Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-05-27 Anti-Canadianism

Mediation Case: 2006-05-27 Anti-Canadianism
Please observe Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

 * Request made by: CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 00:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * ... The article Anti-Canadianism and edit summaries; Talk:Anti-Canadianism; User talk:Canadia and threats to edit war on User talk:CanadianCaesar/fourth (an archived talk page).

'''The response on the writers archive was simply a rejoinder to his threat. "Just to let you know, I will be changing your edits."'''
 * Who's involved?
 * ...User:70.27.46.241, AKA User:Canadia, AKA User:205.189.150.1 (note there has never been any denial of being the same person)


 * What's going on?
 * ...Vandalism (fake protection tags), edit warring, refusal to respond to reason on talk page, personal attacks ("I think you need to get that Canadian off your name, CanadianCaesar. Looks like you aren't really that Canadian after all, eh?" "Your arguments are inane as they are puerile"), even stated outright a contempt for 3RR . Lots of edit warring; note this copied from Administrators Noticeboard:

I have already responded to the writer. I justify my statements upon the insurances that the writer failed to delete original template of anti-Canadianism, which was a simple copy and paste from the anti-Americanism article. This does not constitute a personal attack, as the writer is clearly anti-Canadianism himself. I charge the writer with spreading of false information and failure to respond to the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.46.241 (talk • contribs)

User:205.189.150.1
AKA User:Canadia, User:70.27.46.241 Three revert rule violation on. :

Reported by: CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 00:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Previous version reverted to:
 * 1st revert:
 * 2nd revert:
 * 3rd revert:
 * 4th revert:


 * Doesn't look like 4 in 24h. But you could try elsewhere for the fake tags, etc William M. Connolley 09:21, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

'''I would like to object to this utterly fallacious claim. The writer claims I violated the article, but it should be noted that writer has neither the express the authority to declare the veracity of the edits nor the right to arbitrarily impose his discretion as to whether the edits are neutral or informative. Although I have removed large chunks of information, I have kept the general tone and message of each point in-tact.''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.46.241 (talk • contribs)


 * ''What would you like to change about that?
 * ... Some third party must explain neutrality to Canadiana, abuse of protection tags, and replacing public domain images with fair use- if necessary, report him as a vandal, as I am too involved in the dispute to take remedial action myself. A third party can review the article and NPOV it; what I object to is the senseless POV pushing deletions this user has carried out (turning, for example, sentences into sentence fragments), and angry, insistent demands that the article be deleted entirely.


 * If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
 * ... My talk page is fine. My e-mail also works.


 * Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?


 * This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
 * what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.


 * ...Decline.

Mediator response
Ok, lets move this to the article's talk page. I think we can get more imput there. Eagle talk 06:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We can use this page to keep track of progress.Eagle talk

Issue appears to be over whether or not the article should be deleted or not.
 * Article has undergone AfD a couple months ago and emerged from that with a vote of keep.
 * Over 2 weeks, 4 editors have responded to the disscussion on the talk page. (2 are the original parties, 1 is me).
 * I am going to post a request for a 3rd- view point. (I will remain neutral).Eagle talk 05:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Eagle you had asked for another mediator to join in. I'll help out. Let me know on my talk page what you need. jbolden1517Talk 14:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Do let me know if you need mediator assistance with knowledge of Canadian culture. Perhaps I could be helpful in trying to bridge the 2 sides. Let me know on my talk page. -- Evanx  (tag?) 18:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Evanx add yourself to the list and pull me off. jbolden1517Talk 01:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case is looking close to being resolved... Eagle talk 04:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Has the matter been resolved? I'm trying to clear up the old cases from May to reduce the backlog. Thanks. Cowman109 Talk 18:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I have closed this case due to inactivity. Should futher trouble arise, I would recommend filing another mediation request. Thanks. Cowman109 Talk 06:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with for misconduct and  for 3RR violations. If you need help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil. Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.

Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Comments by others
I will be participating as a commentor for this article. -- Evanx  (tag?) 21:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Stop crying foul Caesar. You are the man who said, "Just to let you know, I am going to be changing the revisions that you have." Again, I justify everything that I have said, including (yes) removing Canadian from your name "CanadianCaesar" as you clearly patronize anti-Canadianism. How does that make you remotely Canadian?? Tortured logic indeed!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.46.241 (talk • contribs)