Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Terra Lliure

Terra Lliure

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

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Danielhythloday (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. Etruscanman114 (talk · contribs)
3. 190.248.136.154 (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. Terra Lliure (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Talk:Terra Lliure#Terra Lliure a Terrorist Organization

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)

The issue is whether Terra Lliure was a terrorist organization or not. Most, if not all the wikipedia pages for the organization in languages other than English, call it a "terrorist" organization. There is a a sentence by the European Court of Human Rights calling it a terrorist organization. There are several hundred pieces of newspaper histories calling it "terrorist". 5 people were killed because of its bombings. There are sentences condemning members of the organization to repair damages. There is no shortage of evidence of its use of bombings and kidnappings in order to carry on its political agenda. In plain English, it was a terrorist organization, and I am afraid the deletion of this fact is motivated by reasons beyond the nature and mission of Wikipedia. --Danielhythloday (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

1. Not just one court (European Court of Human Rights) but several courts in Spain formally called Terra Lliure a "terrorist organization" in several sentences against it. Therefore, it is not a personal opinion, but the official opinion of the judiciary that ruled criminal actions of Terra Lliure
2. The group meets all definitions of terrorism, even the definition that appears at the beginning of the Wikipedia article terrorism that, incidentally, has no claim to be a generally accepted one. Terra Lliure provoked the killing of 5 persons in several bombings during his continued political fighting in time of peace. It clearly fulfills the criteria defined in a Secretary-General of the United Nations report (quoted in the same article) describing terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act"--Danielhythloday (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Additional issues (added by other parties)

1. The opinions of one court is irrelevant.
2. The opinions of editors on other wikipedias is completely irrelevant.
3. WP:NPOV would be breached. The reader can decide for themselves. There is no reason to shove a narrative down their throats.
4. The group does not meet the definition of terrorist as laid out in the terrorism article which defines it as the indiscriminate killing of civilians.
5. WP:LABEL would be breached which says "Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided"Etruscanman114 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

After the Mediation Committee decision to reject the mediation, how is the article supposed to look like? Does the mediation means that the version of the part deleting the adjective "terrorist" must stand or does it mean that the adjective can stay? --Danielhythloday (talk) 01:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

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. I agree to participate Danielhythloday (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)--Danielhythloday (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2017 (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 meet prerequisite for mediation #4, "The parties must have first engaged in extensive discussion of the matter in dispute at the article talk page and discussion only through edit summaries will not suffice." For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 23:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (Chairperson)