Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-08-18/Swarcliffe

Where is the dispute?
After I made a list on the talk page of the Swarcliffe article about mistakes, one editor replied, "I have no intention of going through the list of "errors"". The editor is continually editing in a destructive fashion, and refuses to participate in any constructive conversation. After saying that I would request mediation, the editor in question recently said, "Perhaps you'll benefit from mediation", which shows a blatant disregard for any kind of conversation. Other comment have been, "I don't see what the problem is, the article was nowhere near a GA and is now much improved", "I have chosen to ignore his lists as I find them confusing and unhelpful". Please look at the series of edits that I believe are wrong on the talk page.

Who is involved?

 * J3Mrs

Acceptance of Mediation

 * --andreasegde (talk) 16:12, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

What is the dispute?
One editor is cutting down the page and making many mistakes, but refuses to listen to advice. I stopped editing the article (apart from two edits that really had to be corrected) because I do not want to be involved in a revert war.

What would you like to change about this?
Please advise the editor to stop, or take a step back and read the MoS.

How do you think we can help?
Conferring with the editor would alleviate the situation.

Discussion
Okay, before we start I should inform you both that this is my first mediation case.

So, to begin, I have a few questions for you both, if you would?

J3Mrs, do you explicitly disagree with Andreasegde's suggestions?

Andreasegde, why not just be bold and change the sentences in question yourself?