Misplaced Pages

:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-13 Sardaka: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal | Cases Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:13, 13 June 2007 editPhilKnight (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators125,394 editsm wikify← Previous edit Revision as of 17:23, 13 June 2007 edit undoTheRingess (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers23,992 edits created discussion section, added my opening commentsNext edit →
Line 35: Line 35:


=== Administrative notes === === Administrative notes ===
=== Discussion ===
====Opening Statement from TheRingess====
There has already been much discussion about this case on ]. I'm going to try to cover briefly those topics discussed there and add some new info. I am not engaged in ] (already covered). I am more than a little concerned that there is some ] going on here. This has already been brought up but not discussed.

Regading the ] article, I made one edit . This was not a deletion nor was it destructive, this was an edit designed to standardize the references in the article.

Regarding the ] article, I brought this to ] because it seemed like original research to me. I forgot to notify Sardaka about the AFD, but he did discover it in plenty of time to comment. Since Sardaka has brought up concerns regarding the AFD process, his concerns might be better addressed in a ] rather than a mediation case.

Regarding the ] article; a couple of editors have already reviewed my contributions to that article and concluded that I did not violate policy with my contributions. Since Sardaka described my contributions as "unnecessary deletions", I think we can best address his concerns by examining specific edits to that article that I made. In that way, we can all discuss them and revert any that we all deem as unnecessary.

I'm confident that we can clear up any misunderstandings through this mediation process.

] (]) 17:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:23, 13 June 2007

Misplaced Pages Mediation Cabal
Statusopen
Request dateUnknown
Requesting partyUnknown
Mediator(s)Addhoc
CommentOpening case

]]

Request Information

Who are the involved parties?

Sardaka, TheRingess

What is the involved article(s)?

Depression and natural therapies

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Shakti mantras

Gurudev Siddha Peeth

What's going on?

TheRingess is following me around, always turning up magically as soon as I write an article, frequently making unnecessary deletions, in one case before I had even finished writing the article.

What would you like to change about that?

I want someone to tell her to stop following me around, and to stop making unnecessary deletions.

Mediator response

Administrative notes

Discussion

Opening Statement from TheRingess

There has already been much discussion about this case on User Talk:Sardaka. I'm going to try to cover briefly those topics discussed there and add some new info. I am not engaged in stalking (already covered). I am more than a little concerned that there is some ownership going on here. This has already been brought up but not discussed.

Regading the Depression and natural therapies article, I made one edit . This was not a deletion nor was it destructive, this was an edit designed to standardize the references in the article.

Regarding the Shakti mantras article, I brought this to AFD because it seemed like original research to me. I forgot to notify Sardaka about the AFD, but he did discover it in plenty of time to comment. Since Sardaka has brought up concerns regarding the AFD process, his concerns might be better addressed in a deletion review rather than a mediation case.

Regarding the Gurudev Siddha Peeth article; a couple of editors have already reviewed my contributions to that article and concluded that I did not violate policy with my contributions. Since Sardaka described my contributions as "unnecessary deletions", I think we can best address his concerns by examining specific edits to that article that I made. In that way, we can all discuss them and revert any that we all deem as unnecessary.

I'm confident that we can clear up any misunderstandings through this mediation process.

TheRingess (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)