Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/A Voice for Men

A Voice for Men

The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Ranze (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. PearlSt82 (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. A Voice for Men (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Talk:A_Voice_for_Men#Be_wary_of_citing_references

Issues to be mediated

What is this dispute about? What sections, sentences, or issues in the article(s) can you not agree on? If you are the editor who opened this request, list these issues to be mediated under "Primary issues". If you did not open this request, you can add additional issues to be mediated under "Additional issues". The issues to be mediated would be properly agreed upon later, if this request for mediation is accepted.

Primary issues (added by the filing party)

1. Properly summarizing the views about this web site which have been expressed in various references listed on the page.

After expanding the detail of the references, I investigated the claim that they made statements about the site being controversial or misogynist. These claims were false. In https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?diff=636485329 expanded the references by including quotes from the articles where statements about the web site were made. I then summarized those, based on the references.

This got mass-reverted which I think was very inappropriate. A concern was raised regarding the interpretation of -collegial- so I am co-operating by describing that article statement in more detail, but I do not sense good intentions from the editor here. --Ranze (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

If you are a named party, please sign below and indicate whether you agree or refuse to participate in mediation. Remember that all editors are obliged to resolve disputes about content through discussion, mediation, or other similar means. If you do not wish to participate in mediation, you must arrange another form of dispute resolution. Comments and questions should be made underneath the numbered list below, to avoid confusion.

1. Agree. Ranze (talk) 18:04, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
2. This content dispute is less than half an hour old. Request should be declined and filer served WP:TROUT. PearlSt82 (talk) 18:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

This section should only be edited by a mediator. The Mediation Committee's representative will indicate in due course whether the request is accepted (meaning a mediator will be assigned) or rejected (meaning you will have to try a different type of dispute resolution). If the mediator asks you a question in this section, you may edit here.

• Reject. Fails to satisfy prerequisite for mediation #5, "A majority of the parties to the dispute consent to mediation." For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC) (Chairperson)