Misplaced Pages

:Requests for mediation/Senkaku Islands: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:58, 28 April 2011 editEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 edits →Parties' agreement to mediation: agree← Previous edit Revision as of 15:30, 28 April 2011 edit undoEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 edits →Issues to be mediated: sub-issues + importance of mediation is in its implications and consequencesNext edit →
Line 52: Line 52:
; Additional issues (added by other parties) ; Additional issues (added by other parties)
*Same as above, but within the context of the ]. <small>'''Note:''' This addendum was added by Phead128 in the above statement. &ndash; ]<sup><b>]</b></sup> 06:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)</small> *Same as above, but within the context of the ]. <small>'''Note:''' This addendum was added by Phead128 in the above statement. &ndash; ]<sup><b>]</b></sup> 06:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)</small>
*{{Rquote|right| |Zhongqi Pan|"Sino-Japanese Dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands: The Pending Controversy from the Chinese Perspective," ''Journal of Chinese Political Science,'' Vol. 12, No. 1, 2007 }}
*Other additional issues
* In our mediation process, the adverse consequences of some problems can be mitigated by identifying them '']'' up front. --] (]) 15:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

:* Sub-issue #1, <b>]</b>. This ] is the subject of overlapping interests which infuse every aspect of this subject, as is highlighted in the excerpt at right.

:* Sub-issue #2, <b>Looking backward</b>. This ] <u>is</u> a battleground. It is counter-productive to pretend that it is not.

:* Sub-issue #3, <b>Looking forward</b>. This ] has attracted the participation of editors whose ] perspective has skewed our ] process in unhelpful ways. A structural premise of mediation is that all necessary parties have agreed to participate; however, the ''scope of "primary issues" which frame this case'' must also encompass future contributors who have not yet caused us to ].

:* Sub-issue #4, <b>] vs. ]</b>. Our conventional processes for discerning the threshold requirements for inclusion in Misplaced Pages -- our ], policies and procedures -- are not irrelevant or dispensable in talk page threads nor in this negotiation venue.

:* Sub-issue #5, <b>]</b>. The ] of those for whom the perception of is a self-fulfilling prophesy and it is uninformative.

:Paraphrasing Zhongqi Pan, the real importance of negotiations about the title of this article lies in the dispute’s implications and consequences for the wider context of other East Asian maritime and island controversies. --] (]) 15:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


====Parties' agreement to mediation==== ====Parties' agreement to mediation====

Revision as of 15:30, 28 April 2011

The Mediation Committee
About
Requests
Guide
Policy and Procedures
Cases
Talk
Contact
Please click here to display or hide in-line guidance below.

Senkaku Islands

Request for formal mediation
ArticleSenkaku Islands (talk) 
Submitted25 Apr 2011
MediatorNot yet assigned
StatusAwaiting party agreement
NotesNone

Dispute specifics

Involved users
  1. Ajl772 (talk · contribs), filing party Note: I am attempting to file this as an uninvolved neutral party.
  2. Qwyrxian (talk · contribs)
  3. Phead128 (talk · contribs)
  4. Tenmei (talk · contribs)
  5. John Smith's (talk · contribs)
  6. STSC (talk · contribs)
  7. Phoenix7777 (talk · contribs)
  8. Benlisquare (talk · contribs)
  9. Bobthefish2 (talk · contribs)
  10. Oda Mari (talk · contribs)
  11. Kusunose (talk · contribs)
  12. HXL49 (talk · contribs) Note: My apologies to you HWL49. I may have been a bit hasty in adding your name to this list. You may recuse from participating in this particular request. – AJL 07:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Articles concerned in this dispute
Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted
Previous attempts: (archived)
Current attempts: (unarchived)

Issues to be mediated

All aspects of article content over which there is disagreement should be listed here. The filing party should define the scope under "Primary issues", which is used to frame the case; other parties to the dispute can list other issues under "Additional issues", and can contest the primary issues on the case talk page.

Primary issue
  • Constant disruption of talk page by running around in circles discussing whether or not the title represents a neutral point of view.
Additional issues (added by other parties)
“ not the only maritime territorial dispute that either China or Japan has with their neighboring countries. The possible negative domino effect of the dispute is what China and Japan attempt to avoid. The real importance of the islands lies in the dispute’s implications for the wider context of the two countries’ approaches to maritime and island disputes, as well as in the way in which those issues can be used by domestic political groups to further their own objectives. ”
— Zhongqi Pan, "Sino-Japanese Dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands: The Pending Controversy from the Chinese Perspective," Journal of Chinese Political Science, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2007
  • Sub-issue #1, Domino effect. This article title is the subject of overlapping interests which infuse every aspect of this subject, as is highlighted in the excerpt at right.
  • Sub-issue #2, Looking backward. This article title is a battleground. It is counter-productive to pretend that it is not.
  • Sub-issue #3, Looking forward. This article title has attracted the participation of editors whose single-purpose perspective has skewed our collaborative editing process in unhelpful ways. A structural premise of mediation is that all necessary parties have agreed to participate; however, the scope of "primary issues" which frame this case must also encompass future contributors who have not yet caused us to run around the mulberry bush.
  • Sub-issue #4, Fact vs. factoid. Our conventional processes for discerning the threshold requirements for inclusion in Misplaced Pages -- our core concepts, policies and procedures -- are not irrelevant or dispensable in talk page threads nor in this negotiation venue.
Paraphrasing Zhongqi Pan, the real importance of negotiations about the title of this article lies in the dispute’s implications and consequences for the wider context of other East Asian maritime and island controversies. --Tenmei (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Parties' agreement to mediation

All parties please indicate below whether they agree to mediation of this dispute; remember to sign your post. Extended comments should be made on the case talk page. Every party listed above will be automatically notified that this request has been filed.

  1. Agree. – AJL 04:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
  2. Agree. STSC (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
  3. Decline. I have only been involved in one significant dispute of this page, and so will not be of much use nor qualified to comment. Moreover, who wonders who entrenched and nasty this could be... HXL's Roundtable and Record 04:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
    • Response: My apologies to you HWL49. I may have been a bit hasty in adding your name to this list. You may recuse from participating in this particular request. – AJL 07:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
  4. Decline. As per my intentions to maintain my WP:COOL and keep the peace, I am reluctant to engage in discussion on contentious issues for the time being. Hence, I will keep my distance from this particular topic. Never mind, just realised this was a RfM, and a little input can't hurt. Even though my involvement in the subject in recent times is minimal, I'll participate anyway. Agreeing. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 06:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
  5. Agree. John Smith's (talk) 09:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
  6. Agree. Phead128 (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
  7. Agree. Though I'm not fully convinced this is the place to talk about the matter. It might be WP:NCGN. Oda Mari (talk) 08:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
  8. Agree. While its true that there are other forums to take this to, we've already done that, haven't we? We've definitely discussed the issue at NCGN; I feel like we've discussed it at NPOVN, although that may have been a different SI related topic. Is there some reason to work there first before going into mediation, when it's invariably the case that it will come back here eventually anyway? Qwyrxian (talk) 08:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
    Addendum: In addition, I think part of the reason this belongs here is because other editors have argued, in essence, that there's a conflict between how the Article Title policy and NPOV interact with regards to this specific case. Personally, as everyone here knows, I don't see a conflict, but I can easily see how those opposed to the current name might feel that any one single noticeboard won't actually solve the matter. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
  9. Agree. I don't expect much from this. Let's see what happen. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 08:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
  10. Agree. --Tenmei (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment from the Mediation Committee: Now that the #Issues to be mediated have been specified, the below conversation is probably redundant so I've collapsed it. I'll notify everybody below of the newly-added issues, then ask them to add their formal response to this request. For the Mediation Committee, AGK 21:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Peripheral and earlier discussion.
  1. Comment. Unless #Issues to be mediated is properly filled, I withhold my intention to participate in. Basically if it is the NPOV of title, then we are not involved party, it should be discussed at either WP:NPOV, WP:NCGN or WP:Title. All these guidelines state NPOV title is not subject to change.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 10:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
    Response: I disagree Phoenix; you have been involved in the most recent reincarnation of the NPOV-title issue. – AJL 07:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
  2. Comment. I suspend my decision as per Phoenix7777. Oda Mari (talk) 14:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
    Response: Please review the completed form. – AJL 07:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
  3. Comment. Unless #Issues to be mediated are made specific, this is a kind of stepping stone to nowhere. --Tenmei (talk) 15:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
    Response: Please review the completed form. – AJL 07:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate whether this request is to be accepted or rejected. Notes concerning the request and questions to the parties may also be posed by a committee member in this section.

Category: