Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Seraphim Rose

Seraphim Rose

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

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Ecjmartin (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. 96.246.94.117 (talk · contribs)
3. Anglicanus (talk · contribs)
4. Afterwriting (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. Seraphim Rose

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

Discussion on the talk page. This matter strikes at the heart of a religious-oriented dispute that sees one editor accusing the others of pursuing a "pro-gay" agenda by including this information. Ecjmartin has offered a compromise wording for the paragraph in dispute, but the accusing editor refuses to accept it. Rather than getting into any more edit wars here (especially in a no-win situation such as this one currently is, for both "sides" involved), I think referral to mediation is in order.

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. Should this article contain mention of allegations of Fr. Seraphim's homosexuality during his earlier years? A compromise wording has been offered to give both sides "air time" in this dispute, but one editor refuses to accept it and insists upon all mention of it being deleted completely, even though it is referenced in a published work.
2. If the material should be retained in some way, does the proposed compromise wording by Ecjmartin represent the best way to present this information, or is there a better way to word it?

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. Ecjmartin (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC) NOTE: as the person who initially filed this request, I would like to cancel it. I am withdrawing from the discussion, and want nothing further to do with it. Thank you. - Ecjmartin (talk) 03:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
2. Agree. Afterwriting (talk) 18:09, 30 April 2015 (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 — As withdrawn request. Any of the other parties involved in this dispute may, if they wish, refile this request at requests for mediation. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:22, 1 May 2015 (UTC) (Chairperson)