Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-07-16 Loose Change (2007 film)

Request details
I am filing this case because I have failed to engage in any prodiuctve dialog. If I make an honest mistake, RoyBoy will rant about it. Since Qarnos apparently has a zero-tolerance policy on truthers, he mocks me on my talk page. When I try to cite Jones, the father of 9/11 truth as a rubuttle to Popular Mechanics, RoyBoy told me that he isn't notable and has absoutely nothing to do with loose change, ironically, he cites the Popular Mechanics article (which ihas nothing to do with loose change either). What's disturbing is that he reports on debunkers opinions as facts which is a clear violation of WP:NPOV. I was always disgusted with the article's bias, so I wanted to fix it.

Who are the involved parties?
User:RoyBoy, User:Qarnos, User:Selmo

What's going on?
The article reports on debunkers opiions as facts. To put this into perspective, thinks like "The Jewish Defense League claims that Zionists have been robbed from throughout history. In reality at least one third of the worlds wealth rests in Jewish hands, and have very powerful positions in government positions.'[ref]'The American Nazi Party'[/ref]'.

So I come along and add something like "Historians argue that the Nazi Party persecuted Jews during World War II". That's reasonable right? Imagine if someone like RoyBoy comes along and reverts my edit claiming that it's inappropriate because "it's inaccurate (suupposebly because it isn't written from a Nazi point of view. or because "you have horiffic language skills" Imagine if I warned him about edit warring,I get "Boo hoo hoo! You've been persecuted for so many years! Jews like you have to give it a rest. Why are you adding inaccurate information to the article? Is this part of your zionist takeover plot?" A quick visit to that users talk ´page would reveal he himself is a proud no-Nazi.

Well that's how I feel. I put in a rubbuttle to Popular Mechanics from Alex Jones and its removed by RoyBoy because it isn't relavant. Meanwhile, PM has very little to do with loose change becides a interview that has nothing to do with the article cited. It's obvious to me that these two editors have a strong belief about what's right and want to "correct" 9/11 articles with no regard to NPOV.

What would you like to change about that?
I want to work things out withut being attacked. I would like to see a neutral Loose Change article, free of bias (both positive and negative) which dosen't take anyone's sides. Sadly with these two agressive editor, it's impossible without third party support

Mediator response
Hello all. I'd be happy to mediate this case. Before we proceed, have all parties agreed to the Cabal's mediation, including users Qarnos and Selmo? The Rhymesmith 21:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * DENIED! Please move this page to WP:MOLEHILL. -- Qarnos 23:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Evidently Qarnos does not agree. Case closed unless anyone else has anything else to say... The Rhymesmith 01:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll take this to the ArbCom then.... &mdash; Selmo  (talk) 12:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Administrative notes
Closing.

The Rhymesmith 22:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)