Wikipedia

Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/laurenjf

< Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance | Requests

Case Filed On: 14:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedian filing request:

Other Wikipedians this pertains to:

Wikipedia pages this pertains to:

Questions:

edit

Have you read the AMA FAQ?

  • Answer: Yes.

How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)

  • Answer: Dozens of External Links entered on Wikipedia in economics topics and related categories have been summarily removed since last summer. Yesterday, after learning of the widespread removal, I tried re-entering a few links from a website for which I've been Editor for almost 10 years, which were among those that have been removed. They were removed again since last night. The person who removed them lists himself as Eagle101. He classified the Econlib entries as spam. Econlib (The Library of Economics and Liberty) is not spam. Econlib.org has been publishing online freely accessible classic works and articles by Nobel Prize winners in economics since 1999. We are as renowned and respected as Gutenberg and Bartleby. Our encyclopedias, books, and articles are top-rated on Google for that very reason. We are baffled by our being systematically removed from Wikipedia's External Links sections.

What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.

I have also reinstated my old version of IRC to try looking for Eagle101 on IRC because he listed himself on Wikipedia's Talk pages as being available at #wikipedia-spam--but I couldn't find him on IRC. Someone named David Bryant contacted us at Econlib privately this morning by email, to which I responded promptly. I do not know if David Bryant is in any way related to Eagle101.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?

  • Answer: Help sorting through how to figure out why all of Econlib's links are being systematically deleted from Wikipedia. Econlib is listed at Wikipedia under the primary listing of the Library of Economics and Liberty:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Econlib Yesterday I also added an entry for the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (free online for over 5 years): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concise_encyclopedia_of_economics Even the direct link to the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics was deleted from the External Links section of this new Wikipedia entry! This book, republished online in full, is the number one ranked encyclopedia of economics on Google and is used worldwide in print and online for over 10 years now! Why do you think we are spam?! http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=economics+encyclopedia&btnG=Search


Summary:

edit

Discussion:

edit

Added notes to both User Talk:laurenjf and User Talk:Eagle 101 suggesting holding a discussion and attempt to resolve the dispute amicably. Perhaps this may be all that's needed. --Shirahadasha 01:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few issues here need clarification. First of all, what is Daniel Bryant's involvement in this? Secondly, what link, specifically, was removed? What was the edit summary used for these removals? Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 02:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Followup:

edit

When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?

  • Answer: I look forward to finding it useful!

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

edit

Case Status: open


Advocate Status:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance/Requests/January_2007/laurenjf&oldid=1137459854"