Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Article | British National Party |
Status | Closed |
Request date | 15:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC) |
Requesting party | Unknown |
Just a list of the users involved. For example:
The British National Party is a political party in the United Kingdom with minority support (6.26% at the 2009 European Election), it is often reffered to as 'Extreme' in the media, the main point of dispute is over the use of two phrases
A consensus to be reached over which of the two is more appropriate, or even proposing a third alternate statement.
Review talk page discussion, consider all points and evealuate how the statement would best be worded.
I am declining this case, because multiple editors have explicitly declined to take part. Mediation is not compulsory. The Wordsmith Communicate 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I think this is premature. The editor who is bringing the case is pretty much isolated and a declared supporter of the BNP. We have already had Utube clips used to support his/her version and even if they were valid RS then the content doesn't support the edit s/he wants to make. I won't oppose, but there are many other things to do before mediation. -- Snowded TALK 22:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I would ask that the mass (20+ edits) stop by both Verbal and Snowded. On 13th march Snowded undid something like 2o edites without discusion [ [1]]. Some of thematerial removed relate4d to the latest news rgarding the confronation with EHRC [ [2]] and [ [3]] there is noy way that this is a contentious or contoversal edited, not one that snowded can possible object too. This was mass deletion without checkking whatr was being deleted. Verbal has reverted back to this version recently. I would ask that such mass deletions stop. Slatersteven ( talk) 21:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Article | British National Party |
Status | Closed |
Request date | 15:12, 10 March 2010 (UTC) |
Requesting party | Unknown |
Just a list of the users involved. For example:
The British National Party is a political party in the United Kingdom with minority support (6.26% at the 2009 European Election), it is often reffered to as 'Extreme' in the media, the main point of dispute is over the use of two phrases
A consensus to be reached over which of the two is more appropriate, or even proposing a third alternate statement.
Review talk page discussion, consider all points and evealuate how the statement would best be worded.
I am declining this case, because multiple editors have explicitly declined to take part. Mediation is not compulsory. The Wordsmith Communicate 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I think this is premature. The editor who is bringing the case is pretty much isolated and a declared supporter of the BNP. We have already had Utube clips used to support his/her version and even if they were valid RS then the content doesn't support the edit s/he wants to make. I won't oppose, but there are many other things to do before mediation. -- Snowded TALK 22:01, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
I would ask that the mass (20+ edits) stop by both Verbal and Snowded. On 13th march Snowded undid something like 2o edites without discusion [ [1]]. Some of thematerial removed relate4d to the latest news rgarding the confronation with EHRC [ [2]] and [ [3]] there is noy way that this is a contentious or contoversal edited, not one that snowded can possible object too. This was mass deletion without checkking whatr was being deleted. Verbal has reverted back to this version recently. I would ask that such mass deletions stop. Slatersteven ( talk) 21:10, 13 March 2010 (UTC)