Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Steel-cut oats3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Steel-cut oats3

[edit]
Editors involved in this dispute
  1. MrX2077 (talk · contribs) – filing party
  2. MrX2077 (talk · contribs)
  3. Mutt Lunker (talk · contribs)
Articles affected by this dispute
  1. Steel-cut oats (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
  • [[Talk:Talk:Steel-cut_oats# see section discussion on groat, which is a copy of our conversation ]]

Issues to be mediated

[edit]
Primary issues (added by the filing party)
  1. 1.What is a groat? There is a lack of an explicit definition of the word
  2. 2.To reiterate:My apologies for the reintroduction of this issue; I was unfamiliar with the format of this request form; I now included Matt Lunker talk page where we had "extensive discussion of the matter"; I placed it on his page because he was the one who took exception to my contribution. Please note, that I made three "good-faith attempts" to tailor the definition to accommodate his concerns, and every time an adverse determination was made, the article was reverted back to the previous version.
  3. 3 Maybe I was not clear, every time I try to meet his criteria, he shoots me down, as far as he is concerned if you want more information, one should click on the groat wiki-link; Before Wikipedia or even the internet was introduced to the general public, I found that articles employed a type of Socratic method, namely before discussing a matter in depth, one would define the terms that would be used through out the article. I understand, why a wiki-link would be used if one wanted more information. But if it over-used, it promotes a form of intellectual laziness, where a person does not take the time to develop their ideas so it can become more accessible. Now for a person who is just beginning to understand the subject matter, it is like asking some to look up a word they do not understand, and then find out it is explain in terms of other words they do not understand (sort of like a nested loop). I was under the impression that Wikipedia mission, is to make knowledge accessible to all, but it is hard to do if the other party decides the matter is closed.
  4. 4 If this is an inappropriate forum, please tell me specifically, what would be the more fitting option (in simplest terms what those options mean)
Additional issues (added by other parties)
  • Additional issue 1
  • Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

[edit]
  1. Agree. MrX2077 (talk) 04:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Agree. MrX2077 (talk) 06:11, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee

[edit]
  • Reject. For reasons given in previous filing. For other dispute resolution possibilities, see the list in the previous rejection statement. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 06:16, 5 May 2016 (UTC) (Chairperson)[reply]