Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-30 Jim Bob Duggar

Request Information
I don't understand what I am supposed to write under a header titled "Request Information".

Who are the involved parties?

 * User:Joie de Vivre
 * User:Lilkunta

What's going on?
Lilkunta and I are in dispute about certain biographical information in this article. A minor revert war has ensued. The most recent revert is here, with my version on the left and Lilkunta's version on the right.

I have several concerns that the biographical info is Lilkunta's version is poorly sourced, poorly written, and fails NPOV. I made an attempt on the talk page to explain all of my changes in detail.

One concern is that Lilkunta wants to include a statement that Michelle (the wife of Jim Bob Duggar) is pregnant again. The only reference they can provide is an unverifiable weblog. I tried to communicate that this source fails WP:Attribution, to no avail.

Another concern is their writing style, with sentences such as:


 * "Michelle's friend spoke of a movie that told of the end of the world. Michelle wanted to make sure she would be ready (should such an event take place), and accompanied her friend to a revival. Michelle later committed her life to God as a result of the revival."

I am concerned that Lilkunta's version is improperly formatted (with refs placed inside the punctuation of sentences, and with all words in headers capitalized. Their version also was missing many wikilinks that I later added.  I explained that these changes were tedious to make, and that if Lilkunta reverted to their version, that revert would reinstate the errors.  Lilkunta's response was to revert in full and to make angry comments on the Talk page.

I have tried many times to communicate my concerns on Lilkunta's talk page, in the edit summaries, and on the article Talk page. I tried to include more of the biographical info that they wished to see there. I would at the very least like to see basic quality standards for referencing and formatting upheld.

What would you like to change about that?
I would like to reinstate my version, if only to avoid having to make all the tedious corrections to the reference formatting. As I stated in my original explanation on the talk page, I would appreciate it if Lilkunta would add to the version that I worked to correct, if they feel that any information is missing. I wouldn't have a problem with that. I would like to be able to make changes to the article without Lilkunta angrily reverting.

My problem is that Joie wants Joie's version. I made efforts to correct the things that were wrong. But still the version was not good enuf 4 joie. The beginnings section no longer has the story like tone to it. What referenced did Joie add. This is the 1st time Joie has mentioned that new refs were added. I did not make angry comments. Just as Joie did here, Joie calls me out as "angry, using scare wuotes, etc". All that is childish. I dont care what Jou thinks of me, lets just get the article correct. Lilkunta 09:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediator response
I have suggested that both parties take a break for five days while I solicit third party opinions from members of the Biography project as well as other Cabal editors. Hopefully this third party review will result in suggestions or perhaps even edits to the article that will satisfy both parties.

Editor Athaenara of WikiProject Biography has undertaken a rewrite of the article during the editing break for the involved parties. Hopefully this impartial edit will resolve the issue.

Discussion
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.


 * I just want to state that I find User:Athaenara's rewrite, which occurred in the agreed-upon cooling off period, to have completely resolved my concerns. Joie de Vivre 23:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

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

Administrative notes
Break seems to have calmed down the edit war. Changes made during the break by members of the biography group seem to have been accepted.