Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/November 2006/Minaker

Wikipedian filing request:

• Minaker (talk · contribs)

Other Wikipedians this pertains to:

• SteveCrook (talk · contribs)

Wikipedia pages this pertains to:

• IMDb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

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 dispute and signs of possible revert war

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 and disengaging

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?

• Answer: advice or maybe intervention if possible (not clear on that part of the rules)

Summary:

It started with a disagreement over IMDb inaccuracies (re. TV entries on that site) which I mentioned in the article. The other user (SteveCrook), a frequent IMDb contributor by his own admission, took offense to these inaccuracies and reverted these changes without discussion. I tried to engage him in discussion on the talk page, and he at first obliged, albeit from the perspective that if I don't like IMDb inaccuracies, I should change the actual IMDb rather than report them on Wikipedia. To me, this is an invalid and ludicrous argument, akin to telling me that if I don't like the fact that racism exists, I should change it rather than report its existence in a Wikipedia article. Nevertheless, I attempted to discuss these conflicting views with SteveCrook, who refused to acknowledge my point that his view that the IMDb should be changed does NOT alter the fact that inaccuracies exist and should therefore be reported in the article. (To avoid even the appearance of "original research" I cited specific examples which can be easily verified with the IMDb link at the bottom of the article page). Ultimately, however, Mr. Crook continued to revert any changes I would make, even after I tried finding compromising with diction, and even disengaging from the argument for a while.

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 having a look at this. Trebor 22:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

User no longer wants advocacy. Trebor 07:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)