Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Neoconservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Closed, due to withdrawal of parties and difficulty finding a mediator. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 15:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Neoconservatism 1.1 Involved parties 1.2 Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted: 1.3 Issues to be mediated 1.4 Additional issues to be mediated 1.5 Parties' agreement to mediate 1.6 Decision of the Mediation Committee

[edit] Neoconservatism

[edit] Involved parties

• Jacrosse
• Cberlet
• Bhouston
• Thames
• Hydriotaphia
• Jmabel
• MONGO

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request:

Article talk pages:

• Neoconservatism [1]

User talk pages:

• Jacrosse [2]
• Cberlet [3]
• Bhouston [4]
• Thames [5], [6]
• Jmabel [7], [8]

[edit] Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

• WP:RFC link
• WP:AN/I discussion

[edit] Issues to be mediated

• Whether a section on the origins of Neoconservatism is neutral and factually accurate.
• Whether all parties are engaging in productive discussion of the relevant issue.

[edit] Additional issues to be mediated

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

[edit] Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected.

• Agree. Hydriotaphia 22:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree.Cberlet 22:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree, but have a limited amount of time for this. - Jmabel | Talk 22:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. —thames 22:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree. --Ben Houston 00:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree, but don't want the "process" to get carried away with itself.--Jacrosse 00:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• Agree...but will not participate in any voting...this needs to be a discussion over content and cited refences.--MONGO 06:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Withdraw - though I hope the mediation is successful, I haven't had sufficient involvement in the article to be a useful participant. -Will Beback 21:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Withdraw - other editors are raising same concerns, doubt mediation would be anything but a waste of Admin time at this point. I will walk away from page for two months.--Cberlet 15:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Decision of the Mediation Committee

• Accept: Given Will's "withdrawal," accept, unless the parties can demonstrate that his withdrawal will prevent the mediation from being successful (i.e., if his withdrawal should be construed as failure of all parties to agree).

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 21:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

• Given that editors are withdrawing from the mediation (apologies that it has been difficult to find a mediator), and that others were less than eager to be involved in the first place, I believe the best course is to go ahead and close this mediation with the reccommendation that the parties try other forms of dispute resolution if needed. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 15:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)