Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Eurofighter Typhoon

Eurofighter Typhoon

 * Editors involved in this dispute
 * 1) – filing party


 * Articles affected by this dispute

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_78#Eurofighter_Typhoon
 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)
 * 1) The original press release stated the maximum speed of the Eurofighter as Mach 2.0+ in 2003. Several magazines and other sources have reprinted this figure in the interim. These do not class as secondary sources in my view because:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USEPRIMARY#.22Secondary.22_is_not_another_way_to_spell_.22good.22 From from the above: "Characteristics of a secondary source: "A secondary source usually provides analysis, commentary, evaluation, context, and interpretation. It is this act of going beyond simple description, and telling us the meaning behind the simple facts, that makes them valuable to Wikipedia." The magazines in question fulfill none of the criteria mentioned in the sentence above wrt the Typhoon Mach figure and have remained stagnant (not updated) since 2003.

Furthermore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USEPRIMARY#Not_a_matter_of_counting_the_number_of_links_in_the_chain: "Consider the simple example above: the original proclamation is a primary source. Is the book necessarily a secondary source? The answer is: not always. If the book merely quotes the proclamation (such as re-printing a section in a sidebar or the full text in an appendix, or showing an image of the signature or the official seal on the proclamation) with no analysis or commentary, then the book is just a newly printed copy of the primary source, rather than being a secondary source. The text and images of the proclamation always remain primary sources."

More recently the Austrian Airforce has quoted the maximum speed of the Typhoon as 2,495kph at 10,975m. This calculates as Mach 2.35 at ISA conditions (see DRN link). Furthermore this capability has been confirmed by the manufacturer Eurofighter GmbH as possible with a given fuel load etc. (see DRN link). In light of the fact that these are two good primary sources and in the absence of any true secondary sources (with independent analysis or verification of the top speed capability) I move that the speed be changed to Mach 2.35, or at least noted that 2,495kph at 10,975m corresponds to Mach 2.35 at ISA for the benefit of users not familiar with the calculation. At present the article reads "Maximum speed: At altitude: Mach 2+ (2,495kph at 10,975m)".Z07x10 (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Additional issues (added by other parties)
 * Additional issue 1
 * Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Z07x10 (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm really fine with any solution, idk how to formally list that here. — Julian H. ✈( talk  ) 15:58, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) Reject. Issue has been discussed at length already including at DRN. There is no consensus to make any change as Z07x10 was reminded by other editors and myself in the past few days.--McSly (talk) 02:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Reject. Mediation requires all involved parties to agree to mediate. In the absence of agreement of all parties, mediation cannot proceed. For the Mediation Committee, Sunray (talk) 03:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)