Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/John Wallace Rich

Case Filed On: 19:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedian filing request:

• John Wallace Rich (talk · contribs)

Other Wikipedians this pertains to:

• Ttiotsw (talk · contribs)

Wikipedia pages this pertains to:

• Talk:Killed in action (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

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: Ttiotsw (talk · contribs) violates Wikipedia policy, improperly cites sources for his own questionable puruposes, makes inappropriate entries, and does at least border on personal attacks/ad hominems and attacking the straw man.

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've contacted the WP:MEDCABAL after suggesting a four-day break in discussion, which Ttiotsw (talk · contribs) ignored and went ahead with what he wanted to do, not that I disagree with it at the moment. However, the anonymous user's posts have claimed he or she doesn't approve of the verified term "homicide" applying to KIA on the talk page, but he does not provide valid references or citations against it. His latest citation misquotes a WHO link. The WP:MEDCABAL has this page for the new mediation case on it. Ttiotsw (talk · contribs) has also talked about requesting a Third Opinion (WP:THIRD), and I don't know if the user has or not.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?

• Answer: I hope to correct Ttiotsw's misperception that he's on the high road when he incorrectly cites references, shows a lack of ethics in ignoring verifiable ones, and posts awkard and inappropriate claims on the talk page, besides using a casual style that makes it difficult to communicate. I would also like to see the nonprofit sector function well, an area I work in at the moment. I expect an opportunity to resolve the matter sooner rather than later so that I don't have to waste my time and not get important work done.

Discussion:

I suggest that Ttiotsw (talk · contribs) and you go to the Wikipedia:Mediation Committee for this disagreement. Cocoaguy_contribs^talk 03:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC) To add to my first comment i would like to say this beacuse i also think that a admin should get involved. Cocoaguy 従って _contribs^talk 03:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC) I now change my view to keep it in the AMA Cocoaguy 従って 14:04, 27 January 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: open

Advocate Status:

• Cocoaguy 従って 14:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)