| Revision as of 05:26, 24 May 2006 edit-Barry- (talk | contribs)1,472 edits →Discussion← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:00, 24 May 2006 edit undo-Barry- (talk | contribs)1,472 edits →Compromise offersNext edit → | ||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
| *Compromise is difficult with somene who obviously feels so strongly about his opinion. I request that the page be returned to the last version that was listed as a ], and consensus be achived on specific points before ], ], ] or anyone else involved continues. -] 22:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | *Compromise is difficult with somene who obviously feels so strongly about his opinion. I request that the page be returned to the last version that was listed as a ], and consensus be achived on specific points before ], ], ] or anyone else involved continues. -] 22:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :The current page is listed as a "good article" because when I delisted it, my delisting was reverted. The "good article" template is on the talk page, where I think it's supposed to be. The last version listed as a good article is the current version. | |||
| :I more than compromised on many issues raised here by allowing reversions and other changes. There's very little room left for compromise at this point. I want the revisions that I mention , to the Con subsection of the Opinions section, to all be undone, and until then, I want my custom POV template, which was reverted put back. Anything less than a full return of what I had added to the Con section isn't acceptable to me at this point, though I might not engage in a revert war over it if the POV template is added to the Con section. ] 07:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| === Comments by others === | === Comments by others === | ||
Revision as of 07:00, 24 May 2006
Mediation Case: 2006-05-23 Perl
Please observe Misplaced Pages:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Misplaced Pages talk:Mediation Cabal.
Request Information
- Request made by: RevRagnarok 17:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- Perl
- Who's involved?
- User:-Barry-, User:Revragnarok, User:Scarpia, User:Harmil
- What's going on?
- Claims of NPOV, most by User:-Barry-. -Barry- also claiming that Scarpia is a sock puppet for brian d foy.
- Small clarification: no assertion of sock-puppetry has been made to date, and I believe it was made above in error.
- The claim (which I belive is generally accepted by all concerned) is that User:Scarpia is in fact brian d foy, a well known Perl author and editor of external publications.
- User:-Barry- has further claimed that User:Scarpia has used his pseudonymity to make autobiographical edits in contradiction to guidelines. -Harmil 22:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Small clarification: no assertion of sock-puppetry has been made to date, and I believe it was made above in error.
- What would you like to change about that?
- Both sides make good points, but a lot of the con is FUD against any interpreted software language, along with seemingly bogus benchmarks.
- Specifically, the "Cons" sub-section of the "Opinion" section should be reduced back to its state prior to the argument. Language popularity (especially as measured by search engine results) is not actually a criticism of the language, and the fact that the current text is couched in weasel words makes it all the more inappropriate. -Harmil 03:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
- N/A
- Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
- Not at this time.
Mediator response
Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with {{Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence}} for misconduct and {{Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence3RR}} for 3RR violations. If you need
help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil.
Misplaced Pages:Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.
Summary of items presented Harmil 22:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- User:-Barry- began contributing to Perl in December, 2005. His edits were largely innocuous and reasonable.
- In March, 2006, his edit summaries started to become noticeably more combative , , but his edits were still largely reasonable.
- On April 29, 2006, he first mentions Python
- And then a series of edits attempted to push more and more Python-centric POV by listing it as an "alternative language" (something that we don't do on any other language page, AFAIK) , after that was reverted, he added in an external comparison link and later he added to rather questionable external links to anti-perl diatribes
- After that was reverted, the watershed edit summary came: I reverted this myself, openly referring to it as a troll. The edit summary in question:
- better Perlmonks description. Hey everyone, see my new Python 3 article! Python's better than Perl, you know.
- A number of problematic edits on the part of User:-Barry- were brought up on the talk page here: , ,
- An attempt to compromise on one particular edit was discussed here: as a means to resolve the reversions that he had made previously, immediately thereafter the compromise was wholly reverted with the excuse that User:Harmil's RFC for the page should expire before any compromise should be sought -Harmil 22:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- In an interesting move, User:-Barry- actually removed Perl from the list of "Good Articles" with the justification that there was POV and the article was not stable. It had been stable, of course, before he began injecting what several editors have agreed was in fact inaccurate or POV , , , , and so on.
- The point has been made that some editors have been hostile to User:-Barry- in a very uncivil way on his talk page and on the Perl talk page. For example:
In summary, this has been a two-sided discussion: User:-Barry- against the consensus of the other editors of Perl. -Harmil 22:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.
- Compromise is difficult with somene who obviously feels so strongly about his opinion. I request that the page be returned to the last version that was listed as a Good Article, and consensus be achived on specific points before User:Harmil, User:-Barry-, User:Scarpia or anyone else involved continues. -Harmil 22:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- The current page is listed as a "good article" because when I delisted it, my delisting was reverted. The "good article" template is on the talk page, where I think it's supposed to be. The last version listed as a good article is the current version.
- I more than compromised on many issues raised here by allowing reversions and other changes. There's very little room left for compromise at this point. I want the revisions that I mention here, to the Con subsection of the Opinions section, to all be undone, and until then, I want my custom POV template, which was reverted here put back. Anything less than a full return of what I had added to the Con section isn't acceptable to me at this point, though I might not engage in a revert war over it if the POV template is added to the Con section. -Barry- 07:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Comments by others
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Misplaced Pages is based on consensus.
This is related. Everything else has basically been said on Perl's talk page, edit summaries, etc. If anyone has any questions or takes special interest in a particular issue, and I'm made aware of it, maybe I'll comment. -Barry- 01:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
I went through some of the evidence, up to the fourth item ("And then a series of edits attempted to push more and more Python-centric POV...") Let's try to link to the relevant portion of the talk page when some disputed edit is mentioned. The relevant discussion in this case is here. I initiated the discussion after my edit. People disagreed with my edit and pointed me to Comparison of programming languages, which I said would decrease the need for my controversial edit if such an article existed. My response was "Thanks for the link. I began fixing it up. When I fix it a little more, I'll remove some of those templates and link to it." I improved that article greatly and added a link to it from Perl's article. I allowed the reversion of my original "popular alternatives" infobox and never put it back.
Please don't consider my failure to address other evidence as accepting that it's not misleading. There's a lot there and I didn't review it all. -Barry- 04:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Two points:
- Your change was reverted. That is why you went to the talk page, and then found another page on which to push the Python vs. Perl issues you felt were important.
- Sorry if you thought I was "pushing" anything. What I actually did, in this order, was:
- fill in the Comparison of programming languages page as it was intended to be filled in
- add popularity columns to the comparison chart based on the best information available, from TIOBE's site (though the search engine methodology is disputed)
- add comparisons of benchmarks between Perl and six other languages (not just Python) to the Perl article
- in response to complaints about benchmark accuracy, doubled the data, adding tests from an additional operating system, and added a link to a warning about the accuracy ( )
- after continued complaints, added a cautionary Sectfact template ( )
- in response to complaint about the Sectfact template, added more descriptive and cautionary custom-made template ( )
- improved Comparison of programming languages even more with new sections and links
- after a failed request-for-comments attempt, at which time I allowed the benchmarks to be reverted, I posted the benchmarks here ( diff showing initial addition to page ).
- Sorry if you thought I was "pushing" anything. What I actually did, in this order, was:
- Also note that I took the time to compile the benchmark data in a much more compact and easy to read form than was available from the source, and a link to the source wouldn't have been the same.