Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-16 Difference of opinion about pottery.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article:	Pottery
State:	Closed
Requested By:	User:N.Hopton
Other Parties:	User:Brunnock
Mediated By:	User:Tutmosis

1 Mediation Case: 2007-01-16 Difference of opinion about pottery.

[edit] Mediation Case: 2007-01-16 Difference of opinion about pottery.

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: Nick 20:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?: The Pottery article and its talk pages.

Who's involved?: User:N.Hopton (NH) and User:Brunnock (SB)

What's going on?: Last year a ill-natured dispute arose on the Talk:Pottery page about the definition of the term pottery that caused a certain amount of bad blood between editors. In essence SB is of the opinion that only pots can be pottery and this was disputed by other contributors. I have recently re-written parts of the history section of the Pottery article relating to ceramic figurines found at Dolni Vestonice and Jomen pottery. I did this to try and put the section into the neutral voice required by Wikipedia. SB has reverted my recent edits, but I don't understand why. I knew that this edit had the potential to cause trouble so I took great care with my edits to find a form of words that would be acceptable to both of us.

What would you like to change about that?: I would like you to have a look at the two most recent versions of the history section of the Pottery article, the one that I edited and the latest one, by SB. It might also help if you would have a look at Talk:Pottery for some background on the matter.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?: No, absolutely not, let's have everything out in the open.

[edit] Mediator response

After a lot of discussion the article seems to be now written roughly based on a compromise suggested. Unfortunately Saun seems to have withdrawn from editing and disussion after the changes were implemented, hopefully he will be back. Since things seem to have calmed down and no edit war is in sight, I'm closing this mediation. — Tutmosis 22:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

[edit] Discussion

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.