has a virtually inactive forum, I actually am the only one who has posted to it! That's not real useful to other fans. I really do see where you're coming from what I object to is using Wikipedia as a way to simply increase a page's google pagerank. Build a community, build your site THEN add it to the wikipedia article, not the other way around. Come back in 6 months, do you have an active community going there, is there a wealth of information at the site? Then go ahead and add the link then, but don't just use this site as a way of promotion. LilDice 20:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Edit: I read some of the comments and felt further exposition was necessary: I shall reply to each point:

"Wolfit continually reverts my changes ignoring the 3 revert rule" I think you will find it was you that first ignored this rule. And have confounded my rolling back on an Amin!

"calls me a racist because the band is non-white!"

Did I? and when/where was that?

"it's just a dead message board and a collection of stuff at other sites -- tour list, review list, interview list"

the message board is one day old! your distribution of a collection of other stuff form other sites is nonsense. And all of the information that you do site is what one would find an any fan site that was active.

"I also feel that "Wolfit probably maintains the site"

Even if that was the case how do you know this. I could feel that you manage one of the many Opie_and_Anthony fansites. That doesn't make it true :/

I mention the Opie and Anthony ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opie_and_Anthony )because this is one that the person in question has worked on intensively since making there present loggin. I review of their contribution history shows this to be the case and continues - with extensive discussion and reviews. What is amazing is that DiLicce made the original edit based on the fact that the fan site needed not be there because it was a fan site and was thus not needed. Yet, the Opie and Anthony article - rightly in my view does contain a link to a fan site!~ However, what is even more interesting is that this article actually contains a link to FOUR fan sites:

* Wackbag.com An Unofficial Opie and Anthony Message Board * FullBlownAids.com FullBlownAids.com/Oaexperience.com (AKA FBA) * OpieAnthony.net An Opie and Anthony (and Ron & Fez) Messageboard

I don;t believe in censorship but personally question the validity of so many site and indeed the content of many. For example Wackbag.com An Unofficial Opie and Anthony Message Board contains the following post:

"Apology to the Black Race" this is a long racist, neo-facist tirade. and is followed with many nods of agreement such as: "I'm sorry blacks have an inferiority complex. Blame your "Leaders"" "Does this include taking all day to hang a picture in the WNEW hallway and eating chicken wings with lemonade? ive red it all before, on several white supremest websites and news papers. it wouldnt be bad if it were edited a tad, "Heh, I agreed with a good majority of the shit, except for all of the pro-Christianity stuff. Damn dirty atheist that I am. Although I'd take Christianity over Voodooism any day"

I will never support censorship but somehow DiDice considers 4 such fan sites as acceptable but one factual and reasonable one as not?
 * I'm trying to reply to this, but it appears English is not your first language and I'm having a hard time following your prose. Number one, If you actually look at my contributions to the O&A site. I have removed over 10,000 characters of irrelevance from the article. I just haven't gotten to the External Links section yet. And for the record I am _not_ a fan of O&A, I am actually a Howard Stern fan, I just decided to clean up the O&A article recently because it was such a mess (as shown on the talk page of that article). So please refrain from indirectly calling me a racist again by posting racist threads from a message board on the internet. I have nothing to do with those websites. This is the second time you have alluded to me somehow being racist, the first was on the TVOTR talk page where you write, "For various reasons she has found that their are certain sections of society that seem somewhat irritated about the success of what is a non all white alternative band. I have to say that your present action most certainly verges on vandalism and as such i will be chasing the matter up with a moderator." If you have a problem with the O&A EL section than fix it don't yell at me for not fixing it, it's all besides the point. LilDice 21:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

LilDice:

It appears that we both edited at the same time. So, in reply:

Each time that you make an objection to this site it is on different grounds - and it is frankly confusing me.

Wiki is not, shall never be and should never be about promoting a website. It's rational is to provide further information about a subject. Personally I don't always approve of the inclusion of certain subjects but that is my opinion and I respect others. The site that you have queried is one that fulfills many WIKI criteria. It contains - in one place - a wealth of information regarding the subject matter. that information is growing, It contains up to date news, including band activity, tours and information not available at the bands official site.

It has yet to be even entered at any of the search engine and links to it from the official site have yet to be included. What it did was allow was the culling of a number of external links from the said article as all of this information is now available at one source - including multi media interview and performances.

You are not the only member - people are actually finding their way there from else where - where the site is being actively promoted (but I think you are aware of that already) References to fan sites are never included in the main body of the article. This has been the case with all of the ones that you have been involved with. Indeed, such inclusion would seem to go against an unwritten WKI etiquette.

But honestly, I'm tired and need a drink, its less then 2 hours to New Years Eve. I have seen from your history that you have done some very good work in WIKI - but please remember that your decision about what should or should not be included is not final. I am honestly horrified at some of the material available at the Opie "fan" sites. My natural instinct would be to remove them. Most are simply advertising filled message boards filled with - well, opions I have difficulty in agreeing with. However, I will NEVER make such a decision.If that was the case I would ask - as I did last night regarding article - in the IRC channel for opinions

Again, I am glade that we have come to an agreement - although I think we differ on the reasons. I have no idea what time of day it is where you are - or indeed if it is the "holiday" season in your part of the world but I really do wish you a Happy New Year and if you drink that you "have one on me".--Wolfit 21:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: Seems I missread your comment. We have not reached an agreement. I once again find that your resons for non inclusion - somehow based on "page rang" (by the way Google page ranks is not decided by linking from One site - its a tad more complex then that - alot more indeed)

I shall then be taking this matter back uop with admin. Now you must excuse me - I'm a tad bored. Perhaps you could ask peoples opinons in IRC?--Wolfit 22:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This will be my last comment. I am not saying that you are a rascist What I am is questioning the removel of one fansite yet leaving in so many other on sites that you have extensively worked on

Edit: This will be my last comment. I am not saying that you are a racist What I am is questioning the removal of one fan site yet leaving in so many other on sites that you have extensively worked on, You say that you have simply not got round to removing the ones on the Opie site - yet this is far quicker and indeed simpler then the edits you have made to it - over a period of many months. My rational for quoting message from that site - and there are many more linked to this article - was I cannot understand how you find these to be relevant but not the one in discussion.

You have spent much energy on removing the link in question yet left others - which can be removed on exactly the same grounds and more - imfact.

I will repeat an earlier comment from the site history. Nearly every band, singer, show article has links to fan sites - in many cases multiple ones. Many contain much less information them this one. Why are you finding this oner such an issue? Especially after posting there???

The comment about the webmaster was simply a statement of fact - on the original removal she feared this was the case. She has had to make number of deletions due to this. I am NOT suggesting that you are a racist I am simply stating the truth. I have no idea what your political or socio economic views are - and frankely don't care. But would be surprised if you were and had yet posted positively on the site in question. What I do know is that your actions simply make no sense.--Wolfit 22:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Wolfit, either you have drunk a bit too much ringing in the new year or else we have a language barrier, I think we have a language barrier because you are not understanding my points. If you wait here, a mediator will take up the case and make the decision for us. LilDice 22:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

So you say, however things become clearer now that I have read your coments back in the article discussion, I qoute:

"The simple fact is you can't just make a half-cocked fansite then REQUIRE it to be linked from the wikipedia article. "

Very objective and in the spirit of WIKI I must say. Can I ask why you did not make such a comment on the sites message board but instead left a request to review your video? Again, very odd. I hate to point it out but I already requested a decision on mediation yesterday and an admin made it - see article history. Which you then reversed! But you seem determind to continue anyway.

And my use of English? But You objected on the grounds that I am the webmaster orginally. Make your mind up.--Wolfit 22:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

LilDice? I have re-thought our discussion and felt that it has grown negative and rather personal. You say that you are a fan on TVOTR - and I have no reason to doubt this. You also seem to find the website lacking in someway.

Have you considered joining the beginnings of the community and help to improve things? To make them better? TVOTR fans are a relatively small group as it is and it seems silly that we are fighting amongest ourselves :/ Especially at such an early stage and over what is presently the only central source of information on the group and the sole message board?

I have spoken to the webmaster - it isn't me. And frankly they think that this is simply non productive and considering your positive contributions to Wiki feel that it might be better to work together. Would this be a reasonable suggestion?--Wolfit 00:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the extension of the olive branch. As far as working together, I'm not really interesting in working on another website -- I have enough there. I am interested in keeping Wikipedia objective and fair. Now on to your arguments. The one argument you have going for you is there are no other fan-sites. This seems to be true, as for the claims that you can't get Tour information at the official site this is not true, there is a nice Tour section on the official site. So I'm really torn on this one, on one hand there is no information there that couldn't be added to this page, the forums are rather young and not a real good source of information right now....but it is the only fansite. I'll tell you what here is my compromise offer. Leave the damn link for now. I'm going to check back in 6 months, if there are better fansites or if the forums are still dead then it goes, until then i'm fine with leaving it there. What I would like to see from you is some good faith in expanding the current article short of making sure the one site is linked too. You've caught the LilDice with 7 beers in him, so congrats, but for now that's my position. Mediator feel free to close... LilDice 00:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

LilDice: Lol. My friend, 7 beers is always a good idea. It is good we could come to an agreement, it is what WIKI is all about after all. We hope to see on the message boards over there soon. Your id will be reserved shortly. Simply send an email to the site - the link should be in place by Tuesday.

And happy new year --Wolfit 01:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Closed per discussion. → James Kidd ( contr / talk / email ) 02:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.