Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-04-11 Anti-Brahmanism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Mediation Case: 2006-04-11 Anti-Brahmanism

Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.


[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Anirvan 18:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Where is the issue taking place?
Anti-Brahmanism
Talk:Anti-Brahmanism#Mediation
Who's involved?
Primarily myself (Anirvan) and ISKapoor
What's going on?
There's disagreement about the content of the article about Anti-Brahmanism. ISKapoor seems to feel that prejudice against members of the Hindu Brahmin caste is best described as what I'd call context-less religious prejudice. His edits also seem to conflate anti-Indian and anti-Hindu prejudice with specifically anti-Brahmin prejudice. He seems to express a Hindu nationalist and/or Brahmin apologist POV (but then again, that's my POV, and I'm sure he has equally nice things to say about my edits). I'd like to see the article include more historical context, and describe the various sources of anti-Brahmin sentiment. At least two other users on the talk page appear to agree with my general ideas.
What would you like to change about that?
Most importantly, I don't want to get into an edit war. I have an alternate variant of the article up at User:Anirvan/Anti-Brahmanism. I'd like to see that, or something based on those ideas, to be used as the main article. Some of my specific critiques about ISKapoor's edits are on the talk page. I presume ISKapoor would like to keep the article substantially as is.
If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
You can contact me via WP's "email this user" link, but I don't have a preference as to whether it's handled privately or not.
Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.
No, not at this time.

[edit] Mediator response

This case is being closed with recommendation for future action. Before I became involved with this case, it sat on the shelf for almost 2 weeks which resulted in participants losing some interest in resolution. [[User:ISKapoor}] was concerned but had been willing to engage to a limited extent [1]. The original requester User:Anirvan has remained active but has not replied to the various emails sent after the first one. I can't mediate without any help. In terms of the underlying issue on it comes down to this: there are two fundamental views of anti-Brahmanism:

  1. That it is a natural reaction to class issues inside of India
  2. That is a form of racism promoted by people with anti India interests

The article currently reads as bad propaganda for the second viewpoint. To correct this without starting a revert war I recommend that remaining editors do the following in the following order:

  1. Create a section arguing clearly for the 2nd point of view. That is create a verifiable sub article on this theory quoting its major proponents
  2. Pull from the main body of the article all the defenses of anti anti Brahmanism and simply relay facts about who, why, when, where, what....
  3. Create a section arguing clearly for the 1st point of view. That is create a verifiable sub article on this theory quoting its major proponents. There is already a fairly good start to this User:Anirvan/Anti-Brahmanism

jbolden1517Talk 20:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I would have liked to have been involved further since I think this is an important article, but I reluctantly have to close this case out. jbolden1517Talk 20:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence

Please report evidence in this section with {{Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence}} for misconduct and {{Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Evidence3RR}} for 3RR violations. If you need help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil.
Wikipedia:Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.

[edit] Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.


[edit] Comments by others

While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.


The inept attitude exhibited in handling this sensitive issue has me dizzy, thankfully i was googling for a news article. will sign up and take ownership of this page.. and i agree with teh mod.

A1

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Update requested

Hi there, I am Cowman109Talk. This case has not seen any edits since April 20. Is this case still active? If it is not, I will close it and move it to the archives. Thanks. Cowman109Talk 22:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

semi dead I'll take care of closing it or getting it back to life. jbolden1517Talk 01:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)