Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-08-11/karađorđevo agreement

Where is the dispute?
There is a problem with karađorđevo agreement pages [], [],[],[], []

Who is involved?

 * User:Ceha
 * User:Producer
 * User:ICTYoda
 * User:Polargeo
 * User:Aradic-es

What is the dispute?
User Producer is removing sourced data (war map), peace conference plans whith division of BiH and is producing original research of what happened on that meeting, he also does that without explaining his actions on discussion pages and does that often. Basicly the guy does not allows anything into the article which goes against his POV (no matter how well sourced, for example, quote of Lord Owen about Alija Izetbegović). And the article itself is very much collection of rumors. For example in ICTY (indicment) part there is not one mention of Karađorđevo agreement. Much of the Testimony part is about "Croatian intention" of division of BiH, and the same user is at the same time deleting data of peace talks which were happening in London about BiH division. I also doubt that user Producer is using ICTYoda (and posibly Polargeo) as socketpupets.

What would you like to change about this?
Firstly, I liked that user producer stop removing the sourced material. Better communication and higher participation in discussion pages would be a huge plus. Currently I feel that I'm talking to a brick wall. A bit more of objectivity (ICTY part name, naming of the article itself(the name is a kind of insult to one ethnic group, due to war etc), little bit less original research and conclusions (the article is full of accusations of Croatia of dividing BiH, and no speach about international conference), some parts of data are highly "streached", to much of insinuations etc.

How do you think we can help?
I think that we should make a qualitative discussion(because currently there is an edit war without any real discussion). In the meantime all of data in issue (name of the article, ICTY, testimonies,Graz agreement should be temporary puted away). The mediators should provide a time reference in which we should sort everything out.

Discussion
I came into editing this article because of a request for help from User:PRODUCER. I am in no way allied to Producer who called me in to this dispute because of my settling another NPOV dispute on Rape in the Bosnian War. My first edit on Karađorđevo agreement was just 4 days ago. Three days ago I found that an edit of mine was reverted by an IP, which on investigation turned out to be User:Ceha, who was then blocked for edit waring. I have now been accused of being a POV pusher, sockpupet etc. by Ceha. Ceha concentrates his editing on making sure Croat POV is well represented on wikipedia. I believe that if Ceha could engage with me in dialogue on the article this could be solved. This has been rushed to cabal without an attempt to do this. I am very sorry this will waste another editor's time. Polargeo (talk) 21:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would be very happy if I could discuss my changes with someone on discussion changes. Polagreo, you came before 4 days, but I have been trying for some time to cooperate on that article. My problems (user aradic-es also had similar problems) are with Producer stubbornness to discuss anything important. And my cooperation with you came in badly (your suggestions to me to go and play on some other articles etc). I don't know. Currently I think that we are making some progress and at least I can discuss some edits with you onto the discussion pages. I just hope that this cooperation can go also with user Producer. --Čeha (razgovor) 00:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we put the bad start to one side. I was a little annoyed about being reverted by an IP but I understand, I was very clumsy coming into this in the middle of an edit war. I think Producer is coming from one side of the POV and you are coming from the other. I will try to be as unbiased as I can be. I note that you are willing to make some compromises which is good. If this continues and Producer can do this too then this edit waring on the article may be settled. Polargeo (talk) 10:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)