The case seems to be related to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 December 2005/Mark K. Bilbo -- Fasten 21:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Preliminary response: The case seems to be related to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 December 2005/Mark K. Bilbo -- Fasten 21:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
See also: Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#January_4.2C_2006 -- Fasten 14:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
This is indeed the same case. Case closed.
No it's not. Mark K. Bilbo and Kent Hovind are 2 seperate people that each have their own article in Wikipedia. What Jason Gastrich is doing to Bilbo's article he is doing at Hovind's article. This is not the same case. It is a different case. Apparantly, based on an email conversation with this mediator, I have a bad attitude and that's why an agreement can't be made. I've never editted either of these pages. (Bilbo or Hovind) The dispute of these pages do not involve me. My issue with Jason, is just that, my issue with Jason, which is being handled at the moment. That does not resolve the issue that Jason is continuing to revert edits to the Hovind article, which this case is supposed to be mediating and the Bilbo case which another case is mediating. He is also continuing to push his POV, which has not been addressed by either mediator. Neither of the mediators are giving me much faith in WikiPedia at this time. But I'm glad you decided to close the case while there is still no resolution. Don't quit your day job! Icj tlc 18:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Based on the request of User:Icj tlc and that a cursory evaluation shows that although the cases are indeed related, they do appear to be separate disputes (to me at least) and it would not seem to hurt to give this case a run-through, I'm reopening this case. I will be the mediator for this case. Icj tlc is warned that any further incivility from him relating to this mediation request to a member of the Mediation Cabal team will result in this case being closed. I will perform a full evaluation on this matter within three days or so and publish it here. Best regards, -- NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
From User:Icj tlc:
Since this dispute (and, indeed, the Mark K. Bilbo issue also) gravitates around the Jason Gastrich/Icj tlc conflict, the above message would appear to indicate a state of affairs outside the scope of mediation based on this statement by Icj tlc. This message above, in addition to the incivility demonstrated by Icj tlc towards a Mediation Cabal mediator, also brings this request for mediation into questionable faith. These issues, regardless of their merits, indicate that this case is not one where the assistance of an informal mediator is possible. The Mediation Cabal cannot deal with disciplinary issues, and can only assist where two parties exist who are willing to attempt mutual negotiation to produce agreement. If the statement written by Icj tlc above is indeed true, this case should be brought to the Arbitration Committee; indeed, if a real issue of harassment does exist perpetrated by either party, the affected party should report the matter to his/her local police. As a consequence I am hereby marking this case closed. -- NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The case seems to be related to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 December 2005/Mark K. Bilbo -- Fasten 21:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Preliminary response: The case seems to be related to Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/27 December 2005/Mark K. Bilbo -- Fasten 21:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
See also: Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#January_4.2C_2006 -- Fasten 14:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
This is indeed the same case. Case closed.
No it's not. Mark K. Bilbo and Kent Hovind are 2 seperate people that each have their own article in Wikipedia. What Jason Gastrich is doing to Bilbo's article he is doing at Hovind's article. This is not the same case. It is a different case. Apparantly, based on an email conversation with this mediator, I have a bad attitude and that's why an agreement can't be made. I've never editted either of these pages. (Bilbo or Hovind) The dispute of these pages do not involve me. My issue with Jason, is just that, my issue with Jason, which is being handled at the moment. That does not resolve the issue that Jason is continuing to revert edits to the Hovind article, which this case is supposed to be mediating and the Bilbo case which another case is mediating. He is also continuing to push his POV, which has not been addressed by either mediator. Neither of the mediators are giving me much faith in WikiPedia at this time. But I'm glad you decided to close the case while there is still no resolution. Don't quit your day job! Icj tlc 18:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Based on the request of User:Icj tlc and that a cursory evaluation shows that although the cases are indeed related, they do appear to be separate disputes (to me at least) and it would not seem to hurt to give this case a run-through, I'm reopening this case. I will be the mediator for this case. Icj tlc is warned that any further incivility from him relating to this mediation request to a member of the Mediation Cabal team will result in this case being closed. I will perform a full evaluation on this matter within three days or so and publish it here. Best regards, -- NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
From User:Icj tlc:
Since this dispute (and, indeed, the Mark K. Bilbo issue also) gravitates around the Jason Gastrich/Icj tlc conflict, the above message would appear to indicate a state of affairs outside the scope of mediation based on this statement by Icj tlc. This message above, in addition to the incivility demonstrated by Icj tlc towards a Mediation Cabal mediator, also brings this request for mediation into questionable faith. These issues, regardless of their merits, indicate that this case is not one where the assistance of an informal mediator is possible. The Mediation Cabal cannot deal with disciplinary issues, and can only assist where two parties exist who are willing to attempt mutual negotiation to produce agreement. If the statement written by Icj tlc above is indeed true, this case should be brought to the Arbitration Committee; indeed, if a real issue of harassment does exist perpetrated by either party, the affected party should report the matter to his/her local police. As a consequence I am hereby marking this case closed. -- NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 04:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)