Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
Most of the discussion will occur on this case talk page. I'll be conducting this case quite formally (despite this being informal mediation) so I'd ask proper editing decorum be maintained at all times. As always, please keep discussion civil. I'll watch this actively, provide suggestions and compromises, as well as advice as I see fit, and will deal with user conduct issues if necessary, though I hope there are none. I'd ask that you all leave your external feelings at the door, and edit this case page with Wikipedia's best interests in mind (Not that you already don't :) Best, Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 23:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
OK, first of all, I'd like each of you, in your own section, tell me a short statement about why you began editing this category of articles (we all have a reason, I edit the articles relating to 24 because I like the show) as well to how you are involved, or what your viewpoints are in relation to the Corrib gas project/Shell to Sea/etc/, and any conflicts of interest you have that could affect this case, as well as your view on the dispute, and how you best think the dispute can be solved. We'll proceed after that. Keep your statements concise. This isn't ArbCom, but I'd prefer less than 2,000 words each if possible. Also, most people will call me Steve. I'm pretty formal, and refer to people by their first name if i know it. I'd consider revealing your first name as not really revealing much about yourself. I'd much prefer to call you by your name than by your username. While I'd prefer if you didn't, if you aren't comfortable, just make one up. But no Voldemorts please. Thanks :) Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 08:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Steve. I'm nineteen years old, married, and studying Computer Systems Engineering. I've been editing Wikipedia since January 2008, and my main interests on Wikipedia are editing articles related to 24 and dispute resolution, as I like helping others solve their problems, and I'm not afraid to take on large, controversial cases. I've mediated four cases at MedCab:
I also mediated a few cases informally, including Ming Dynasty and Sovereign Grace Ministries
I've not had a perfect past, and was previously sitebanned for half a year, but I've learned a lot from my past mistakes. But anyway, the focus here is on you, and how I can help you resolve your disputes. So, with that in mind, let's get started. :) Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 22:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm Fin! This was originally quite different, but I rewrote it in the past hour to suit Keith/Gainline's template.
I'm going to stick with LP. I've been editing since 2005, mostly articles to do with history and politics.
Someone has to start, my names Keith and I'm looking forward to getting things worked out.
GainLine
♠
♥ 21:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Alright, apologies for the delay. I have more free time in the short term, so let's get started. Looking over the dispute, the main issues, which all others branch off, is part verifiability of content, blended with original research, as well as changing the wording of sources, as well as POV pushing. Edit warring is also an issue, however the agreement you have all made to refrain from editing the articles should stop that. Undue weight is also an issue, however I'd suggest that this issue be addressed later on in the mediation, and that we make some progress to get our confidence built up before we address the more complex issues. I think, for starters, the best way to proceed is to use content, specifically from sources, and while we don't want to plagarise the sources, be sure that we are not twisting the source to promote a certain point of view. However, this case is large, so it may be wise to split the case into sub cases to address each issue individually, eg pov pushing. If there are no objections, i'll do that. Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 12:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I really hate to do this, and apologise to you all, however, I must withdraw as mediator from this case. That said, I have made sure that a mediator will be assigned to this case, and will continue to mediate this case. Sorry again. Best, Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 00:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
To move forward I have removed some of the issues and likewise articles from this mediation. If we we to deal with everything we would be here for months and months on end. I have explained the reasoning behind each one:
Links to deletion debates:-
GainLine
♠
♥ 09:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
These have now been AFD'ed
GainLine
♠
♥ 16:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I will go through each article at a time dealing with the sourcing issues, linking issues etc. It must however be accepted by all parties that this mediation has to accept that articles must comply with the need for verifiable information. Seddσn talk 22:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Please list under your user name, specific sections of text or sources that you feel is associated with this dispute following the example below:
===[[User:Example]]===
*''"example reference"''
'''reason its unsuitable'''
Sorry for the delay in me getting started, I've been pretty busy IRL tho it seems no one else had a chance either. This is actually probabaly one of the lesser problem articles in the dispute.
LP seems to not fully understand or ignores the WP:OWN policy' and reverts changes he doesn't like
Subtle POV Pushing
Uncited and again connection of material to lead reader to conclusion, also possible WP:OR in this example
Negative Bias against parties the Shell to Sea Campaign opposes
eg: [3]
POV imagery
GainLine
♠
♥ 16:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Also sorry for the delay, I've had other stuff going on over the past couple of weeks.
Subtle POV-pushing - while the statement may be true (it probably is the most heavily guarded), the use of this statement in the introduction is pushing the POV that there's overwhelming opposition to the terminal, so much so that it has to be guarded 24/7.
Weasel words, unsuitable sourcing - the "people" stated here have never been cited, the source cites Shell's record independently, not citing it in relation to Corrib gas.
Selective quotation, weasel words, sweeping statement - a quote from a member of the opposition about a government initiative is never going to be positive, a quote such as the one from Dick Spring implies Ireland was just about to sink into the sea. "Drastically" is a weasel world, "the lowest in the world" is speculative as best.
Unnecessary detail to push POV - there's no need to quote the report, stating that permission was refused is fine.
POV-pushing, practically libel - this section is deliberately written (without sources) to imply that IRMS are pedophiles that intimidate locals.
There's more examples and other problems (like WP:OWN and POV-imagery as Keith mentioned above), but that's just a few I took from a quick skim through the article. Thanks! Fin © ™ 10:41, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
Most of the discussion will occur on this case talk page. I'll be conducting this case quite formally (despite this being informal mediation) so I'd ask proper editing decorum be maintained at all times. As always, please keep discussion civil. I'll watch this actively, provide suggestions and compromises, as well as advice as I see fit, and will deal with user conduct issues if necessary, though I hope there are none. I'd ask that you all leave your external feelings at the door, and edit this case page with Wikipedia's best interests in mind (Not that you already don't :) Best, Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 23:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
OK, first of all, I'd like each of you, in your own section, tell me a short statement about why you began editing this category of articles (we all have a reason, I edit the articles relating to 24 because I like the show) as well to how you are involved, or what your viewpoints are in relation to the Corrib gas project/Shell to Sea/etc/, and any conflicts of interest you have that could affect this case, as well as your view on the dispute, and how you best think the dispute can be solved. We'll proceed after that. Keep your statements concise. This isn't ArbCom, but I'd prefer less than 2,000 words each if possible. Also, most people will call me Steve. I'm pretty formal, and refer to people by their first name if i know it. I'd consider revealing your first name as not really revealing much about yourself. I'd much prefer to call you by your name than by your username. While I'd prefer if you didn't, if you aren't comfortable, just make one up. But no Voldemorts please. Thanks :) Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 08:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Steve. I'm nineteen years old, married, and studying Computer Systems Engineering. I've been editing Wikipedia since January 2008, and my main interests on Wikipedia are editing articles related to 24 and dispute resolution, as I like helping others solve their problems, and I'm not afraid to take on large, controversial cases. I've mediated four cases at MedCab:
I also mediated a few cases informally, including Ming Dynasty and Sovereign Grace Ministries
I've not had a perfect past, and was previously sitebanned for half a year, but I've learned a lot from my past mistakes. But anyway, the focus here is on you, and how I can help you resolve your disputes. So, with that in mind, let's get started. :) Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 22:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm Fin! This was originally quite different, but I rewrote it in the past hour to suit Keith/Gainline's template.
I'm going to stick with LP. I've been editing since 2005, mostly articles to do with history and politics.
Someone has to start, my names Keith and I'm looking forward to getting things worked out.
GainLine
♠
♥ 21:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Alright, apologies for the delay. I have more free time in the short term, so let's get started. Looking over the dispute, the main issues, which all others branch off, is part verifiability of content, blended with original research, as well as changing the wording of sources, as well as POV pushing. Edit warring is also an issue, however the agreement you have all made to refrain from editing the articles should stop that. Undue weight is also an issue, however I'd suggest that this issue be addressed later on in the mediation, and that we make some progress to get our confidence built up before we address the more complex issues. I think, for starters, the best way to proceed is to use content, specifically from sources, and while we don't want to plagarise the sources, be sure that we are not twisting the source to promote a certain point of view. However, this case is large, so it may be wise to split the case into sub cases to address each issue individually, eg pov pushing. If there are no objections, i'll do that. Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 12:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I really hate to do this, and apologise to you all, however, I must withdraw as mediator from this case. That said, I have made sure that a mediator will be assigned to this case, and will continue to mediate this case. Sorry again. Best, Steve Crossin Talk/ Help us mediate! 00:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
To move forward I have removed some of the issues and likewise articles from this mediation. If we we to deal with everything we would be here for months and months on end. I have explained the reasoning behind each one:
Links to deletion debates:-
GainLine
♠
♥ 09:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
These have now been AFD'ed
GainLine
♠
♥ 16:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I will go through each article at a time dealing with the sourcing issues, linking issues etc. It must however be accepted by all parties that this mediation has to accept that articles must comply with the need for verifiable information. Seddσn talk 22:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Please list under your user name, specific sections of text or sources that you feel is associated with this dispute following the example below:
===[[User:Example]]===
*''"example reference"''
'''reason its unsuitable'''
Sorry for the delay in me getting started, I've been pretty busy IRL tho it seems no one else had a chance either. This is actually probabaly one of the lesser problem articles in the dispute.
LP seems to not fully understand or ignores the WP:OWN policy' and reverts changes he doesn't like
Subtle POV Pushing
Uncited and again connection of material to lead reader to conclusion, also possible WP:OR in this example
Negative Bias against parties the Shell to Sea Campaign opposes
eg: [3]
POV imagery
GainLine
♠
♥ 16:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Also sorry for the delay, I've had other stuff going on over the past couple of weeks.
Subtle POV-pushing - while the statement may be true (it probably is the most heavily guarded), the use of this statement in the introduction is pushing the POV that there's overwhelming opposition to the terminal, so much so that it has to be guarded 24/7.
Weasel words, unsuitable sourcing - the "people" stated here have never been cited, the source cites Shell's record independently, not citing it in relation to Corrib gas.
Selective quotation, weasel words, sweeping statement - a quote from a member of the opposition about a government initiative is never going to be positive, a quote such as the one from Dick Spring implies Ireland was just about to sink into the sea. "Drastically" is a weasel world, "the lowest in the world" is speculative as best.
Unnecessary detail to push POV - there's no need to quote the report, stating that permission was refused is fine.
POV-pushing, practically libel - this section is deliberately written (without sources) to imply that IRMS are pedophiles that intimidate locals.
There's more examples and other problems (like WP:OWN and POV-imagery as Keith mentioned above), but that's just a few I took from a quick skim through the article. Thanks! Fin © ™ 10:41, 25 June 2009 (UTC)