Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Comment by Addhoc
Essentially, the dispute is about Mr. Knodel edit warring to reinstate his website, The Sly Traveller, to the External links section of Sex tourism. I would suggest the remainder of the dispute is fairly trivial and possibly a 'smoke screen' for his attempts to reintroduce this link. Addhoc 14:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comment by Daniel E. Knodel, M.A.
I just want to say thank you for accepting our request for arbitration. This is my first time doing this, so please fill me in if I overlook anything during your review. I'm going to add more detail to the evidence page, in order to explain further why I filed for your intervention. Please let me say that it will be necessary for me to present other editors in a bad light. But, my ultimate hope is that in the end you will offer a solution that allows all editors to work together without conflict. I feel that editors are already on good terms at this point, and that your decision will be beneficial in resolving disagreements.
Daniel E. Knodel, M.A. 03:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Is this meatpuppetry? Is this allowed?
Could we have a ruling on this?
The following message on User talk:KyndFellow is posted[1] by his Advocate:
Yes, you are banned from Sex tourism and its talk page. If you do it, you may be reverted and blocked... I think you can still collaborate with Devalover to improve the article, as long as you don't edit the article or its talk page. Fred-Chess 13:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I think this is:
- WP:MEAT#Advertising and soliciting meatpuppets to evade the ban,
- against the spirit of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism#Puppets,
- but not actually illegal by the letter of the ruling.
Am I correct? If something happens, I don't mind taking it to WP:AE, but before it gets to that stage, we could use some clarity on this.
Nothing against Devalover's edits in general, but Devalover (talk • contribs) has a recent history of edits consistent with a pattern of tractability in response to pressure from KyndFellow. Since Devalover is by all the evidence I have an honest and thoughtful editor, I wouldn't want a dodgy arrangment with KyndFellow to compromise Devalover's edits.
Fred-Chess has also posted[2] the following, referring to Mr. Knodel's website, The Sly Traveller:
If the website is really usable for readers of the site, you can be certain that a link there will be added by someone else.
I'm sure Fred-Chess's intentions are good, but taken together these two suggestions could be misinterpreted as license to resume editing the page by proxy. / edgarde 15:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
