Mediation case opened. Andranikpasha 16:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Article | Armenian nationalism |
Status | closed |
Request date | Unknown |
Requesting party | Unknown |
Parties involved | Dbachmann |
Mediator(s) | SebastianHelm |
Comment | closed; misunderstanding |
User Andranikpasha alleges that Dbachmann's editions at Armenia-related articles are not neutral, unsourced and consist elements of anti-Armenianism.
User Andranikpasha respectfully requests one thing
Context:
constructive contribution to these discussions is most welcome. -- dab (𒁳) 10:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I am coming here as a mediator with a keen interest in working towards resolving ethnic conflicts. I have, however, no background knowledge about Armenian nationalism, and I ask both parties for patience with me in that regard. This can be seen as an advantage, since I am uninvolved in any of the existing discussions.
My role as a mediator here is to help both parties. I will be looking and directing both parties to look towards ways to win, without making the other side lose. (See win-win situation).
The request of this case is for one user "to recuse himself from any further dealings with the Armenia-related topics until such time as this topic reaches a permanent steady-state. Say ninty days.", I think it would be fair if this were done symmetrically. If both parties agree to recuse themselves for an agreed time from editing an agreed set of articles then we can already close this mediation. If you have any idea for a modification of this agreement, please let me know, it may still be easier to agree on this than to go through a full mediation process.
If we don't have the easy way out, then I propose that we go through the items one by one, so that nobody gets overwhelmed.
I appeal to both parties to cooperate: The better both sides cooperate, the better for all of us. This is easier here than in the wild discussions on other talk pages because it is mediated. I can help create a cooperative atmosphere by words or by actions, such as deleting statements that I deem not constructive. Please see this as a chance to get results that have not been achieved in the discussions so far.
I think this case has considerate potential for win-win situations: Dbachmann is well known and respected as someone who is fighting against all nationalism. The Armenians were themselves victims of terrible nationalism during the Armenian genocide. This alone could offer a wide field of common ground. I don't know if this works, but why not give it a try? — Sebastian 08:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I renamed the title from "Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-30 Possible anti-Armenianism by Dbachmann" to "Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-30 Armenian nationalism" and added the necessary template to talk:Armenian nationalism. The reason for this change is that our instructions at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal clearly states that a mediation must be connected with an article and mandate putting the template there. This makes sense because:
I chose Armenian nationalism as the eponymous article for the following reasons:
Sorry, this was indeed rash by me. However, as I said, "Anti-Armenianism" is not a crime on Wikipedia. Nor is "Pro-Armenianism". Seeing how you are not even addressing my point, I feel it would have been better if I had just closed this mediation on the grounds that it was inappropriate. I still have some hope, though, that we can work this out, but I really need you to come to this with an open mind, which includes reading and understanding our pertinent rules and guidelines. — Sebastian 17:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
User Andranikpasha marks these editions of Dbachmann as problematic:
(After I made this list, new dubious editions by Dbachmann took place. I'll have to look at them as maybe they need to be discussed here, too.) Andranikpasha 16:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
it appears Andranikpasha is getting all worked up because he apparently understood I was trying to defend the official Turkish position on the Armenian genocide. That is not the case at all. It is perfectly obvious that the Armenian genocide merits the description "genocide" as much as any other genocide. Just as it is perfectly obvious that Turkish nationalist revisionism in turn fans Armenian nationalism. We have an entire article on that effect, viz. Rise of nationalism under the Ottoman Empire. I find it difficult (and not too engaging) to follow Andranikpasha's line of thought, but his indignation seems to somehow be based on assuming that by mentioning Turkish attitude towards Armenians I am somehow endorsing it (which is of course perfectly baseless). All of this doesn't change that authors like Martiros Kavoukjian having notability as "historians" in Armenia is a textbook illustration of nationalist antiquity frenzy. Of course we cannot expect that any academic takes note of authors like Kavoukijan at all, so that we are lucky to have at least a passing review in academic literature in "Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology in the Caucasus" (1996). Any serious editor would not put up an argument about the credibility of Kavoukijan, so that I must consider attempts to spin this author into anything resembling credibility as trolling, and I am not prepared to discuss this further. dab (𒁳) 10:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Just some points:
* (one item moved to
#Name and purpose of this case)
Not so fast, please! As I wrote above, we need to do things in order.
First and foremost, we don't even know what this case is about. I realize now that I made a mistake when I renamed this without seeking agreement. Let's clear that up first; I'm moving the discussion of this into its own section, #Name and purpose of this case.
Secondly, this discussion here is an example for what we don't want on a mediation. Dab wrote "I am not prepared to discuss this further". He has the right to refuse this mediation, which is likely if he sees this as just another time consuming random fight. To keep this from happening, it takes discipline and from all of us.
I asked that we go through issues one by one, and now we already have a big heap of unstructured arguments. On top of that, inflammatory language like "the other side is getting all worked up" are precisely what keeps emotions escalating. To avoid this, I propose the following. Do you have any other ideas?
I think Dab's statement is a great example for where mediation can be helpful. Hidden in a lot of tough wording, I see an attempt to find common ground. Dab writes that he is against Turkish nationalism, because he thinks Andranikpasha is, too. Let me say this as a neutral observer: I would also have thought that Andranikpasha might be against Turkish nationalism, and I was really hoping this could provide some common ground. My impression is that Andranikpasha felt so compelled to fight Dab, that, instead of trying to see this common ground, he brought up more ammunition from god knows where, just so he could write "Sorry you're not right.". This mindset has to stop, or there will be no mediation. Mediation is not about who's not right, but about how we get out of this mess. Is that clear? I really need the cooperation of both sides to change this from a battle to a mediation. — Sebastian 17:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
After exchanging e-mail with requestor, we agreed to close this case. This was a misunderstanding; Requestor was actually not seeking cooperation with the other party, so mediation can't help him. I learned from this that we need to spell this condition out more clearly, and before accepting a case, I need to check all conditions. — Sebastian 01:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Mediation case opened. Andranikpasha 16:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Article | Armenian nationalism |
Status | closed |
Request date | Unknown |
Requesting party | Unknown |
Parties involved | Dbachmann |
Mediator(s) | SebastianHelm |
Comment | closed; misunderstanding |
User Andranikpasha alleges that Dbachmann's editions at Armenia-related articles are not neutral, unsourced and consist elements of anti-Armenianism.
User Andranikpasha respectfully requests one thing
Context:
constructive contribution to these discussions is most welcome. -- dab (𒁳) 10:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I am coming here as a mediator with a keen interest in working towards resolving ethnic conflicts. I have, however, no background knowledge about Armenian nationalism, and I ask both parties for patience with me in that regard. This can be seen as an advantage, since I am uninvolved in any of the existing discussions.
My role as a mediator here is to help both parties. I will be looking and directing both parties to look towards ways to win, without making the other side lose. (See win-win situation).
The request of this case is for one user "to recuse himself from any further dealings with the Armenia-related topics until such time as this topic reaches a permanent steady-state. Say ninty days.", I think it would be fair if this were done symmetrically. If both parties agree to recuse themselves for an agreed time from editing an agreed set of articles then we can already close this mediation. If you have any idea for a modification of this agreement, please let me know, it may still be easier to agree on this than to go through a full mediation process.
If we don't have the easy way out, then I propose that we go through the items one by one, so that nobody gets overwhelmed.
I appeal to both parties to cooperate: The better both sides cooperate, the better for all of us. This is easier here than in the wild discussions on other talk pages because it is mediated. I can help create a cooperative atmosphere by words or by actions, such as deleting statements that I deem not constructive. Please see this as a chance to get results that have not been achieved in the discussions so far.
I think this case has considerate potential for win-win situations: Dbachmann is well known and respected as someone who is fighting against all nationalism. The Armenians were themselves victims of terrible nationalism during the Armenian genocide. This alone could offer a wide field of common ground. I don't know if this works, but why not give it a try? — Sebastian 08:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I renamed the title from "Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-30 Possible anti-Armenianism by Dbachmann" to "Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-30 Armenian nationalism" and added the necessary template to talk:Armenian nationalism. The reason for this change is that our instructions at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal clearly states that a mediation must be connected with an article and mandate putting the template there. This makes sense because:
I chose Armenian nationalism as the eponymous article for the following reasons:
Sorry, this was indeed rash by me. However, as I said, "Anti-Armenianism" is not a crime on Wikipedia. Nor is "Pro-Armenianism". Seeing how you are not even addressing my point, I feel it would have been better if I had just closed this mediation on the grounds that it was inappropriate. I still have some hope, though, that we can work this out, but I really need you to come to this with an open mind, which includes reading and understanding our pertinent rules and guidelines. — Sebastian 17:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
User Andranikpasha marks these editions of Dbachmann as problematic:
(After I made this list, new dubious editions by Dbachmann took place. I'll have to look at them as maybe they need to be discussed here, too.) Andranikpasha 16:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
it appears Andranikpasha is getting all worked up because he apparently understood I was trying to defend the official Turkish position on the Armenian genocide. That is not the case at all. It is perfectly obvious that the Armenian genocide merits the description "genocide" as much as any other genocide. Just as it is perfectly obvious that Turkish nationalist revisionism in turn fans Armenian nationalism. We have an entire article on that effect, viz. Rise of nationalism under the Ottoman Empire. I find it difficult (and not too engaging) to follow Andranikpasha's line of thought, but his indignation seems to somehow be based on assuming that by mentioning Turkish attitude towards Armenians I am somehow endorsing it (which is of course perfectly baseless). All of this doesn't change that authors like Martiros Kavoukjian having notability as "historians" in Armenia is a textbook illustration of nationalist antiquity frenzy. Of course we cannot expect that any academic takes note of authors like Kavoukijan at all, so that we are lucky to have at least a passing review in academic literature in "Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology in the Caucasus" (1996). Any serious editor would not put up an argument about the credibility of Kavoukijan, so that I must consider attempts to spin this author into anything resembling credibility as trolling, and I am not prepared to discuss this further. dab (𒁳) 10:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Just some points:
* (one item moved to
#Name and purpose of this case)
Not so fast, please! As I wrote above, we need to do things in order.
First and foremost, we don't even know what this case is about. I realize now that I made a mistake when I renamed this without seeking agreement. Let's clear that up first; I'm moving the discussion of this into its own section, #Name and purpose of this case.
Secondly, this discussion here is an example for what we don't want on a mediation. Dab wrote "I am not prepared to discuss this further". He has the right to refuse this mediation, which is likely if he sees this as just another time consuming random fight. To keep this from happening, it takes discipline and from all of us.
I asked that we go through issues one by one, and now we already have a big heap of unstructured arguments. On top of that, inflammatory language like "the other side is getting all worked up" are precisely what keeps emotions escalating. To avoid this, I propose the following. Do you have any other ideas?
I think Dab's statement is a great example for where mediation can be helpful. Hidden in a lot of tough wording, I see an attempt to find common ground. Dab writes that he is against Turkish nationalism, because he thinks Andranikpasha is, too. Let me say this as a neutral observer: I would also have thought that Andranikpasha might be against Turkish nationalism, and I was really hoping this could provide some common ground. My impression is that Andranikpasha felt so compelled to fight Dab, that, instead of trying to see this common ground, he brought up more ammunition from god knows where, just so he could write "Sorry you're not right.". This mindset has to stop, or there will be no mediation. Mediation is not about who's not right, but about how we get out of this mess. Is that clear? I really need the cooperation of both sides to change this from a battle to a mediation. — Sebastian 17:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
After exchanging e-mail with requestor, we agreed to close this case. This was a misunderstanding; Requestor was actually not seeking cooperation with the other party, so mediation can't help him. I learned from this that we need to spell this condition out more clearly, and before accepting a case, I need to check all conditions. — Sebastian 01:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)