style="background:#dfffdf"|

If you would like to see which advocates are currently accepting new cases you may check this list of currently available advocates.

AMA members will respond to your requests after reviewing your statement below. You do not have to identify yourself (with your Wikipedia user name) or the subject of the dispute (although explaining the nature of the problem may help us find a suitable advocate). However, at a minimum you will need to provide some contact information so that the advocate can get in touch with you.

You can also contact individual advocates directly. Some advocates have posted personal statements on a separate page for member statements, which may help you in selecting which advocate to work with. Some advocates have also announced their availability here.

Members' Advocates offer their assistance in representing you or assisting the presentation of your side of an existing dispute. If you are looking for Mediation or Arbitration, you should start that process in the appropriate manner, and then contact the AMA if you want someone to help represent your side. Members' advocates will also assist in other personal conflicts between users prior to mediation or arbitration stages.

Make sure you read and understand the Members' Advocacy Information and FAQ pages before making a request for advocacy.

Please place new requests directly below, at the top of this section.

For the past month, me and another user have been going back and forth about the contents of an article, UGOPlayer, and it has resulted in an edit war. It has gone through individual attempts to agree, a deletion attempt, a 3rd opinion which was accepted by the party that did not ask for the 3rd opinion, but not by the one who did, and is presently filed for mediation over the content. I was wondering if there was anyone who would be willing to provide advice for me throughout the process of mediation, and be able to better put arguments into words for me? I apologize if this seems awkward or something. Sbloemeke 00:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been enjoying wikipedia and began to notice stubs about past companies, and mildly famous friends of mine popping up. I had begun to mildly contribute to stubs and thought it would be nice to add an article for me. I am not Madonna, but I have done quite a bit of work in the design world. I wrote a small piece (unfinished) about some of my schooling a few collections I have done. My work for Betsey Johnson, Triple five Soul, Akademiks, PRPS, Candies, Kelly Clarkson, The Gorrillaz, Eric West, Koneko (my old band boy george likes) etc. and before I knew it (minutes) an administrator had erased the whole thing (after I noted it was unfinished). Thinking I just needed to link it to some of the other stubs I began to do that and reload it. But then I was told I would not be allowed to edit anymore for doing so. I find this hostile. It is one thing to just write "hi im rob and I have a big thumb", but I am a little known designer, and just thought it would be nice to share my info, especially being from Ohio.... I figure it might be neat for kids to see you CAN become something NOW and go somewhere. My impression of Wikipedia is the ability to offer randomn & valid information that would be hard to find otherwise. say the guy who picked the alligator for Lacoste, or the person who invented Aqua net. I understand that is could be considered tacky to write about oneself, and I could easily hire someone to do it......but I just thought it would be fine.

Anyhow I just found the reply to be hostile and rude, especially since I was writing a professional and responsible piece. I am not Madonna, but I assumed being linked to all these people and doing valid work makes it ok? ( I was not trying to do some myspace type profile) I have noted the forum for being listed and I do fall under.....

1. Multiple features in popular culture publications such as Vogue, GQ, Elle, FHM or national newspapers

Anyway Here was the conversation and reply:

"

Please stop recreating deleted articles or you will be blocked from editing. --W(t) 00:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the afforementioned article. I find being more well known than a professor to be a bit of a strange concept. I can't think of any famous professors offhand. But I sure can find other people mentioned on here that I have no knowledge of. I feel that this action is a bit hostile... especially after noting that the article is unfinished.

I have found the following:

1. Multiple features in popular culture publications such as Vogue, GQ, Elle, FHM or national newspapers

Which I have done. and as stated I planned to finish the article. ( My Work has been presented in VICE magazine, Elle girl, Teen Vogue, numerous publications of Fader, and Complex, etc. and I will be happy to show tears verifying this.) It is also published on billboards for akademiks, prps is worn by the gorillaz (a band) for their videos, and is currently being requested by Eric West, among other names. Is this not enough?

Also. I have styled Kelly Clarkson for Candies ads.

ALSO. I contributed work to the band Koneko, Who has a cd out (Yes I doubt it has sold 50,000 copies), BUT it is an interest of Theo of the Luna chicks, and Moby. And Boy George himself has expressed enthusiasm in the band. Is this not enough?

I have also noted. this article located under "autobiography"

2. "It is a social faux pas to write about yourself", according to Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia's founder. [1] You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

I can easily hire someone else to write it for me if that is all that is required. I know certain other "famed" people on here who have done so.

Finally, personally, I would be interested in knowing who chose to stick the Crocodile on a lacoste shirt. Who Chanel's right hand girl was. Or who invented Aqua Net. I thought the point of Wikipedia was valid & randomn information. Not having to be Madonna in order to plant a flag. I planned to finish my small piece in a professional manner, as I started.

If Wikipedia does not desire my profile that is fine. Thank you. Joshua S. Amos

ps. you CAN also google some of my work."

I guess I was just curious as to if I am way out of line for putting this up. Or If there is just hostility in the wikipedia environment. I just did not realize the amount of notoriety necessary to be in wikipedia? If I am out of line I apologize. Thanks, Josh xtruthlovex

There is a long standing dispute over the use of macrons in article titles for Japanese articles (as well as many other non-English subjects) and I am seeking an end to the dispute. Not for the first time, a structured vote has called (and won) by pro-macron users to change the MoS to allow the use of macrons in article titles, though the poll does not reflect consensus. For reasons many times quoted on Metawiki (including Jimbo's apparent own reluctance to use voting as a means to solve a dispute) m:Power_structure#Democracy I petition for help in finding/creating a well-advised solution to the macrons issue that will not be disputed in the future (e.g. one that supports Wiki principles and does not fall on the values of individual editors).

The most recent vote was held at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(Japan-related_articles)#Voting, all involved parties have left comments on the votes.

Some other discussions that were had in the past (by various parties, most of whom have become fed up discussion the issue and no longer comment) can be found at:
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_for_Japan-related_articles/Macrons
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_for_Japan-related_articles/UTF-8_conversion
as well as on numerous talk pages of articles with disputed macron/macronless titles.

The discussion is civil though neither parties are willing to bend. I can provide further evidence/arguments on request. Thanks! (I came here as a precursor to talking to the Arbitration committee. If you feel this issue is better suited for them--as the changes of the vote have already been put into effect at the result of the vote--then I will move this request)   freshgavin TALK    04:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this issue would be better settled by ARBs then please leave me a message.  freshgavinΓΛĿЌ  03:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been trying to edit out the rampant disinformation being spread about the radio hosts Opie and Anthony. The lack of attention to verifiable facts seems to mark all of these edits. I would appreciate any and all assistance in controlling this obvious smear campaign against the popular satellite radio broadcasters. Please reference XM Satellite Radio history vs Sirius Satellite Radio history to see the difference in Wiki Encyclopedic Article vs Advertisement. Also reference Howard Stern article vs Opie and Anthony article. You will immediately see the difference, it is astounding the amount of advertising and POV that is going on in these entries. (Countzer 04:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC))[reply]

For older requests, see Archives: 1 2 3 4 5

{{helpme}}