Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Animal testing

Animal testing

Mediation of this dispute has been completed. The case pages should not be edited.

To report a problem with the outcome of this case, contact the Mediation Committee.
If additional mediation proceedings are required, a new mediation request should be filed.
These case pages should not be edited, even to correct article content problems. Case pages are not indexed by search engines.

Resolved:

Request of one of the parties.

This mediation case is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this case page.

view edit delete watch
Filed: 03:48, January 30 2008 (UTC)

Involved parties

Articles involved

Animal testing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted

Frequent discussion and arguments on Talk:Animal testing since August 2007, with no resolution, along with several article RfCs. See this archive.

Issues to be mediated

The party filing this request uses this section to list the issues for mediation. Other parties can list additional issues in the section below.

The main issues are that one party makes frequent use of primary sources, in a way that amounts to original research. There is an overreliance on reverting as an editing tool, rather than collaboration. There is from one editor, as I see it, a desire to push a certain POV, rather than to write an informative article, and there is a disagreement as to the purpose of the article, and what areas it should cover. One editor appears also, as I see it, to have invited other editors to the page to cause a problem, rather than to improve the article. So the point of the mediation would be to try to facilitate a more respectful and collaborative editing environment.

Additional issues to be mediated

Other parties can use this section to list any others issues they wish to include in the mediation. Please do not modify or remove any other party's listing. Please sign all additions to this section if there are more than two parties involved in this case.

Additional issue 1

Although I am willing to try mediation if people think this will be helpful, I think we would be better trying some other methods to solve any disputes we have, before requesting mediation. I am personally unaware of any article RfCs and think our past talk page discussions have been quite productive. Possibly rather harsh at times, with ownership issues and assumptions of bad faith occasionally surfacing, but overall reasonably effective at resolving disagreements. Recent examples are Talk:Animal_testing#Animal_welfare_groups, Talk:Animal_testing#Draize_test and Talk:Animal_testing/archive7#Chart. Personally, I favour an article RfC dealing with the issues I have highlighted on the talk page. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)./[reply]

Additional issue 2

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. Only "Agree" or "Disagree" and signatures should appear here; any comments will be removed, but can be made at the talk page.

Agree. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Crum375 (talk) 03:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Rockpocket 06:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee

A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate acceptance/rejection/other relevant notes in this section. Non-Committee members should not edit this section.

Accept

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 00:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to mediate this case myself, provided the parties have no objection. WjBscribe 22:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.