Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-01-22/Talk:Biocentrism

Where is the dispute?
The dispute is on the talk page in the section "Requested move".

Who is involved?

 * User:Jrtayloriv
 * User:Goethean
 * User:Sinneed
 * User:Reviewer4
 * User:Staff3
 * User:Swift
 * User:Jordgette
 * A handful of anonymous editors

What is the dispute?
Essentially, the dispute is about a proposed article move for biocentrism. User:Jrtayloriv proposed that the article biocentrism (ethics) should be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and should be moved to biocentrism, and that the cosmological sense of "biocentrism", which is currently at biocentrism, should be moved to biocentrism (cosmology).

Many of the other users have opposed this move, or suggested an alternative (disambiguation page) for the reasons listed on the talk page.

The discussion does not seem to be going anywhere, and many of the points regarding Wikipedia policy have not been responded to. There is also concern by two of the editors that there might be a possible sockpuppet issue.

What would you like to change about this?
I would like a neutral third party to come in and make sure that the conversation sticks more to Wikipedia policy/guidelines, that people are discussing things rather than talking past each other, and that reasoning and evidence is provided for individual claims.

How do you think we can help?
I think that in cases where a Wikipedia policy is brought up, the mediator can insure that other editors respond to it, citing Wikipedia policy in response. I feel that there are cases where certain editors are not providing evidence to back up their claims, are not responding to points made about why Wikipedia policy does/doesn't support moving the article, and are generally treating the issue as a WP:Vote as opposed to a discussion.