Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Scorpios

Case Filed On: 14:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedian filing request:

• Scorpios (talk · contribs)

Other Wikipedians this pertains to:

• 68.60.68.203 (talk · contribs)
• Constanz (talk · contribs)

Wikipedia pages this pertains to:

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

Questions:

Have you read the AMA FAQ?

• Answer: Yes, I have.

How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)

• Answer: It is a content dispute.

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 made a comment on Constanz's Talk page and read over the Joachim Hoffmann Talk page. After I made the comment, a futher revert was made by Constanz.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?

• Answer: I hope to see these two work out their differences.

Summary:

Joachim Hoffmann seems to have been accused of anti-Semetism, anti-Russian feelings and Nazi sympathizing. Constanz disagrees with this view while 68.60.68.203 supports it. The two repeatedly revert eachother's edits (Very substantial edits, at that). I stumbled accross the page while patrolling Recent Changes. I noticed that an unregistered IP had added over 21,000 characters to the page. Alarm bells went off in my head and I stumbled across a problem much worse than the simple, revertable vandalism I had suspected. Other than a comment on Constanz's Talk page, I have not yet involved myself in the dispute.

Discussion:

Would you please provide some links to the content under dispute? User:Pedant 09:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

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: NEW

Advocate Status:

• None assigned.