Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-02-05 Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Mediation Cabal | |
| 2007-02-05 Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations | |
| Article | Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations |
|---|---|
| Status | Closed |
| Requestor | DES |
| Parties | Wahkeenah (talk · contribs), 64.105.100.228 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS), Gravitor (talk · contribs), Des@des.no (talk · contribs) |
| Mediator(s) | Captain panda (talk · contribs) |
| Comment | attempting to start meditation |
Contents |
[edit] Mediation Case: 2007-02-05 Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations
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: DES 11:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations
- Who's involved?
- Wahkeenah (talk · contribs), 64.105.100.228 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS), Gravitor (talk · contribs), Des@des.no (talk · contribs)
- What's going on?
- One of the issues discussed on the page is that hoax proponents and opponents disagree on where the burden of proof lies. This was mentioned in a section entitled Burden of proof. Editors who favor the hoax repeatedly changed this section to assert that the burden of proof rests on NASA, or even removed it altogether. Others repeatedly reverted those changes. I attempted to intervene by rewriting it to make it more clear that it describes a disagreement without trying to argue either side. Pro-hoax editors then removed the rewritten section on the grounds that it was "unsourced original research".
- What would you like to change about that?
- The Burden of proof section describes a genuine disagreement which lies at the core of the hoax debate, and should be part of the article. The article also needs to be reviewed for bias and especially weasel words.
- Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
- No.
[edit] Mediator response
Is this case still active or can I close it? --Ideogram 01:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, the case said it was new because of the category it was under and I figured that I could take it, so I did. If this case has been closed, then I will gladly leave. Just let me know :)
Captain panda In vino veritas 04:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Let's see if anyone responds. --Ideogram 05:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
No activity. Closing. --Ideogram 04:23, 9 March 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.
Well, first I will say that this article is theory and guessing overall in its basis. It is difficult to cite a sourced when one is speculating.
Captain panda In vino veritas 04:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
As for the burden of proof, I would say that due to the USA landing on the moon being seen by more people as true rather tahn false, the burden of proof lies upon those saying the landing and information given there was false. However, this is just an initial theory. My mind can be changed and perhaps it will in time.
Captain panda In vino veritas 04:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Comment on the burden of proof section. That section was in such a poor state that I was thinking that it needed to be omited. However, I think DES did a good job in rewriting it to be neutral. Bubba73 (talk), 16:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
If there is going to be a meditation, we will need both sides. Can you people who created this page get the people that oppose you to come here for a discussion. Without two sides, there can be no mediation.
Captain panda In vino veritas 23:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
