Allninemice

Hi! Asking For Help Regarding Disputed Edit

Hi, it's me again! I need some help or advice on an edit of mine that was reverted, and as a beginner, I still don't know who or how to ask for help.

On the article JianHao Tan, I had changed the format of his name in the first mention and infobox to 'Tan Jian Hao', to follow Chinese naming conventions that is followed in Chinese speaking countries where the family name comes before the given name (Tan is of the top 3 most common family names in Singapore). Wikipedia follows this convention, such as in Lee Kuan Yew and Mao Zedong.

Prior to making this edit, I consulted the talk page to make sure that I had the approval of other editors before I proceeded. I got one reply stating the users lack of preference, and got no other objection from other editors. I then made the edit.

However, very shortly after I made the edit, it was reverted. The editor who reverted it pointed out the reason being that he was following wp:commonname, claiming that it states that first mentions and infoboxes in Wikipedia typically follow the page topic. I replied that the very examples given in wp:commonname show clearly that first mentions of an individual's name in the article is their full formal name, and not their common name, though I agreed that infoboxes don't necessarily do so. The examples that wp:commonname gave were Bill Clinton and Bono, who are referred to as William Jefferson Clinton and Paul David Hewson respectively in their first mention.

May I ask you what your opinions are on this issue, and what the rules or guidelines are behind disputed edits? Does the editor that reverted my edit have all the right to revert any of my edits, and do I not get a chance to reinstate my edit? What happens if I simply reinstate my edit without his approval? I'm not even sure if I'm breaking a rule or formality by asking another user for help regarding a dispute, so I'm definitely not asking that you jump in, but I would like to learn how such situations are meant to be handled. Any advice you could give regarding this situation would be really appreciated.

Thanks! - Sentimex (talk) 21:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sentimex, regarding commonname, it looks to me like the infobox usually follows the article title, but the first mention in the lead is the formal name.
The other editor has the right to revert your edits and you will need to reach consensus to reinstate them; if you reinstate your edits without discussion it can be seen as edit warring (see also wp:BRD).
You're totally fine asking me for help, and I don't blame you as the policy around consensus can be pretty confusing sometimes. I hope this is what you're looking for, and let me know if you need any more help. ~ANM🐁 T·C 04:23, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Yup. As mentioned, I concede that info boxes don't necessarily state the person's formally given name, and as per the given examples, actually state their common name. I also had the feeling that simply reinstating my edit probably constituted some poor ethic or breach of protocol, and I only discovered the term 'edit war' after I wrote to you.

The conflict has since been resolved, with the other user agreeing to my proposition as I had stated: to change the first mention but not the infobox. Thank you for your reply once again! As a beginner, it's hard to find answers to even simple things like this, haha!

I am curious to know, however, if the other user hadn't been as polite as he is, and let's say it was another user who was much less cooperative, then how would such a dispute be resolved, especially if the other user is the one with the rollback rights and an extremely experienced Wikipedian? - Sentimex (talk) 08:05, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

​If you can't reach a consensus through talk page discussion, you would move on to the next steps in the dispute resolution process, probably third opinion or the dispute resolution noticeboard in the scenario you gave.
Rollback and experience aren't a license to edit war but are sometimes used as one, in which case an administrator will usually need to step in and stop the edit war, either by protecting the page or blocking the user(s) temporarily. User rights and edit count don't give a user any more say in a content dispute but some users will try to use them in that way, in which case going to third opinion and having an uninvolved editor weigh in is probably your best bet. ~ANM🐁 T·C 16:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch! The links you provided would really come in handy should I ever encounter this issue! I shall refer to them again should I ever need to. Again, thank you so much for sharing! - Sentimex (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

david rodriquez edits - nothing i said is untrue

https://rumble.com/voitq1-juan-o-savin-with-david-nino-rodriguez..html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8080:2400:E9:FD14:BEA2:7639:E61E (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)