| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Article | Mujahideen |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | Unknown |
| Parties involved | User:Osli73 and User:HarisM |
| Mediator(s) | Xavexgoem ( talk) |
| Comment | complete standstill; will keep watched |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases| Mujahideen]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance| Mujahideen]]
Request details
Dispute regarding interpretation of the ICTY appeals chamber's judgement in the case of Hadzihasanovic and Kabura case and how this should then be reflected in the Bosnia section of the article. The alternatives are essentially the versions proposed by Osli73 and HarisM.
Who are the involved parties?
What's going on?
User:HarisM has essentially reverted the section on Bosnia to a previous version by User:Grandy Grandy on the basis of a decision by the ICTY's appeals chamber in the case of Hadzihasanovic and Kabura. Some discussion has been going on in Talk:Mujahideen but is not productive. I would like som outside assistance in this matter. Please not that the article and edit conflict is related to an earlier mediation on the Bosnian mujahideen article.
What would you like to change about that?
I ( User:Osli73)argue that while the court's decision in the Hadzihasanovic and Kabura case does motivate a slight change in the wording, it does not motivate a wholesale revert of the article to a completely different text.
Mediator notes
Administrative notes
Discussion
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Article | Mujahideen |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | Unknown |
| Requesting party | Unknown |
| Parties involved | User:Osli73 and User:HarisM |
| Mediator(s) | Xavexgoem ( talk) |
| Comment | complete standstill; will keep watched |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab closed cases| Mujahideen]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance| Mujahideen]]
Request details
Dispute regarding interpretation of the ICTY appeals chamber's judgement in the case of Hadzihasanovic and Kabura case and how this should then be reflected in the Bosnia section of the article. The alternatives are essentially the versions proposed by Osli73 and HarisM.
Who are the involved parties?
What's going on?
User:HarisM has essentially reverted the section on Bosnia to a previous version by User:Grandy Grandy on the basis of a decision by the ICTY's appeals chamber in the case of Hadzihasanovic and Kabura. Some discussion has been going on in Talk:Mujahideen but is not productive. I would like som outside assistance in this matter. Please not that the article and edit conflict is related to an earlier mediation on the Bosnian mujahideen article.
What would you like to change about that?
I ( User:Osli73)argue that while the court's decision in the Hadzihasanovic and Kabura case does motivate a slight change in the wording, it does not motivate a wholesale revert of the article to a completely different text.