This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PhilKnight (talk | contribs) at 18:36, 23 November 2007 (relisting case). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:36, 23 November 2007 by PhilKnight (talk | contribs) (relisting case)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| Misplaced Pages Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Article | Sterling Management Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) |
| Status | new |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | Unknown |
| Parties involved | Misou (talk · contribs) |
]]
Request details
Who are the involved parties?
User:Fahrenheit451, User:Ibeme, User:Misou, User:Stan_En, User:AndroidCat, User:GoodDamon.
What's going on?
Editors have been having content disputes regarding WP:NPOV that are not being fully resolved.--Fahrenheit451 03:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
What would you like to change about that?
Editors reach a consensus about what constitutes NPOV on this article and the article is edited accordingly, thus resolving the contention.--Fahrenheit451 03:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Mediator notes
I am happy to take this case for mediation. I have read the article once and I will re-read it thoroughly another 3-5 times to make sure that I understand. I have a couple of requests:
Request 1: Please refrain from any non-minor edits to the article during mediation. This will help eliminate any of my potential confusion. I will do my best to mediate this dispute quickly.
Request 2: I would like a commitment from each participating party (including User:Fahrenheit451, User:Ibeme, User:Misou, User:Stan_En, User:AndroidCat, User:GoodDamon) that you will commit to follow WP:CIV during the entire dispute resolution.
Request 3: All parties -- Please make your comments in the 'Discussion' section of the dispute page.
I look forward to a swift resolution of this matter.
Regards, --Leonmon 05:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I have read the article several times and am now quite familiar with it. I have several thoughts regarding how this article could be improved in light of WP:NPOV. I would, however, like all parties in this dispute to please specifically outline what you believe the problem is and how it should be resolved. Since this is a shorter article, please be as specific as you believe necessary in your references to the article. I look forward to your responses.
--Leonmon 15:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
At the request of User:Fahrenheit451, I have notified parties as indicated by User:Fahrenheit451.
--Leonmon 06:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for all of your comments. I have been reviewing the article (as well as all of the prior edits to the article) in light of these comments -- specifically looking at potential violations of WP:NPOV and WP:COI. I will make another post with questions and comments within the next couple days. (I apologize for the delay -- I've been spending most of my time moving my office across town. We just finished most of it Friday.) Thanks for your patience.
--Leonmon (talk) 05:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Good Evening. I have spent a considerable amount of time reviewing all of the edits (and unedits) to this article. I indicated that I would need a couple of days in order to be ready to proceed.
I come back and this page has simply become another venue for parties to argue, insult and intimidate each other about this article. This venue is NOT a venue for trying to make others look bad, to intimidate others, or simply to extend the nastiness that has been going on regarding this article.
It has taken me quite some time to get to a point regarding this article that I can at least start a process. User: Fahrenheit451 has already decided that all attempts at mediation are fruitless during the few days that I needed in order to become well-versed in this entire affair.
Is mediation truly fruitless? I made a simple request -- I asked for a committment from each participating party to agree to adhere to WP:CIV. I have NOT received that committment from any party.
Are the parties truly interested in participating in the crafting of a solution regarding this article? If so, then I am prepared to outline my proposal for proceeding.
I renew my request for a committment from each party to strictly adhere to not only WP:CIV but also WP:AGF. In addition, all future comments on this page should ONLY be directed to me as the mediator. I have settled complex issues in the past and I am confident that we can arrive at a solution in this matter -- it takes time and patience.
I look forward to your responses. Regards,
--Leonmon (talk) 03:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
As you will notice, I have archived all of the prior discussion, arguing, bickering, etc. that was previously on this page. Going forward, this project page will be strictly preserved for discussions and questions between involved parties and the mediator. (As mediator, I will initiate all discussions on this page.) If you wish to have side discussions with other parties, then please do so on the discussion page.
I have requested that all parties commit to follow WP:CIV and WP:AGF. WP:NPA is in effect and will be enforced.
- I have received committments from User:Fahrenheit451 and User:Ibeme to follow WP:CIV and WP:AGF. I await responses from User:Stan En, User:Misou, User:Good Damon.
I assure all parties that the article as well as most (if not all) comments, edits, and discussions have been reviewed at least once by me and will probably be reviewed again. As much as I appreciate your desire to assist me in this process, please refrain from making suggestions regarding how I should and should not proceed and please allow me to determine what is important and what is less important.
Although I am not an unexperienced mediator, I am still a new WIKImediator and I will be enlisting the assistance of User:SebastianHelm when jumping through any WIKIhoops as well as with any clarifications of WIKIpolicies.
That being said -- I am very confident that we can arrive at a solution that is agreeable to all parties involved.
Happy Holidays to everyone.
--Leonmon (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)