Requests for arbitration

Initiated by exoplanetaryscience (talk) at 19:34, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Involved parties

• Exoplanetaryscience (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), filing party
• Lorent33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Alex of Canada (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

• Lorent33
• Alex of Canada

Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

• After the first time my edit was reverted, I reverted 186.122.185.147's revert with an explanation of the rationale for it in the page history (theirs did mention reasoning against it but with no mention of the top section's description of "other notable earthquakes" being included. Later, Lorent33 reverted it, giving the exact same reasoning as previous with no addressing of my comment, and upon me reverting that once more and restating my rationale, it was once again reverted by them, this time with no comment.
• I then sent a message to their talk page (I had not done this earlier as they had not responded to any other messages on their talk page) asking to discuss the situation. So far, it has been nearly 15 hours and they have not responded, but have made another edit to the same earthquakes list 1 hour ago, indicating that they would have seen it.

Statement by Exoplanetaryscience

While the leading header for "list of earthquakes in x year" says "Only earthquakes of magnitude 6 or above are included, unless they result in damage and/or casualties, or are notable for some other reason", the final has not been invoked by anyone except me since in October 2017, and even then was a mere 0.1 magnitudes below satisfying the first constraint. I invoked it for the intraplate earthquake near Palmyra Atoll on 2018/01/31, but this might have been ignored simply because I added it on October 30, 9 months after the event itself. We need to have some sort of discussion as to refining exactly what qualities make a non-deadly/very large earthquake notable, and numerous times the editors of the articles have shown that they are not interested in having discussion (see Lorent33's edit removing a listing I had made with no explanation or mentioning of it being removed, not elaborating until five days later, and Alex of Canada's edit which was only explained after two unexplained reverts and a message I left on his talk page (which he responded to with "don't message me")) Communication is a critical part of giving the best, most informative experience in a given article, and with some of the most dedicated editors on an article series which gets Over 1000 daily views on average not being particularly open for discussion, it makes any sort of improvement (or even proposal for improvement) very difficult.

PS My apologies, it seems there was some issue in the formatting of this when I posted it, but I'm not familiar enough with the proper format to fix it.

Is there some lesser form of dispute arbitration to take first? It seems there's no step between talking on someone's talk page and bringing it to here. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will retract it. Apologies for the inconvenience. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 19:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Lorent33

Statement by Alex of Canada

I'm not sure exactly what is wanted of me here. Alex of Canada (talk) 23:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Beeblebrox

This is a grossly premature request, diffs provided do not in any way show previous attempts at lesser forms of dispute resolution, other parties were not notified, dispute is only a day old and extremely minor, suggest filing party simply withdraw it now as there is a 0% chance this will be taken up by the committee.

•  Clerk note: The named parties have now been notified. Bradv🍁 20:05, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
•  Clerk note: The filer has announced their intention to withdraw this case request. Per the arbitration procedures, this posting will be removed after 24 hours. Bradv🍁 00:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of "otherwise notable" earthquakes on List of earthquakes in xxxx year: Arbitrators' opinion on hearing this matter <0/1/0>

Vote key: (Accept/decline/recuse)

• Decline as premature, as no dispute resolution steps beyond a message on a user talk page have been tried. Exoplanetaryscience, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration#Alternatives to arbitration for guidance. I would recommend reading that page, as well as the instructions in the red box on this page, since this seems to be your first time here. Please also notify the users you've named in your request (post {{subst:arbcom notice|Inclusion of "otherwise notable" earthquakes on List of earthquakes in xxxx year}} on their user talk pages, and post links to the diffs of this notification in the "Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request" section above), and please only respond to other commenters on this page within your own section. GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• This can be removed as exoplanetaryscience has indicated above that he does not wish to proceed. SilkTork (talk) 22:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]