Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/May 2007/monkeyzpop 2007/

Case Filed On: 21:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Your problem:

An intense dispute has been going on between myself and chunda18 over aspects of the John Wayne page. Chunda18 has violent opposition to allowing anything that shows Wayne in a positive (or even less negative) light to remain on the page. In the Talk page, he has referred to Wayne as "racist John KKK Wayne," which is neither here nor there but it exemplifies his hatred of the subject. I have been a student of the subject for many years and have tried to place extremely well-cited material into the article, but chunda18 keeps removing anything that doesn't sufficiently bash Wayne, particularly in the areas of Wayne's military service controversy and his height(!).

A similar dispute arose on the James Stewart (actor) page, as chunda18 seems to have a personal mandate to publicly expose popular movie stars for their "failings" (mostly political), usually involving making sure that any star with a conservative political viewpoint is seen as a vicious racist or worse. Despite my own liberal viewpoint, he has accused me of being a right-wing flunkie for racists. I don't care what he thinks of me -- he's way off base and sort of silly in this regard -- but it seems to me flogging a particular political opposition to a subject is non-encyclopedic and contrary to Wikipedia standards.

I confess that as a relatively new Wikipedia editor, I have engaged in activities in response to this dispute which did not follow Wikipedia guidelines, including repeated reverting of material and harsh words in the Talk section. I have apologized to chunda18 for my harshness, though it seems not to have diminished his. I am not concerned particularly with being called names. My intention is to have accurate and objective, encyclopedic material in this and other articles to which I contribute. Since realizing that my methods have been both ineffective and in some cases counter to Wikipedia protocol, I would like to have a meaningful resolution to the dispute. However, chunda18 seems so extremely driven by political or personal animosity toward the subject, it is my opinion that he is incapable of compromise in this matter. Admittedly, Wayne is a hot-button subject for some people, which is why a clear-headed objective article which shines light on both positive and negative aspects of the subject is necessary. Much of what I have submitted is seen by many of Wayne's more loyal fans as too negative, while that same material is excoriated by chunda18 as not negative enough. It is for that reason that I have attempted to thoroughly cite my submissions. But chunda18 seems determined to remove any material, cited or not, that doesn't show Wayne in a (very) bad light. If he were not so emotionally tied to proving Wayne some sort of monster (and a short one, at that), perhaps compromise would be effective. I do not believe he has any willingness to compromise, though, and so I turn to advocacy as a possible solution.Monkeyzpop 21:39, 13 May 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.