Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard
|Skip to open disputes • skip to newest thread •|
This is an informal place to resolve small content disputes as part of dispute resolution and get assistance to the right place; request for comment, conduct RFC, mediation or other noticeboard, if involving other issues. You can ask a question on the talk page. This is an early stop for most disputes on Wikipedia. You are not required to participate. Any editor may volunteer! Click this button to add your name! You don't need to volunteer to help. Please feel free to comment below on any case. Be civil and remember guidelines and policy when discussing issues. Noticeboards should not be a substitute for talk pages. Editors are expected to have had extensive discussion on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) to work out the issues before coming to DRN.
The DRN noticeboard has a rotating co-ordinator, and their role is to help keep the noticeboard organised, ensuring disputes are attended to in a timely manner, are escalated to alternative forums as required, and that new volunteers get any assistance that they need. They also collect the monthly metrics for the noticeboard.
The current co-ordinator is Keithbob
|Do you need assistance?||Would you like to help?|
If we can't help you a volunteer will point you in the right direction. Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, objective and as nice as possible. Comment on the contributions not the contributor. Off-topic or uncivil behavior may garner a warning and a particpant could be asked to step back from the discussion.
We are always looking for new volunteers and everyone is welcome. Click the volunteer button above to join us, and read over this page to learn how to get started. Being a volunteer on this page is not formal in any respect, and it is not necessary to have any previous dispute resolution experience. However, having a calm and patient demeanor and a good knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines is very important. It's not mandatory to list yourself as a volunteer to help here, anyone is welcome to provide input.
Have you discussed this on a talk page?
Yes, I have discussed this issue on a talk page already.
Location of dispute
There is an ongoing disagreement over the difference between a tin box and a can. There is one point of view that a sealed can (for example, a can of baked beans which is opened by a tin opener) is different to a resealable box (eg: a metal tin that mints come in, with a hinged lid), The alternate view is that a tin box should be referred to as a can, and that essentially the two items are indistinguishable. The confusion is making my head spin. I think we need to get to the foot of this dispute! It is spiralling into mayhem!
Have you tried to resolve this previously?
Long discussions on the talk page. Attempt to compromise. We have essentially been sucked into some kind of ontological fog.
How do you think we can help?
Help us work out the best way to proceed.
My position is in my last comment on that page: Are we a dictionary or an encyclopedia? True (as Pkgx wants to move the article) there are two words "box" and "can" and they are often overlapped. However, as an encyclopedia, we have two concepts, box and can, that are very clearly defined and distinct. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:09, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
- Its all about this edit  which removed the word box from the article, despite the article being called "tin box". The construction section of the article said "Some types of tin boxes have", tin box being the name of the article after all, and he changed it to "Some types of metal tins or cans". Other changes made in that edit are just as ridiculous. See talk page for more. A tin box is a totally different thing than a tin can, we having separate articles for a reason. Dream Focus 00:15, 13 December 2013 (UTC)