User:Amgine/Maureen's RfC
In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 09:49, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 02:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC).
- (jguk | talk | contributions)
| The RFC is CLOSED. Please do not edit, post comments, or sign sections. |
Statement of the dispute
[edit]I will try to be concise. I allege that jguk has disrupted the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style to make a point. He tries to change, or does change, the style guide without consensus, and without the discussion warranted, to be what he calls "neutral".
The details I list are incomplete but indicative.
Description
[edit]Jguk has said repeatedly that he believes the style guide should use "neutral" language, or similar statements. In other words, he professes that it ought not favor either British or American English, for instance. He has been asked more than once discuss this specifically, but he has not done so.
If he does not "win" on a given point at a given time, he does not accept that.
He has tried to make substantive changes during trims.
He makes substantive changes without discussion, as is advised in the style guide and for which he has reverted another user. Since October 17, 2004, he has tried to change two elments in particular, concerning serial commas and "U.S."
He later held a poll on these elements, which was preceded by no discussion of these issues. It was biased by stating his rationale prominently and any rationale against was buried in voters' comments. He failed to gain a majority. A few people told him essentially to let it go. He changed the style guide regardless.
People suggested improvements to his changes. I asked whether anyone but jguk objected. After 24 hours, no one had. I implemented the suggested improvements. jguk changed them again.
Despite his avowed preference for language "neutrality": He changed "serial comma" to "Oxford comma", he changed "period" to "full stop (period)" or a similar construction, and he makes no mention of the style guide's preference of the British style for quotation marks.
He wrote in an edit summary, "adding more US references isn't going to go down well at the moment." On the talk page, he wrote, "it doesn't seem like a good time to add even more US-explicit references to the Manual."
He takes references out of the style guide. He removed attribution from a quote.
There is now 98 kb of discussion related to his recent changes.
I should acknowledge that jguk recently wrote to me on my talk page to work toward a more constructive dialogue between us. But it is too little and too late. He did not reply to my response to him.
{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries}
Evidence of disputed behavior
[edit](provide diffs and links)
- His first style guide changes
- Jguk persists, although he failed to gain a majority.
- Removing attribution from quote
- Removing references and showing that he knows there is no consensus for change
- Showing that he knows there is no consensus for change concerning "U.S."
- Making a change he knows is disputed, without discussing it
- Removing U.S. reference source
- Changes made without consensus:
Applicable policies
[edit]{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
[edit](provide diffs and links)
- Initial attempt
- Request to withdraw poll and discuss issues of "U.S." and serial commas
- Objection to poll
- Request to discuss "neutrality" issue
- Poll results: After no majority for change, consensus is to maintain status quo.
- Asked why he won't discuss neutrality issue.
- List style guide discussion at RfC
- Requesting wider input to style guide discussion
- Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (jguk's changes)
- Most recent attempt; received no reply.
Users certifying the basis for this dispute
[edit](sign with ~~~~)
- Maurreen 09:49, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Other users who endorse this summary
[edit](sign with ~~~~)
- Rhobite 16:16, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC) No consensus to change MoS. Side note, it's a little annoying for jguk to complain about the term "Britainian" while himself using the silly term "USian".
- Amgine 19:01, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC) Removed references after consensus to keep same.
- Factitious 09:18, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC) As I recall, after the proposals failed, he claimed that the results showed that the current policy lacked consenses, and therefore needed to be changed.
These comments have been copied to the talk page on jguk's style guide changes. Maurreen 18:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Response
[edit]This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.
{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries}
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Outside view
[edit]This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.
{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries}
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Discussion
[edit]All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.