This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Catamorphism (talk | contribs) at 19:32, 4 June 2006 (→Request Information: mention reversion of non-vandalistic edits). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:32, 4 June 2006 by Catamorphism (talk | contribs) (→Request Information: mention reversion of non-vandalistic edits)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Mediation Case: 2006-06-04 Cisgender
Please observe Misplaced Pages:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Misplaced Pages talk:Mediation Cabal.
Request Information
- Request made by: Catamorphism 19:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- On the article Cisgender and on Talk:Cisgender.
- What's going on?
- Originally, the terms "cisman" and "ciswoman" were removed from Cisgender because of a lack of reliable sources that indicate these terms are commonly used (analogously to "cisgender", which refers to people who are not transgender, "cisman" and "ciswoman" are supposed to refer to a man or a woman respectively who are not transgender). AlexR continues to revert these changes and insists that these terms belong in the article, but has refused to provide sources for them even when asked (the only source AlexR was able to come up with to show that these terms are used was a blog). AlexR has also used a very aggressive and incivil tone when it isn't warranted, as in this edit. Finally, AlexR has reverted good-faith edits using the edit summary "rvv".
- What would you like to change about that?
- I would like to either have reliable sources showing that "cisman" and "ciswoman" are in common usage added to this article, or have the article restored to this state with no further edit-warring.
- If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
- Reaching me on my talk page is fine.
- Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
- This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
- what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.
- Sorry, don't have the time right now.
Mediator response
Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with {{Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence}} for misconduct and {{Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence3RR}} for 3RR violations. If you need
help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil.
Misplaced Pages:Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.
Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.
Comments by others
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Misplaced Pages is based on consensus.