Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/January 2007/Shaftesbury

Case Filed On: 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Case Opened On: 1:14, 03 Febuary 2007 (UTC)
Case Closed On: 11:20, 04 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedian filing request:

Shaftesbury (talk · contribs)

Other Wikipedians this pertains to: Steinsky (talk · contribs)

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, vandalism

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: I have left a message on their page asking them not to vandalise, see their user profile.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?

Answer: Then saying that it was spam (a blaintant lie!) and that they would try and get it added to wikipedia's spam filter

Summary:

Shaftesburytown.co.uk is Shaftesbury's only community owned and run website and is working in co-operation with most orginisations in the town to improve tourism, community info and history for the town online. I feel its the only one that should be linked from wikipedia from the Shaftesbury page (since the other 2 shaftesbury sites are commerical, IE charge for advertising, and one of those is claiming to be offical when no site could make that claim of a town unless it was directly owned by the town and open to public review, and the other is very new and only was made to get back at the council when a very shady deal feel to peices when members of the public uncovered acts of negligence and possible coruption. As for the Gold hill page, well gold hill is IN shaftesbury, and King alfred was not only very important for the town but this website (shaftesburytown.co.uk) was responsible for helping correct factual errors in the wikipeida page about him and is working with the Town abby to add significant new information about him which will be on both shaftesburytown.co.uk and given to wikipeida.

This user does not know what hes is talking about and is vandalising our pages. Thank you for your help I love wikipedia and hate to see people trying to damage pages whatever the reason.

Discussion:

Comment I am not one of the advocates, but Wikipedia:External_links provides a guideline for including and excluding external links in an article. If you wish to include or exclude external links in one of the articles mentioned above, please read Wikipedia:External_links and use the text from Wikipedia:External_links to support your position on the article talk page. If you have trouble with using the text from Wikipedia:External_links to support your position, please post a note on my talk page and I will gladly provide assistance. -- Jreferee 16:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advocate Response

Wikipedia's Guidlines that Apply

Facts

Grahamcjones added [1] to article Shaftesbury and to Gold Hill, Shaftesbury.
Grahamcjones made his last edit on 17:20, 15 January 2007

Closure

Grahamcjones has stopped editing so this case is closed. Any spam may be removed. Please contact me is any assistance is needed.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 21:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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:

Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs).