Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Robert Prechter

message: :I attempted unofficial mediation at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/Robert Prechter but this has apparently failed.  I tried to comment about the process and conduct of both User:Rgfolsom and User:Smallbones at Talk:Robert Prechter where the substance of my attempts at mediation can be seen.  I have no interest in sponsoring one case or the other, but I found the conduct of both parties to be disruptive.
:Smallbones was insistent on making his posts which sharply diverged from Rgfolsom's views.  Rgfolsom aggressively and repeatedly removed anything that didn't meet his approval, as if he "owned" the article and ignoring many WP guidelines despite insisting vehemently that he compliant.  Smallbones continued either to revert or to create new versions, none of which met with Rgfolsom's approval and triggered more nuclear responses.
:Rgfolsom however has a material WP:COI since he is an employee of Robert Prechter.  He has serially failed to address this issue (which in my opinion makes him ineligible to contribute to this article) preferring to continue to war very aggressively and to attack Smallbones personally; often these attacks were venomous and nasty.  Of the few editors contributing to this article, most were aligned around Smallbones' view; none that I know of took Rgfolsom's side.  However the apparent nastiness of the anger and energy that Rgfolsom invested in asserting control over the argument saw other editors fade away; Smallbones continued to make his case and this led to escalation of the edit war.
:Lastly, it seem that Rgfolsom presumes that his understanding of WP rules has "absolute status" and that any divergent view must be ignore, attacked or silenced.  However, he complains about the same behavior in others.  This "asymmetry" is difficult to deal with as he rejects any attempt to discuss his tactics as being "discussing the editor and not the subject".  My early attempts to do so were met with hostility, but only after I cited rules & guidlines from WP did this hostility reduce.  I did not achieve successful resolution of discussing either eligibility under COI rules or behavior.
:Regardless of the COI, I feel that both parties have violated many WP rules and guidelines and if forced to express a view I would say that Rgfolsom is the more culpable.  I do not suggest that Smallbones is unimpeachable.
:Please note, I do not endorse either view, but the direction of the conflict is clear.  This my considered opinion. CanaryInACoalmine 09:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have updated my user page to explain that my sole interest is to mediate.  I have no preference for which way arbitration goes, I just seek resolution.  CanaryInACoalmine 17:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Dionyseus, Punanimal is known to me but we are not the same person.  I will also confirm that I used to edit the Socionomics article, when I was very unsophisticated in my understanding of Wikipedia.  I have reflected much on this over the last few months, and have realised that WP is a valuable asset to humanity and that, probably, I suffer from the objectivity/subjectivity problem.  I'm not sure I'd make a good editor for this issue, but mediation is something I feel capable of.  This is why I have adopted a stance of "mediation only".  Perhaps I should have pre-declared this, in the interests of full disclosure?  If you feel that I am should therefore also be a subject of the arbitration places, then please feel free to pronounce your verdict.  CanaryInACoalmine 19:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I would also like to note that I found my attempt at mediation very difficult, and will be happy no longer to be involved.  It's been a learning experience, in many respects.  I think my ambitions to be a general mediator will be short-lived and I intend to cease contributing to Wikipedia completely.  I'll use my energies elsewhere.  CanaryInACoalmine 10:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statement by [[User:CanaryInACoalmine|CanaryInACoalmine]] 

message: :Dionyseus, Punanimal is known to me but we are not the same person.  I will also confirm that I used to edit the Socionomics article, when I was very unsophisticated in my understanding of Wikipedia.  I have reflected much on this over the last few months, and have realised that WP is a valuable asset to humanity and that, probably, I suffer from the objectivity/subjectivity problem.  I'm not sure I'd make a good editor for this issue, but mediation is something I feel capable of.  This is why I have adopted a stance of "mediation only".  Perhaps I should have pre-declared this, in the interests of full disclosure?  If you feel that I am should therefore also be a subject of the arbitration places, then please feel free to pronounce your verdict.  CanaryInACoalmine 19:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply to statement by [[User:Dionyseus|Dionyseus]] 

message: :I would also like to note that I found my attempt at mediation very difficult, and will be happy no longer to be involved.  It's been a learning experience, in many respects.  I think my ambitions to be a general mediator will be short-lived and I intend to cease contributing to Wikipedia completely.  I'll use my energies elsewhere.  CanaryInACoalmine 10:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further thoughts 

message: I noticed that an anon edited User:CanaryInACoalmine's statement.    I was about to revert it, but then I looked at the anon's contribution history and it revealed that the anon has an interest in the Socionomics article just like User:CanaryInACoalmine does.  Further investigation revealed that the anon had edited User:Punanimal's userpage.    User:Punanimal allowed for the edit to remain,  this suggests that the anon and User:Punanimal is the same person.  Why is this relevant?  It is relevant because a look into User:Punanimal's contribution history reveals that the user has an interest in the Socionomics and Robert Prechter articles, just like User:CanaryInACoalmine does.  What made me more certain that these three users are the same person is that just minutes after the anon edited User:CanaryInACoalmine's statement, User:CanaryInACoalmine apparently logged in and modified the statement, using the same edit summary that the anon used, and modifying the signature replacing the anon ip with his own.    Dionyseus 17:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The links  and  from User:Dionyseus's statement above do not work.  67.117.130.181 02:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Statement by uninvolved party, [[User:Dionyseus]]