Wikipedia talk:AMA Requests for Assistance

Cleanup[edit]

Neither requests or the requests talk have been cleaned up, organized, and/or archived in quite some time, I'm undertaking this task.

All requests before November that were in the new requests category have been moved the Archive 4 with a note for people to file a new request if they still wanted a response to their unanswered request. Everything after November will be reorganized into what has been responded to and what has not. Lots o'fun. --Wgfinley 04:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Archives[edit]

For older AMA Requests discussion see Archives: 1

refactored chatter[edit]

This user is in desperate need of advocate assistance with respect to framing her points in a way that will not be ignored. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then feel free to join the AMA and assist. If no one is interested in taking the case and you are, that would be great.Gator (talk) 18:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot in good concience advocate for people that are wrong. As such, I am not an appropriate person to join this project, regardless of my superior ability to help people who are right. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe that's why no one else is taking the case then. Still, you are free to join. Love to have yah.Gator (talk) 18:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user is right but horribly, horribly misguided. I will not join an institution that supports users that are wrong. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then, I'm horribly misguided. I admit it. You win.Gator (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The misguided user I am refering to is Elonka, not you. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were in favor of "helping new users help the encyclopedia", not being an elitist. If you can't bring yourself to do that, you shouldn't be here. Besides, why would you join an organization that you want to eliminate? Aside from entryism, that is? - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 19:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not deny entryism. I explicity think that the current version of AMA is badly flawed, and said as much in my coordinator platform. If you think that my goal here is to "help new users" do anything, you are sorely misguided. My goal here is to make a reliable Encyclopedia. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hipocrite, that's the second time (to my knowledge) that you've used that term, "misguided", which can be construed as a personal attack. As I mentioned on your userpage, I would advise you to please read the policies on Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Civility. When offering criticism, it is better to attack concepts, not the people who have stated them. If your desire is to make a good Encyclopedia (a desire that I share), then I would recommend working to foster an atmosphere of cooperation and civility, which will make a more productive environment for everyone. Elonka 06:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I'm unclear where to put this, or whether the AMA covers this kind of thing. I would like some help in speeding up my Arbitration case here. It's gone on for over 2 and a half months. I think that's too long. The glacial pace hasn't been helped by the recent ArbCom elections. It's actually seems to be going backwards in time, since it was at "Motion to close" stage a week ago, and is now back to "Voting". All I'm asking for is help in persuading the ArbCom to come to some kind of decision. - Xed 13:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how to help you, as there is no oversight of the ArbCom that I know of (aside from User:Jimmy Wales). But I'd say that's something someone else here might help with, so go ahead and post a formal request. Of course, the AMA is going through an election process right now too :) - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 18:03, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unintelligible requests for assistance[edit]

Is there any standard answer as to what advocates should be about requests for assistance that are confused or incomprehensible, and often unsigned?

One of the problems with the Advocate concept is that, in my opinion, there are three levels of knowledge in editors. There are editors who know how Wikipedia works and can write, and can be their own advocate. There are editors who can use help in presenting a case. They are also editors who need help but cannot or do not know how to cooperate. Unfortunately, I think that Wikipedia is starting to get a lot of antisocial editors who are departing the Usenet, as it becomes even too antisocial for them. The intermediate editors, who could use help, usually, although not always, also have the sense to be polite, and so seldom get into disputes.

What should we do about requests for assistance that are bizarre? Robert McClenon 02:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it depends on what you mean by bizarre. If the user is asking for something left-field, then advise them that WP standards isn't likely to provide it. If the user isn't being clear about their problem, then follow the links to the issue and figure out what's going on. If the user left no links, try contacting them on their talk page for more info. That's what I've done in the past. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 15:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am really referring to two requests that are currently on the requests for assistance page. They are both long. I don't understand either of them. I have decided to ignore them, which I assume is always an option. Neither of them is properly signed. One of them appears to be expressing a conspiracy theory. The other author wants help with something, but I am not sure whether it is a Wikipedia article at all. Robert McClenon 00:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that one point is that advocates have to understand that some requesters are reasonable and some are unreasonable, and that one must use some judgment in deciding whether to take a case at all. If the requester is a troll, then it is better not to make contact at all. If the requester is a newbie, that is who we are trying to help. Flamers are a special problem, because one does now know at first whether they simply came from Usenet and have not learned to be civil, or whether they are bullies. Robert McClenon 00:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]