For the past months, [[Autobiography (album)]] has been the subject of heated debate. I doubt whether any policies and guidelines have been broken, but what is clear is that Everyking refuses to allow others to edit the article, arguing they are removing "essential information". Here is a quote from the talk showing the information he considers essential:
---Begin quote---
Which seems more informative? Compare another of Zen's paragraphs:
"In Canada http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada, the album debuted at number 37 on the Jam Music charts in late July [3] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_072904_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_072904_ALBUMS.html/), and peaked at 11."
With mine:
"In Canada http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada, the album debuted at number 37 in late July [4] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_072904_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_072904_ALBUMS.html/), rising to number 36 in its second week [5] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_080504_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_080504_ALBUMS.html/) and then to number 30 in its third week. [6] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_081204_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_081204_ALBUMS.html/) In its fourth week, it rose greatly, to number 11 (its peak), [7] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_081904_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_081904_ALBUMS.html/) but fell to number 14 in its fifth week, [8] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_082604_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_082604_ALBUMS.html/) where it remained in its sixth week. [9] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_090204_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_090204_ALBUMS.html/) In its seventh week, it fell slightly to number 15, [10] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_090904_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_090904_ALBUMS.html/) and then slightly more in the next two weeks: first to number 16 (week eight) [11] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_091604_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_091604_ALBUMS.html/), and then to number 17 (week nine). [12] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_092304_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_092304_ALBUMS.html/) It remained at number 17 in its tenth week, [13] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_093004_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_093004_ALBUMS.html/) before falling to number 24 in its 11th week [14] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_100704_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_100704_ALBUMS.html/) and then to number 29 in its 12th week. [15] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_101404_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_101404_ALBUMS.html/) It rose again in its 13th week, however, to number 23, [16] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_102104_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_102104_ALBUMS.html/) and rose further still in its 14th week, to number 20. [17] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_102804_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_102804_ALBUMS.html/) It then fell to number 30 in its 15th week [18] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_110404_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_110404_ALBUMS.html/), to number 33 in its 16th week [19] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_111104_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_111104_ALBUMS.html/), to number 41 in its 17th week, [20] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_111804_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_111804_ALBUMS.html/) and to number 46 in its 18th week. [21] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_112504_ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/prev_112504_ALBUMS.html/) In week 19 it fell slightly more to number 47, before rising to number 38 in week 20. [22] http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/ALBUMS.html (/http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicCharts/ALBUMS.html/)"
---End quote---
[[User:Calton]] has also compiled some statistics on the scale and breadth of this dispute, albeit before it reheated itself again after Everyking placed the article on FAC:
---Begin quote---
Some statistics:
As of 03:08, 13 Dec 2004, there have been *554 edits* (counting the original creation of the article), inflating the article to 38K in size. The article was created on 26 Jul 2004, 140 days ago, giving an average of just under 4 edits per day, though that was not spread out evenly:
* July: 3 * August: 16 * September: 13 * October: 40 * November: 356 * December: 125
Of the 554 edits, *496 (or 89.5%) have been by Everyking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Everyking*.
Thirty-two users performed the remaining 58 edits -- although since two of each were the leveling and then lifting of protection, I'll discount those, making 30 users performing 56 edits. Reene had the highest single number at 13 edits.
Of those 56 other edits, *29 were reverted by Everyking* (25 completely and 4 partially) -- over half of non-Everyking edits. This includes the removal of at least 4 tags (peerreview and clean-up), and involved at least *four violations of the 3-revert rule* (including an astonishing 8 reversions in 2 hours on 26 November).
---End quote---
Two of my rewrites have been reverted by Everyking, who has refused to stand down on the importance of useless chart information. I am at my wits' end as to how to resolve this; I cannot think of any policies violated, and I believe Everyking is editing in good faith, but it's clear this article is stagnating, as Everyking refuses to allow anyone to edit the article unless they agree to avoid removing his precious promotional and charting information.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])