Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Buddha

Buddha

 * Users involved in dispute
 * , filing party


 * Articles concerned in this dispute


 * Other steps of dispute resolution that have been attempted
 * Talk:Gautama_Buddha

Issues to be mediated
''All aspects of article content over which there is disagreement should be listed here. The filing party should define the scope under "Primary issues", which is used to frame the case; other parties to the dispute can list other issues under "Additional issues", and can contest the primary issues on case talk page.''


 * Primary issues
 * Adding additional content from Pali suttas where the Buddha claims divinity in past lives as a God that clarifies the Andrew Skilton point cited in the article that the Buddha never claimed he was God, in which the Pali suttas are the primary source and the published translations of the Pali suttas are the secondary sources, such as Thanissaro Bhikkhu translations at AccessToInsight.org and from the Pali Text Society at Oxford University.
 * Use of a published book reference regarding the same content in the issue identified above as an additional secondary source.
 * Changing the name of the subsection so that it reads: "Divine nature in traditional depictions" to reflect the content described in the subsection.
 * Whether it is 'neutral' for an editor to undo edits that make use of the same Pali sutta primary source material as the above reference in this subsection of the Buddha article by Andrew Skilton who uses the Majjhima Nikaya Pali sutta (Mahāparinibbāna Sutta) to support his point that the Buddha claimed divine power.


 * Additional issues (added by other parties)
 * 1) Among other things, the part that Mbrahmana left out is that it isn't just "a published book" but was written by an author with the same name as the editor. Given that the preconditions for mediation are nowhere close to being met, it's a bit premature to jump from "I was reverted" to a request for mediation.  The talk page discussion itself is only a few hours old, let's at least let discussion take place before jumping all the way to mediation. - SudoGhost 11:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Several problems with Mbrahmana's edits were raised by me, but not answered. And regarding "the Andrew Skilton point cited in the article that the Buddha never claimed he was God": this is not what the quote says, on the contrary.   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   15:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) And what a funny coincidence that the some source, the book written by M. Brahmana, suddenly pops up at the Theravada page, added by User:Vimutti, who started today.   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC) A sockpuppet investigation has been requested.   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:24, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Parties' agreement to mediation
''All parties please indicate below whether they agree to mediation of this dispute; remember to sign your post. Extended comments should be made on case talk page. Every party listed above will be automatically notified that this request has been filed.''
 * 1) Agree. Mbrahmana (talk) 10:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Mbrahmana (talk) 10:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) I don't agree, per my explanation above. - SudoGhost 11:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 4) I don't agree either. Mbrahmana has reverted three times diff diff diff, despite objections from two editors, and without a serious attempt to address the issues we've raised, and the responses we've given. Let him start there, instead of pushing his private beliefs and the book wriiten by the author of the same name.   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   15:44, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee
''A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate whether this request is to be accepted or rejected. Notes concerning the request and questions to the parties may also be posed by a committee member in this section.''
 * Administrative note: I [ have moved] this page from Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Buddha to Requests for mediation/Buddha (without leaving a redirect) so that it is listed under a sensible name. For the Mediation Committee, AGK  [•] 11:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Recommend rejection: Prerequisites of mediation not met, no prior content dispute resolution attempted. — TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 14:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC) (As member of Mediation Committee.)
 * Thanks AGK for moving the page. I agree with TransporterMan about the lack of attempts to resolve this dispute. Also, obviously, the other parties to the dispute haven't agreed to mediation. In this context, I'm rejecting this request at this stage. PhilKnight (talk) 17:31, 15 June 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the Mediation Committee