Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-02-28 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mediation Cabal
2007-02-28 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Article	Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Status	Closed
Requestor	Musmanno01
Parties	Musmanno01, Nschubach
Mediator(s)	Vassyana (talk · contribs)
Comment	Lack of participation; compromise seems acceptable

Contents 1 Mediation Case: 2007-02-28 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Mediator response 1.3 Compromise offers 1.4 Discussion

[edit] Mediation Case: 2007-02-28 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Musmano01 Musmanno01 14:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard:_Saga_of_Heroes

Who's involved?

... Musmanno01 and Nschubach

What's going on?

... Contrary to Wiki guildelines, Nschubach keeps reverting accurate information simply because he doesn't like it. My assessment of the situation is that he wants to use Wikipedia as a marketing site for Vanguard and scrub the article clean of any negative information. The information I added to the site is this:

While the game has been recognized as having a great deal of promise due, among other things, to the massive game world and various game play features described below, early release of the product has resulted in a retail product that many argue is still in beta (though neither the retail packaging nor price reflect this).

The above paragraph is entirely accurate. I can supply links to the fact that the game was released early (the developers have said as much themselves). I can also supply links to those who are arguing the product is essentially still in beta (as well as to developer comments that it still needs patching on par with a beta release). Nschubach doesn't appear to understand the philosophy behind Wikipedia and thinks he can remove information just because he doesn't like it, without regard to accuracy.

I am playing the game currently, though I'm not a mindless fanboy. As the game progresses and more fixed are put in place, I plan to update the information accordingly. No where in my two-sentence contribution do I slam the game, or offer rude or objectionable language. I'm merely stating a fact. The state of the Vanguard release has even prompted articles on gaming sites and blogs regarding whether this is a step in the wrong direction for the industry. There is a bit of controversy surrounding it. Nschubach doesn't want people who read Wikipedia about Vanguard to know any of this. He wants a sanitized pro-Vanguard marketing site, and he apparently thinks he owns it and no one else has the right to contribute without his approval. He's a perfect embodiment of one of the key reasons Wikipedia gets flak in some circles, and I'd like mediators to step in and point out that anyone is able to contribute accurate information to the article. That's the whole philosophy behind Wikipedia.

What would you like to change about that?

... See above.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

... In my view, the mediation should be open and not discreet, just like everything else that goes on at Wikipedia.

[edit] Mediator response

I am contacting both parties to see if the compromise below satisfies all parties. Vassyana 11:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

No one has responded regarding the compromise and it seems to be holding. Closing case. Vassyana 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

I have created a community concerns section and moved his concerns there. I haven't heard from anyone concerning this, so I assume that it's acceptable. Nschubach 05:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion