Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-09-21 Joseph Massad

Mediation Case: 2006-09-21 Joseph Massad
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: Kalkin 02:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * The Joseph Massad article.


 * Who's involved?
 * Myself (Kalkin), User:Amoruso, User:Avraham


 * What's going on?
 * We are involved in a dispute about whether Massad, the article subject and a living person, ought to be included in Category:Anti-semitic people. He has been accused of anti-semitism by well-known, if in my opinion not entirely reputable, sources, but denies the allegation.  I see inclusion in the category as a plain case of WP:NPOV violation, given his denial; the other editors believe that since the accusation is reliably sourced, inclusion is justified.  It is apparent that all of us have strong political biases which may be relevant; a comment by a neutral editor or two would be helpful.


 * ''What would you like to change about that?
 * I would like someone uninvolved to comment on whether or not Massad ought to be included in Category:Anti-semitic people. I believe that he should not be.  But either way, this should be fairly quick and easy.  (Note: there is no dispute among the three of us about whether Category:Anti-semitism applies, since he has made arguments about the nature of anti-semitism, as well as being accused of it himself.  The question is the narrower category.)


 * Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
 * I see no reason not to work openly and directly. I have mentioned this request on the article talk page.  Thanks very much for any help you can provide.

Mediator response
This case is a questionable one for mediation. Perhaps a more suitable method would be to conduct a public poll, but asking for other mediators' opinions as well would not do any harm. Nevertheless, this is mine:

I personally think the main catch here is what exactly is defined as 'anti-semitism'. I know very little about this professor, but if he was truly anti-Semitic he probably wouldn't still be employed by Columbia, which is a reputable university. There is a difference between attacking someone who is pro-Israel, and attacking someone because they are Israeli. I incline towards NOT including this person in the category of anti-Semitic people - that category should be left for true neo-Nazis, Fascists, or extremely right-wing persons, etc. However, this may be a controversial topic so it would be better if other mediators also made their POV in this matter clear. Jsw663 10:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm going to second the questionable for mediation. Perhaps a RFC? It'd certainly be best to get people who are familiar with the subject matter. The scope of the mediation cabal really is mediating disputes though, not really offering opinions. Good luck anyways! --Keitei (talk) 12:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, yeah, RFC. That's where this belongs.  I'll move it, but thanks anyway. Kalkin 13:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm closing the case. Jsw663 14:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

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