Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-02-10 Bates Method

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal

Article: Bates method State: Closed Requested By: seeyou Other Parties: famousdog

Contents 1 Mediation Case: 2007-02-10 Bates Method 1.1 Request Information 1.2 Mediator response 1.3 Compromise offers 1.4 Discussion

[edit] Mediation Case: 2007-02-10 Bates Method

[edit] Request Information

Request made by: Seeyou 08:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Where is the issue taking place?

Bates method discussion page, Talk:Bates method.

Who's involved?

famousdog

What's going on?

editing citation. which is not allowed as far as I know since it is a citation

What would you like to change about that?

third party help or opinion Also warning about fake argument and creating diffusion. See the comments famousdog is giving.

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?

my talk

[edit] Mediator response

I'm not sure I understand what exactly is being asked for here. Could you clarify, please? It looks like a user simply properly formatted a reference you gave in an article, so I don't see how this requires mediation. Cowman109^Talk 17:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Answer :

The problem is the literal citation :

The Bates Method is an educational program created by ophthalmologist William Horatio Bates, M.D., in which natural correct vision habits --based on relaxation of the mind and body – are taught; optional self-healing activities and games are often included to accelerate integration and self-healing; commonly misunderstood as only eye exercises even by many Bates Method teachers.

Has been changed into :

The Bates Method is a program created by ophthalmologist William Horatio Bates, M.D., which aims to "correct" vision habits with relaxation techniques, exercises and optional activities and games.

In my opinion a lot of valuable information is removed.

For example 
 ( educational program ) has become ( program ),
 ( commonly misunderstood as only eye exercise even by many Bates method teachers ) 
  has been removed

Also when these kind of edits are allowed. A reader can not check it in the book. There is also a chance that in future it will change again and again making it constantly less informative and farther away from what is really said by people who studied the material thoroughly.

In other words the quality of the information has become worse. From the point of view of the skeptic however it has of course become better. Details do matter.Seeyou 17:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Are those two points vital to the understanding of the article? The lead sentence of the article should be concise, and it looks like the subject of the article is fully explained further along. It's probably best to not just use direct quotes from sources either. In my opinion at least, 'educational program' and 'program' have little if any difference, and the sentence 'commonly misunderstood as only eye exercise even by many Bates method teachers' does seem to assert the use of the Bates Method while the common mainstream view appears to be that it does not work. There doesn't seem to be a need to assert that the method is 'more than only an eye exercise' when the mainstream view seems to be that it is so, unless I'm missing something. I think the issue in this content dispute is, however, that you haven't outlined your concerns to the other editors in the talk page of the article. If you explain yourself in the talk page with your specific concerns, I'm sure a positive discussion could begin. Cowman109^Talk 18:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

> In my opinion at least, 'educational program' and 'program' have little if any difference

In my opinion there is a big difference. ( keep also the skeptic point of view in mind ) To apply the batesmethod with succes it needs to be properly educated by a skilled batesteacher who really understands what the batesmethod is about. A program suggests the bates method is simply a fixed static program. You just have to read the book do the program and then you understand it and your sight will improve. ( like just buy the kit of the See Clearly Method ) An educational program tells people you first have got to become educated ( take lessons ). before you start. Understand how and why it works. Compare it with learning to drive a car or flying a plane. Driving a car for small and easy to solve sight problems and learning to fly a plane for complex sight problems.

Famousdog’s comment : BM is not an "educational program", ( look also on his comments of the past in the discussionpages batesmethod and amblyopia ( common sense, real arguments ? I do not think so. ))

( educational program ) is cited. ( Program ) is a edited citation making it not longer a citation.

The text ; ( commonly misunderstood as only eye exercise even by many Bates method teachers. ) is of less importance though good informatio for an other position in the article.

I hope I have made it clearer.Seeyou 21:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, things are much clearer now. Unfortunately I am leaving for two weeks in a day, so I won't be able to personally help (hopefully another mediator should jump in), but at this point I would suggest that you explain what you said above on the talk page of the article. I think there were some communication errors early on that made the other party unsure of what exactly you were looking for in the article. And then see where things go from there. Cowman109^Talk 23:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Is this case stil active or can I close it? --Ideogram 07:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please. Famousdog 15:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Closing. --Ideogram 22:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Reopened this case. Problem is not solved yet. Seeyou and famousdog do not agree with each other. Seeyou 14:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

If famousdog doesn't agree that there is a case here then I have to close it. --Ideogram 23:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise offers

How about I add the Bates Method article to the peer review project? Lets see what other people think. Famousdog 14:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Done. See Wikipedia:Scientific peer review/Bates method. Famousdog 14:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The mainsubject of this wikipedia mediation is converted into the following 4 words : educational program or program ! This should be solved.Seeyou 06:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed "educational program" to "program" because an "educational program" is something that governments enact while planning school curricullums, not a bunch of exercises/games/techniques that claim to help cure poor vision. I'm happy with the term "program", but I don't see any educational value to the Bates Method at all. Care to answer my comments about your confusing of citation/quotation and comment on my requesting a peer review of the article, or are all the compromises supposed to come from me? Famousdog 16:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

This is not the scientific proof the bates method is not an educational program.Seeyou 20:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is useless. I give up. Famousdog 21:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be great to hear the skeptics explain why it is impossible to improve eyesight naturally. ( Hint use parts of his book and magazine or anything you want.) There is however a danger the Bates metod will become educational when people reply or can not give real replies. Seeyou 20:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Forget it. I can't discuss anything with you when you keep shifting the goalposts. I hope a mediator can make sense of your arguments, I can't. Famousdog 21:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

> I hope a mediator can make sense of your arguments. He already understood what I meant. So that would not be a problem.Seeyou 21:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion