Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-12-10/jimbrossard

Located under Jim Brossard Wikipedia.

Wrong: Jim Brossard is an U.S. veterinarian, proud by a Reno bar owner flying a Italian flag above the U.S. flag, cut the U.S. flag down. He is variously being hailed as a loser and a patriot or decried as a criminal and a vigilante for this act.

Right: Jim Brossard is a U.S. veteran, and proud American. In October of 2007 he cut down the Mexican flag that had been placed above the U.S. flag on the same pole. He is variously being hailed as a hero and a patriot or decried as a criminal and a vigilante for this act.

Hello,

I revere Wikipedia as the go to for truth and accurate information. Now I see that somebody has inaccurately represented what most Americans see as a heroic act. This opening statement above is a deplorable misstatement of facts and use of the English language. I am the person mentioned, Jim Brossard. I am a Veteran not a Veterinarian. What is "proud by a Reno bar owner"? It was a Mexican flag not an Italian flag. I am not being hailed as a loser but a person who by others words a hero. If a crime had been committed then I would have been prosecuted, I was not. Please do not mistake my words as angry. I am very confused, hurt and disappointed. I am first and foremost confused that this heading is allowed. I am hurt that numerous people have been led to have the wrong view of this standing up for America. And disappointed that it remains posted. I did try to edit but it will not allow me to do so. Then I tried to contact the help link and was so confused on how to proceed that I finally settled on contacting you sir. Will you please see that this problem is solved.

Thank you, Jim Brossard

Where is the dispute?
This section should explain where the problem is. Link to the articles where the dispute is taking place.

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


 * User:A
 * User:B

What is the dispute?
A calm explanation of what the problem is. Be as precise as you wish, but avoid general statements such as "User:X has a POV regarding article Y", as that's usually unhelpful. Provide diffs if possible, but try to keep the description brief. A list of issues that need to be addressed, such as this, would also help.

What would you like to change about this?
Here, tell us what you would like to changed. Does the conversation need better structure? Are folks having difficulty communicating? Are they talking past each other? Stuff like that.

How do you think we can help?
We are here to help you, but we need to know how. Sometimes mediators will look at a dispute and have no idea where to start, so please help us out. Do note that we will not "take sides" in any dispute.