User:Volunteer Marek/proposal

@Masem: @GoldenRing: @Sandstein: @Drmies:

Proposal

First, User:Icewhiz is topic banned from any articles about living persons (BLPs) who are historians who have published in the area of Polish-Jewish relations during WW2. This is a minimum that needs to happen here just to put an end to the constant and ongoing attacks on living persons and the turning of their biographies into attack pages.

Second, as to the broader scope of dispute, I would be happy to participate in mediation or some formal dispute resolution process with Icewhiz (and User:François Robere, as well as any other editors involved, although obviously I can’t speak for them) which seeks to resolve the relevant issues. This could be potentially productive PROVIDED that certain conditions are met (since previous interactions have been so contentious).

In particular:

• The mediation/DR should focus on one article at a time. Simultaneously – rather than being subject to an outright topic ban - myself, Icewhiz and Francois Robere will voluntarily refrain from editing other articles in the topic area of Polish-Jewish relations during WW2. This will keep the dispute from spreading, focus the dispute resolution, and give us all an incentive to come to a compromise (so that we can move on to other articles)
• This “one article at a time” has to be one where issues can potentially be resolved. So, for example, it shouldn’t be the Home Army article, where Icewhiz’s edits and comments, comparing the anti-Nazi HA to the Nazi Party itself are so lop-sided and obnoxious that they’re essentially provocations and unlikely to result in resolution. Rather, I would suggest something more narrow, such as the Koniuchy Massacre article or the Bielski partisans article. Let’s start there. (Alternatively, if we want to pick one where there might not actually be that much disagreement to start with, then the Jedwabne Pogrom might be a good one)
• The mediator assigned is serious about it and approaches the subject neutrally – mediates, not settles content disputes. Bad experiences with mediation in the past always involved some mediator who does a half-assed job or who comes to the table with lots of preconceptions.
• In case the dispute resolution breaks down, the mediator will report and summarize the process to WP:AE and advise admins at WP:AE with regard to sanctions, if any, which would be necessary because dispute resolution failed. This will also give all parties the incentive to behave and to approach mediation in good faith. Too often mediation fails because it has no teeth so people WP:GAME it. This part of the proposal would give it… maybe not fangs, but at least baby teeth.

Volunteer Marek (talk) 08:09, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: If mostly uninvolved-but-knowledgable editors, such as User:Ealdgyth or User:K.e.coffman wish to be involved in this process - though of course its understandable if they don't - I have no problem with that either.