Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Aratta

This Request for Mediation has been closed.

This case was closed by: Anthøny 14:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]
The reason given for closure was: further to recent developments documented here.
Parties: If you wish to resume this mediation, please file a new request.

Aratta

request links: view edit delete watch

Filed: 16:16, April 17 2008 (UTC)

Involved parties

Til Eulenspiegel (talk · contribs), filing party
Sumerophile (talk · contribs)

Articles involved

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

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-03-24 Aratta - please read for a fuller summary of the problem
- discussion in above case mostly conducted at Talk:Aratta
Preceding this case, in response to requests at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, multiple neutral editors explained their view that the references are indeed sufficient to establish that a given hypothesis exists and may be mentioned as existing -- without of course endorsing said hypothesis in any way.
- The above statement is not true, as the Aratta talk page shows. Nationist sources should not be used. Sumerophile (talk) 02:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

How, and to what extent, should the various prominent and significant, academically published hypotheses and schools-of-thought regarding the possible location of Aratta, be mentioned in the section "Location hypotheses" of that article? Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The mainstream discussion that took place in the 1950's-70's is already rather exhaustively represented in the "location hypotheses" section for this mythical land. A lot of fringe ideas have popped up since then (sometimes pointedly nationalistic, sometimes this-word-looks-like-that-word). Sumerophile (talk) 02:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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
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. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, noting this request sounds like WP:Canvassing Sumerophile (talk) 18:57, 24 April 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 given that informal mediation was unsuccessful in resolving this dispute.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 23:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediating case. Parties, please watchlist this page; also note my statement on the talk page. Cheers, Anthøny 16:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]