Wikipedia:Requests for mediation

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rfm-header

Instructions

New requests should be listed at the top of the "New Requests" section, right below the template sample. All requests must use the template provided below.

• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide provides an explanation for how to file a request.
• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Sample shows the template with instructions.
• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Common Reasons for Rejection has a description of common reasons for rejecting requests.

All parties to the mediation must indicate agreement to mediate by signing the "Parties' agreement to mediate" section; any request that has not been signed by all parties within 7 days will be rejected. Please watch this page during the time the case is listed here; if additional information is required, you will be asked here, and expected to respond within the 7 day period.

Case name (Sample)

---

Do not edit this section! Copy the text of this section into another section and edit that.
Edits to this section will be reverted immediately.

---

Involved parties

• Example (talk · contribs)
• Example (talk · contribs)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request: Provide diffs showing where {{RFMF}} was added to the talk page(s) of the involved article(s), and {{RFM-Request}} was placed on the talk pages of the other parties.

Article talk pages:

• Foo [1]

User talk pages:

• User:Example [2]

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

• WP:RFC link
• WP:AN/I discussion

Issues to be mediated

• Issue 1
• Issue 2

Additional issues to be mediated

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

• Agree.

Decision of the Mediation Committee

• Accept/Reject/Extend: Reason for rejection (if rejected), additional required information (if extended.)

For the Mediation Committee, (Mediation Committee members only.)

---

Your case should look just like this when you have finished filing;
no commentary, no extra information, just what is required in this template.
If you choose to ignore these instructions, your case will likewise be ignored. Caveat lector.

---

New Requests

New requests immediately below this line.

Kosovo introduction

---

Involved parties

• Ahwaz (talk · contribs)
• Asterion (talk · contribs)
• ChrisO (talk · contribs)
• Ferick (talk · contribs)
• Ilir pz (talk · contribs)
• KOCOBO (talk · contribs)
• Litany (talk · contribs)
• Phil Boswell (talk · contribs)
• Phildav76 (talk · contribs)
• Osli73 (talk · contribs)
• Reinoutr (talk · contribs)
• Telex (talk · contribs)
• TSO1D (talk · contribs)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request:

• Ahwaz [3]
• Asterion [4]
• Ferick [5]
• Ilir pz [6]
• KOCOBO [7]
• Litany [8]
• Phil Boswell [9]
• Phildav76 [10]
• Osli73 [11]
• Reinoutr [12]
• Telex [13]
• TSO1D [14]

Two other users, Bormalagurski and HolyRomanEmperor, have also been involved in the dispute but are currently blocked. I have not informed them of this mediation as they will be unable to participate in it. -- ChrisO 09:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Article talk pages:

• Talk:Kosovo, Talk:Kosovo/Intro changes proposal, Talk:Kosovo/Archive 9 [15]

User talk pages:

• User:Ferick [16]

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

Extensive discussion on article talk page since May 2006

Issues to be mediated

• Should Kosovo be described as "one of two autonomous provinces in Serbia, the other being Vojvodina, in northern Serbia"?

Brief background: all of our reputable published sources (books, encyclopedias, media reports etc) describe Kosovo as a province of Serbia under United Nations administration. This is reflected in the article's introduction. User:Ferick believes that this is inaccurate and instead wishes the article to say that Kosovo "is located in the south-east Europe" without reference to Serbia. He has repeatedly deleted any mention of Kosovo as part of Serbia from the article's intro. This has resulted in a long-running edit war between Ferick and a large number of other editors, which has resulted in the article being protected for extended periods.

The issue has been discussed extensively in the article talk page but we have seem to have reached an impasse. Ferick has expressed an unwillingness to discuss sources or abide by WP:NPOV, which has made it difficult to find any common ground. His position is supported by User:Ilir pz but otherwise the majority of editors (most of whom are not Serbs, by the way) have already reached a consensus on the existing introduction.

I don't particularly expect this mediation to get anywhere, given Ferick's apparent rejection of WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:RS. However, for the sake of ticking the box in the dispute resolution procedure I would like the Mediation Committee to consider the matter. -- ChrisO 09:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Several users have added comments below. Please note that "Discussions will take place on a mediation subpage", to quote the rules given at the top of this page. I've temporarily commented out the comments for now - they're still there, just hidden. If this mediation is accepted I'll move them across to a discussion page. In the meantime, please don't add further comments! -- ChrisO 00:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

• Agree. -- ChrisO 09:29, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 09:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 12:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree TSO1D 13:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 17:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree —Phil | Talk 17:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I should point out that my contribution to this article consists entirely of partially swapping round the two halves of the introduction in order that the subject be described before sailing into complex diplomatic issues; I am relatively neutral as to how soon the mention of the province's status needs to be. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 17:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree --KOCOBO 19:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree -- Phildav76 22:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Disagree--Ferick 03:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment:Your framing of this issue is very disingenuous. For more info see my comments here[[17]]Ferick 03:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC).

Decision of the Mediation Committee

• Accept/Reject/Extend: Reason for rejection (if rejected), additional required information (if extended.)

For the Mediation Committee, (Mediation Committee members only.)

Rex / Angusmclellan,CyrilleDunant and Srnec

The users involved are:

• Angusmclellan (talk · contribs)
• CyrilleDunant (talk · contribs)
• Srnec (talk · contribs)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request:

• User:Angusmclellan : Yes
• User:CyrilleDunant : Yes
• User:Srnec : Yes

Article talk pages:

• Talk:Charlemagne

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

Nothing but plain discussion.

Issues to be mediated

• Long running conflicts within in a certain sections of the Charlemagne article.

Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

• Agree. Rex 18:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. CyrilleDunant 14:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. Srnec 15:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

• Accept/Reject/Extend: Reason for rejection (if rejected), additional required information (if extended.)

For the Mediation Committee, (Mediation Committee members only.)

Neutrality of the word liberate and its derivatives

Involved parties

1. AndriyK (talk · contribs)
2. Halibutt (talk · contribs)
3. Grafikm_fr (talk · contribs)
4. Alex Bakharev (talk · contribs)
5. TruthCrusader (talk · contribs)
6. Irpen (talk · contribs)
7. Kuban kazak (talk · contribs)
8. Tufkaa (talk · contribs)
9. PatrickFisher (talk · contribs)
10. Ghirlandajo (talk · contribs)
11. Piotrus (talk · contribs)

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request:

Article talk pages:

• Talk:Battle of the Lower Dnieper [18]
• Talk:Lviv [19]
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-25 Battle of the Lower Dnieper [20]

User talk pages:

• User_talk:AndriyK [[21]]
• User talk:Halibutt [22]
• User talk:Grafikm fr [23]
• User talk:Alex Bakharev [24]
• User talk:TruthCrusader [25]
• User talk:Irpen [26]
• User talk:Kuban kazak [27]
• User talk:Tufkaa [28]
• User talk:PatrickFisher [29]
• User talk:Ghirlandajo [30]
• User_talk:Piotrus [31]

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

• Discussions on Talk:Battle of the Lower Dnieper (Archive 1, Archive 2).
• Discussions on Talk:Lviv
• RfC [32]
• Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) [33]
• A Mediation Cabal was attempted but failed.[34]

Issues to be mediated

The neutrality of using the word "liberate" and its derivative in the context of military operations, specifically in the context of the USSR's taking of Ukraine, Baltic states, Poland etc. from Germany in WWII. The issue is vied differently by the parties:

• In most historical publications, the word "liberate" or "liberation" is used as the dedicated word to describe the action of retaking USSR territory from the Nazis in 1943-1944. Some people argue that this word is not neutral and propose different terms, based solely on political considerations (i.e. on geopolitics and not on historical vocabulary) that would constitute original research and POV. This issue has to be resolved. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 12:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• The word liberate is generally understood as to set free from oppression, confinement, or foreign control [35]. Or "to change from not having freedom to having freedom".

  Athough there is no doubt that Nazi occupation was oppressive and definitely can be characterize as "not having freedom", (re)taking the territories of Ukraine and other Eastern/Central European countries by the Red Army did not bring freadom to the people. Stalinist regime that was (re)established on those territories resulted in new repressions and one more artificial famine that claimed more than one million human lives. Millions of Ukrainians were deported to Siberia. Ethnic minorities (Crimean Tatars, Germans and others) were deported en masse, many people died on the way. Calling this "liberation" is extremely unneutral and can be even considered as offensive by the people who lost their relatives in the famine and the repressions.

  The word "liberate" assumes sympathy to the Soviet Army, which contradicts to WP:NPOV stating that the neutral point of view "is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject".--AndriyK 13:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• We must be more specific when defining the issue: at issue is the use of the word liberate w.r.t. the USSR's taking of Ukraine, etc. from Germany in WWII. For example, there is no significant disagreement about the use of liberate w.r.t. the Allied liberation of France in WWII. If the mediation is not limited to this more specific issue, I think it would be seriously flawed and would not agree to it. -- PatrickFisher 19:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

• Agree. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 12:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. --AndriyK 13:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. TruthCrusader 13:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. --tufkaa 14:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Sure. //Halibutt 16:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Sure, although I think I am only marginally involved.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 22:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Agree, but only if more specific (see above). -- PatrickFisher 19:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

• Accept/Reject/Extend: Reason for rejection (if rejected), additional required information (if extended.)

For the Mediation Committee, (Mediation Committee members only.)

Accepted Requests

These requests have been accepted and opened.

Armando/Daily Kos

This case has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. There may be a delay while members of the Committee review and select cases they will mediate. If your case is not assigned within two weeks, please feel free to request a status update by contacting the Committee. Recommended reading for now is Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide, and especially the #Assigned cases section.
Mediators: If you undertake this case, please remove this template.

Alcoholism

This case has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. There may be a delay while members of the Committee review and select cases they will mediate. If your case is not assigned within two weeks, please feel free to request a status update by contacting the Committee. Recommended reading for now is Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide, and especially the #Assigned cases section.
Mediators: If you undertake this case, please remove this template.

F-14 Tomcat

This case has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. There may be a delay while members of the Committee review and select cases they will mediate. If your case is not assigned within two weeks, please feel free to request a status update by contacting the Committee. Recommended reading for now is Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide, and especially the #Assigned cases section.
Mediators: If you undertake this case, please remove this template.

Authorship of A Course in Miracles

This case has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. There may be a delay while members of the Committee review and select cases they will mediate. If your case is not assigned within two weeks, please feel free to request a status update by contacting the Committee. Recommended reading for now is Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide, and especially the #Assigned cases section.
Mediators: If you undertake this case, please remove this template.

Rejected Requests

These requests have been rejected/delisted.

Talmud

File:Yes

This request does not use the required format. The filing party will be contacted and asked to properly complete this request. After an appropriate time, if this request does not use the proper format, it will be declined. For assistance in filing the request, please read the guide to formal mediation or contact the Committee. To re-file this request entirely, add {{csd-u1}} to the top of the page; and, when it is deleted, go here.

Message added by 08:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC), on behalf of the Mediation Committee.