Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-08-25 Honda S2000

Discussion

 * Providing subjective "customer reviews" seems to run directly counter to the goals of presenting a neutral point of view. I've seen whole articles deleted for reading too much like a buyer's guide (in the interest of full disclosure, I was the AfD nominator in one of those cases).  As it is, there's no precedent in automotive articles for extensive reviews/criticism, aside from those vehicles whose historical impact is defined by their critical response, such as the "Unsafe at Any Speed" Chevrolet Corvair.  That goes for positive or negative responses - and in this case only negative opinions are presented.
 * Another mediator has suggested that the parties involved aren't calm enough for mediation yet and that administrator intervention might be a better option. Upon giving it some thought, I'm retracting my mediation request for now. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E;  16:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I propose to find a mutual agreement as to what amount subjective (positive as well as critical) content should be published in the articles of Wikipedia as online Encyclopedia. Literal Encyclopedias generally show the features and characteristics of articles in a quite neutral manner. Anyway, Wikipedia - as a well known open source instrument for providing and deriving information - is in my opinion expected to provide also subjective information comparable to the customer's reviews in the amazon online bookstore which reviews are often highly appreciated in the decision making of the customers. The basic question of the pending dispute could accordingly be simply the question to what extent this subjective information should be added to the article's description. I'd like to mediate in this case and if you agree I'd like to keep the proceedings confidential because the behaviour and argumentation of the parties is likely to change dependent on the publicity of the posts. fly 16:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * IMO, it should shortened; it doesn't need to leave anything out really; just leave a lot of the details on the cited pages.. eg something like this;
 * The car has been criticised for low torque[link] and its torque curve[link], the short gearing[link] (resulting in noisy motorway cruising), aswell as oversteer in early versoins [link] and somewhat still in current versions[link] despite XYZ to fix it. 
 * That would leave all the factual critiscm, without it dominating the article. ~ Bungalowbill 01:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)