Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-11-05 Antony Flew


 * Note: Please limit posts to this page to brief statements about the nature of the dispute until a volunteer adopts the case. Keep ongoing discussions about the topic to the appropriate talk page(s), but feel free to provide links to the talk page(s) where discussion has happened (and may be ongoing) for the convenience of the informal mediator and other parties. This will help keep discussion from fragmenting out across more pages and make it easier for a volunteer to review the case. Thanks!

Who are the involved parties?
(who is often logged out, and has static IP address 141.219.80.241)

What's going on?
Users and  feel that the article is unduly dismissive of the claims that Anthony Flew has mentally declined and is being used as a mouthpiece by Roy Varghese. Users and  disagree.

Particular points of conflict include:
 * The use of the phrase "some of them going as far as". (Hyperdeath and Jeff5102 feel that this paints the critics as an extreme fringe.)
 * The use of the phrase "Flew has defended himself against this criticism" in the lead section. (Khamosh and Mange01 feel that this is needed for balance, whilst Hyperdeath feels that it is essentially meaningless, as Flew isn't is a position to defend himself.)
 * The use of the phrase "critics" versus "some atheists" in the lead section to describe proponents of the Flew-has-mentally-declined theory. (Hyperdeath, Jeff5102 and Mange01 favour the latter phrasing, pointing to sources that suggest that critic Mark Oppenheimer in a practising Jew. Khamosh favours the latter phrase.)
 * The use of the word "comical" in the sentence "In addition, he rejected Richard Dawkins' comical effort to argue in The God Delusion that the origin of life can be attributed to a 'lucky chance'." (Hyperdeath, Jeff5102 and Mange01 all regard this as inappropriate.  Khamosh wishes to retain it, and has unilaterally removed the POV tag that previously marked the word.)

What would you like to change about that?
Add more voices to the discussion. Things seem to be going round in circles.

Mediator notes
Hi. I have opened this case. [ roux  » x ] 23:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

A few ground rules:
 * I will create sections for each party to comment in. Please address all your comments to me, and not to the other participants.
 * Please keep your statements at 200 words or less, unless asked otherwise.
 * Please keep all comments on facts, and not on the past, present, or future behaviour of any other users
 * All participants are asked to refrain from any editing of the disputed article, the disputed article's talk page, or each other's talk pages until the case is concluded. Any vandalism to the article will be caught by vandalism patrollers, so don't worry about that either.
 * I reserve the right to edit any comments or statements which don't fit within these guidelines.
 * MedCab is not a formal part of the dispute resolution process, and cannot provide binding sanctions. Nevertheless, I ask that everyone involved agree to:
 * Abide by the outcome of this case
 * Immediately move to the next phase of dispute resolution if you are unable to agree with the final outcome

Please sign just your username below, with four tildes ( ~ ) to indicate your agreement with the ground rules and your participation in the case.


 * Jeff5102:
 * Khamosh:
 * Mange01: Mange01 (talk) 18:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hyperdeath: &mdash; H y p e r d e a t h ( Talk ) 19:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

the above was collapsed, as that was another mediator's suggestion. However, it's a good one with good ground rules, so I suggest folks sign it anyway. However, I will not edit comments or statements made by others, nor do I require that all parties agree with the outcome (since the outcome is consensus anyway ;-) The stuff about brevity and personal attacks is very good, though.

Administrative notes
User:Roux has left WP for good, it seems... is this still in dispute, or do you think I can close? Xavexgoem (talk) 08:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC) will close in 3 without reply


 * Can't it be transferred to a different mediator? &mdash; H y p e r d e a t h ( Talk ) 12:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Certainly. Will relist. Xavexgoem (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)