User:とある白い猫/mediat

This is a suggested mediation procedure.

Method

 * 1) Initial assessment.  Complete... 
 * 2) Assessment
 * 3) Neutralisation
 * 4) Edit
 * 5) Feedback -- if good go to step 6, otherwise, to step 2
 * 6) Final clean up

During all discussion a civil tone should be maintained. The No personal attacks policy should be respected, with no insults or accusations. I will not be making any edits to the article on my own aside from spelling and grammar. We will start this from scratch, meaning all past hostilities will be forgotten. Please provide your arguments in bullet format and sign each. In order not to get involved in a "revert war", allow me to make the changes based on what we agree here. I will stay neutral in the article itself.
 * <-- Bullet.

Please, refrain from "you are wrong, we are right"-type arguments: use a more productive "I see your point, but this is what I think, how about rephrasing it as...". Insisting on a single, unaltered version does not help.

Please say what, in your opinion, is POV or what isn't factual in the article in the format below:

Categories
Argument (italic non indented)
 * View Pro Argument (bullet with no indenting)
 * View Against Argument (bullet with one indenting)
 * View neither for nor against (bullet with two indenting)


 * Consensus (Bold, italic non indented text)

Colours
This is how it appears in the article:

This is a randomly generated string.

This is how I recommend suggesting a change in article:
 * This is a randomly generated string . (material to be removed red in color string )
 * This is a randomly generated text . (material to be removed green in color string )

While you are not obligated to use this format, for the sake of clarity I highly recommend it.