Editing Eurovision Wiki:Dispute resolution noticeboard

{{Short description|Informal venue for resolving content disputes}}
{{Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Header}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Archivemainpage|Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 270
|minthreadsleft = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(72h)
|archive = Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{clear|left}}

__TOC__
{{clear}}

=Current disputes=

== Zack Polanski ==

{{DR case status|closed}}
{{DRN archive top|Closed due to no notice to other editors.  It has been 48 hours since a note was posted saying that the filing editor was required to notify the other editors, but there has been no such notice.  Resume discussion at the article talk page.  If discussion is lengthy and inconclusive, a new request can be filed here, and the other editors must be notified.  [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 11:50, 8 March 2026 (UTC)}}
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 14:04, 3 April 2026 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1775225084}}<!-- REMEMBER TO REMOVE THE PREVIOUS COMMENT WHEN CLOSING THIS THREAD! -->
{{drn filing editor|Greenpark79|14:04, 6 March 2026 (UTC)}}

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Have you discussed this on a talk page?'''</span>

Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Location of dispute'''</span>
* {{pagelinks|Zack Polanski}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Users involved'''</span>
* {{User|Greenpark79}} 
* {{User|Bejakyo}} 
* {{User|Pretzel Quetzal}} 
* {{User|GearsDatapack}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Dispute overview'''</span>

I want to add an Zack Polanski's appearance on the podcast show the Rest is Politics and the media coverage which followed. Everytime I do it's completey deleted or removed. It was first as it was undue weight, I then provided external coverage to the appearance. It was then removed for being too detailed included the coverage in response to the appearance. 

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How have you tried to resolve this dispute before coming here?'''</span>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zack_Polanski

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How do you think we can help resolve the dispute?'''</span>

I would like there to be a mediation about the edit and consensus reached. In addition to the edit remaining on the article page without it being removed constantly. I don't wish to do further work in terms of providing citations.

==== Summary of dispute by Greenpark79; Bejakyo; Pretzel Quetzal; GearsDatapack ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

=== Zack Polanski discussion ===
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.</div>
*'''Volunteer Note''' - The filing editor has not notified the other editors on their user talk pages.  Notice on the user talk page is required with any noticeboard filings.  [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 17:33, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
{{DRN archive bottom}}

== John Gielgud ==

{{DR case status|closed}}
{{drn filing editor|Spectritus|11:03, 18 March 2026 (UTC)}}
{{DRN archive top|Closed [[without prejudice]] as not discussed recently on the article talk page.  DRN is available for resolving disputes among editors who have discussed a topic at length inconclusively on the article talk page recently, maybe within the past month.  Some of the editors appear to be listed because they took part in discussion in 2024.  This appears to be an effort to reopen discussion that was discussed and closed in 2024, which is reasonable because [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]].  However, that discussion should resume on the article talk page before coming here.  Resume discussion on the article talk page.  If that discussion is lengthy and inconclusive, a new request can be made here.  [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 18:16, 18 March 2026 (UTC)}}

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Have you discussed this on a talk page?'''</span>

Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Location of dispute'''</span>
* {{pagelinks|John Gielgud}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Users involved'''</span>
* {{User|Spectritus}}
* {{User|SchroCat}}
* {{User|Halbared}}
* {{User|Tim riley}}
* {{User|Cinemaniac86}}
* {{User|The One I Left}}
* {{User|Omnis Scientia}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Dispute overview'''</span>

Apparently, a few years ago, there was a consensus to not add an infobox. In 2024, this discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AJohn_Gielgud%2FArchive_1#Infobox_%28yes%2C_yet_again%29, seems to show that the consensus changed but for some reason nothing has happened since.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How have you tried to resolve this dispute before coming here?'''</span>

[[Talk:John_Gielgud/Archive_1]]
[[Talk:John_Gielgud]]

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How do you think we can help resolve the dispute?'''</span>

I personally think that the fact such a thing is debated is ridiculous. I hope that a definitive solution can be found here.

==== Summary of dispute by ShroCat ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>
sorry, but you haven't discussed it. You asked a question a little earlier today that no-one has answered. That's not a discussion. The nub is that you want an IB on the page, but you haven't said so in the discussion and you haven't outlined the reasons why.{{pb}}I have a sinking feeling when reading "{{tq|the fact such a thing is debated is ridiculous}}", as it hardly shows a mind that is open to the viewpoints of others - not that you have so far asked any one '''why''' they may have an issue. DR is supposed to be for when something has already been discussed: why has this step been missed out entirely? - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 15:17, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
@[[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] It was discussed multiple times long before my involvement. And the latest discussion (from 2023–2024) seems to show that consensus changed. And I am open to other people's views. I was just giving my opinion on the matter. [[User:Spectritus|Spectritus]] ([[User talk:Spectritus|talk]]) 15:22, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
:Except you haven't given an opinion. You have written "{{tq|Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AJohn_Gielgud%2FArchive_1#Infobox_%28yes%2C_yet_again%29 the consensus seems to have changed but for some reason nothing happened since}}". That's all. As I've said above, you haven't said what you want '''or why'''. Relying on a dead thread from a few years that was never actioned isn't enough. You need to say what you want and why - talk pages are for discussions, and you haven't given anyone anything tangible to discuss. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 15:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

==== Summary of dispute by Halbared ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by Tim riley ====
The Wikipedia policy at [[MOS:INFOBOXUSE]] is that IBs are neither required nor prohibited. Whether to include one and which parameters to use is decided by consensus, and there has so far, despite the heavy pressure from IB absolutists, been no such consensus. I think those contributing to the discussion should declare honestly whether they think that every article should have one. For my own part I use IBs where helpful – I have written one article with ''five'' IBs in my time – but they are not helpful to the reader in such articles as this. '''<span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">[[User:Tim riley|<span style="color:# 660066">Tim riley</span>]][[User talk:Tim riley|<span style="color:#848484"> talk</span>]]</span>''' 17:42, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
@[[User:Tim riley|Tim riley]] In this article, an infobox would be helpful to easily where he was born and died, his years active, his partner (s), etc. [[User:Spectritus|Spectritus]] ([[User talk:Spectritus|talk]]) 18:12, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
==== Summary of dispute by Cinemaniac86 ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by The One I Left ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

==== Summary of dispute by Omnis Scentia ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>

=== John Gielgud discussion ===
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.</div>
{{DRN archive bottom}}

== Graham Platner ==

{{DR case status}}
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 17:50, 15 April 2026 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1776275446}}<!-- REMEMBER TO REMOVE THE PREVIOUS COMMENT WHEN CLOSING THIS THREAD! -->
{{drn filing editor|EasternShah|17:50, 18 March 2026 (UTC)}}

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Have you discussed this on a talk page?'''</span>

Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''Location of dispute'''</span>
* {{pagelinks|Graham Platner}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Users involved'''</span>
* {{User|EasternShah}}
* {{User|GorillaWarfare}}
* {{User|Generalrelative}}
<span style="font-size:110%">'''Dispute overview'''</span>

EasternShah added [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graham_Platner&diff=prev&oldid=1344025964 verifiable information] about Platner's service in Iraq using a source that was already in the article. EasternShah was reverted and told to find consensus. Their attempts to find consensus have been fruitless, so they think a wider participation would be helpful.

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How have you tried to resolve this dispute before coming here?'''</span>

[[Talk:Graham Platner#Abu Ghraib]]

<span style="font-size:110%">'''How do you think we can help resolve the dispute?'''</span>

Please opine on whether the Abu Ghraib details should be included, and if so, in what form.

==== Summary of dispute by GorillaWarfare ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>
Platner's service in Iraq is already described in his biographical article; EasternShah has been pushing to include Platner's presence at the [[Abu Ghraib prison]] specifically. EasternShah's [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_Platner&diff=prev&oldid=1344038713 first stated reason] to include it was that {{tq|Abu Ghraib was quite a significant location in the Iraq War}}. I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_Platner&diff=1344039899&oldid=1344038713 pointed out] that {{tq|"Abu Ghraib was quite a significant location in the Iraq War" ''because'' of the human rights abuses. If Platner was uninvolved in them, why is his presence there noteworthy?}} They then [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_Platner&diff=prev&oldid=1344041317 argued] it should be included because:
{{tqb|I think it should be included because Abu Ghraib was a place were horrible atrocities took place, and many people do bad things because of peer pressure. Many bad incidents have happened because of peer pressure, especially in the context of the American invasion of Iraq, such as the Mahmudiyah rape and killings. However, Platner was responsible enough in that moment, surrounded by such grave ills, not to take part in any of those things. What an upstanding citizen, and someone perfect to be senator! That's why I think it should be included.}}
This is a poor argument for inclusion and smacks of POV-pushing.

In my view, Platner's presence at the prison is not widely described in RS and seems to have been a fairly minor feature in his military career. In order to mention it in the article, explain to readers why the Abu Ghraib prison is noteworthy, and then explain that Platner was not involved in the human rights abuses for which it's known, I think we'd end up giving a lot of weight to a fairly insignificant detail. My feeling is it's not worth including unless reliable sources begin covering it in greater depth. [[User:GorillaWarfare|GorillaWarfare]]&nbsp;(she/her&nbsp;•&nbsp;[[User talk:GorillaWarfare|talk]]) 22:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

==== Summary of dispute by Generalrelative ====
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep it brief - less than 2000 characters if possible, it helps us help you quicker.</div>
I'm not sure I have much to add to what GorillaWarfare has stated above, other than to concur, and to state that EasternShah's statement below is misleading on a couple of points. 

1) {{tq|Originally...}} Before this revert, GW and I had already made it clear on the talk page that ''if'' this material is to be included it needs to be rephrased to clearly indicate that Platner had nothing to do with the human rights abuses at Abu Ghraib ''and'' a minimal argument for relevance / due weight needs to be made. Despite numerous requests, ES has been unable to provide such an argument. While this conversation was ongoing, ES proceeded to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graham_Platner&diff=1344034836&oldid=1344028972 edit war a long string of provocative comments back into the BLP lead], including the Abu Ghraib reference. It was only then that I reverted the entirety of the additions with the edit summary {{tq|Rolling back contested material. Please refer to WP:BLPRESTORE.}} 

2) The argument that {{tq|Platner has not received that much publicity}} is demonstrably and wildly false. GW has [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AGraham_Platner&diff=1344039774&oldid=1344038713 already pointed ES to the article's <u>78</u> sources.] The fact remains that very few of these sources even mention that Platner was once present at Abu Ghraib, so it seems undue for us to do so.

[[User:Generalrelative|Generalrelative]] ([[User talk:Generalrelative|talk]]) 05:47, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

====Additional comments by EasternShah====
Originally, Generalrelative [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Graham_Platner&diff=prev&oldid=1344035284 removed] the content citing [[WP:BLPRESTORE]], which states {{tq|When material about living persons has been deleted on good-faith BLP objections, any editor wishing to add, restore, or undelete it must ensure it complies with Wikipedia's content policies.}} The Abu Ghraib been covered in a reliable source, it doesn't damage the neutrality of the article, and there aren't other reasons like article size to exclude the fact from the article. The [[WP:UNDUE]] claims are very minor in my view. Platner has not received that much publicity, as he hasn't even been elected to senate yet. The second argument that was quoted above was to demonstrate that a reader could take a favorable or negative view of content, which doesn't automatically make it negative.
'''[[User:EasternShah|<span style="color:#4a5d23;">Sahi</span><span style="color:#fcd116;">b</span>-<span style="color:#4a5d23;">''e''</span>-<span style="color:#fcd116;">Q</span><span style="color:#4a5d23;">iran</span>]]''', EasternShah 00:42, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

=== Graham Platner discussion ===
<div style="font-size:smaller">Please keep discussion to a minimum before being opened by a volunteer. Continue on article talk page if necessary.</div>