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

Case Filed On: 00:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Your problem:

The problem concerns an edit to the Bard College article. User 69.116.138.95 and others insist on adding a reference to a non-notable student who got an athletic award from an online publication the awardee was a contributor for. The edit has been reverted numerous times already but keeps getting added. It would appear this student is adding his own NN award to the article through IP addresses in the 69.x.x.x range. I have tried engaging the user through the article's talk page but he/she doesn't seem to be interested in notability/non-notability. Corto 00:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

It looks to me that you've been trying to assume good faith as much as possible, but at this point you should probably stop reverting the edits lest you violate 3RR. Hopefully other editors will be willing to step in to revert the changes as they come along. One thing to try is to add a notice to discuss all additions to the notable people sections on the article. Then, any addition that isn't discussed can be reverted freely until they are discussed. I would recommend placing messages on the talk pages of the users in question to invite them to discuss the subject on the article's talk page. If the content is added continually after the request for discussion is plainly evident, then there are ways to escalate the handling of the situation by getting admins involved, etc. For now, just be calm and go through the steps of dispute resolution. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 20:58, 18 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:

• Unassigned.