Requests for arbitration

Initiated by Xtremedood (talk) at 02:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Involved parties

• Xtremedood (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
• Capitals00 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log
  )
• Ghatus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

• [1] - Capitals00
• [2] - Ghatus

Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

• [3] - Survey in which the majority agree that Bangladesh should be included in the results section as a victor.
• [4] - Discussion which concluded the wording.
• [5], [6], examples of revisions by Capitals00 after consensus was reached.
• [7] - Request for mediation between disagreement between Capitals00 and I, which was declined due to Capitals00 not responding.
• [8] - Follow-up on Capitals00 not responding to mediation.
• [9] - Report of Capitals00 at the Edit-Warring noticeboard, where I was told to take this to arbitration by the deciding admin. Xtremedood (talk) 02:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Xtremedood

Consensus, way back in July 2015, was that Bangladesh should be included in the results section, see here [10]. Continued disputes surrounding the wording were solved in early December, 2015, over here [11]. Revisions, contrary to consensus and disruptive edits by Capitals00 began in mid-to-late December 2015, as seen here [12], with non-effective rationale for its revision. A third opinion, was requested by me, between the dispute between Capitals00 and I. However, for some reason, user Ghatus commented and the third opinion was not made (due to third opinions being reserved for disputes between 2 users). The response may be seen over here [13]. A suggestion that mediation should occur was made by the third opinion poster. I then requested mediation here [14], however, it was rejected due to Capitals00 not responding. I then reported Capitals00 to the edit-warring noticeboard, however it was declined, this time due to it not breaking the 3rr. However, a suggestion of arbitration was made over here [15]. I am now seeking arbitration, as to whether or not Bangladesh should be included in the results section of the article. Xtremedood (talk) 02:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Capitals00

Statement by Ghatus

Everyone is requested to visit the Talk Page of the mentioned article. The consensus is against Xtremedood by 4 to 2 and all the three sources are against Xtremedood. He has provided no

• Please explain why you didn't try
  WP:AE first? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 03:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Decline. Try
  WP:RFC. Gamaliel (talk) 22:16, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Decline
  WP:AE is down the hall and to the left ;) I think this is the second recent example of mixing up a case request with an AE request; maybe we need to improve the instructions. Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Decline per Gamaliel. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 01:05, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Decline conduct issues can be dealt with by making a request at
  RFC. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Decline AE is the appropriate place for this; I agree with Opabinia regalis that we probably need clearer instructions of how to ask for intervention in problems like this. DGG ( talk ) 06:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Decline should be at
  WP:AE. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Decline per above. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 13:26, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Decline also per above. Doug Weller talk 17:38, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Decline per Opabinia. Courcelles (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]