Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-04-23/The Political Cesspool

Where is the dispute?
There is a dispute at The Political Cesspool's FAC nomination page.

Who is involved?
Just a list of the users involved. For example:


 * User:Stonemason89
 * User:AniMate

What is the dispute?
AniMate and I are engaged in a disagreement regarding the article's sourcing and its eligibility for FA status. AniMate opposes the nomination because he/she feels that some of its sources (specifically, Media Matters for America) are biased, even though the article itself does not push MMfA's, or anyone else's POV. I firmly believe that objecting to the inclusion of information solely because of its origin constitutes a genetic fallacy in this case, as there is absolutely no reason to believe that the information in the article is inaccurate. Also, the FAC rules state that the only valid objections to any FA nomination are those which provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. The fact is, the topic has attracted quite a bit of attention from sources such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, Media Matters for America, Anti-Defamation League and the Stephen Roth Institute, but has received comparatively less coverage from newspaper and news-TV sources, and it hasn't been covered in books at all. This fact is not something that is within my power (or any other Wikipedian's power) to change, so I don't think it's fair to oppose this article's FAC nomation on these grounds (since it is an objection that cannot be addressed). I also feel that I've done about as good of a job as is possible of covering the subject using those sources which are available at this time, so I think the article deserves to be given FA status to reflect that. AniMate, however, feels differently.

What would you like to change about this?
Since it doesn't appear like the two of us will be able to reach consensus through discussion alone (since we are coming at this issue from completely different perspectives), I would like a third opinion to help resolve the discussion.

How do you think we can help?
Look at both my comments and at AniMate's, and try to resolve this dispute by providing a third opinion.

Mediator notes

 * Closed case on 01:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC). Requesting party asked for help elsewhere. -- Mike moral  ♪♫