Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Film censorship in China

Film censorship in China

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

Film Censorship in China
 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk:Film censorship in China

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)
 * 1) Should the release date and runtime of censored films be kept? Is it really violating original research without providing any encyclopedic value to Wikipedia? I welcome other editors' suggestions on combining it with the banned films or adding more scholarly literature. Banned films don't have to show runtime since it will be meaningless to show zero, n/a, nil in the column. But movies that got minutes lopped off is a form of censorship that needs to be well documented. At the time of this filing, WikiProject Film/Chinese cinema task force has no one shown up. I am not taking ownership of the project to violate ownership rules. I am just taking leadership since other editors are not subject matter experts in this topic area of film censorship in China. I have kept my opinions on the talk page but not the main page. The main page is only a collection of verifiable facts.


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

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Supermann (talk) 03:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Reject. I was already leaning towards rejecting this under prerequisite to mediation #9, which allows the chairperson to refer cases back to lower forms of dispute resolution, before seeing the postings of the two replying parties on the talk page here. Since no one is required to participate in any form of moderated content dispute resolution if they do not care to do so, for any reason whatsoever, but both of the responding parties seem willing to participate at DRN or in a RFC, #9 would, indeed, seem to be the proper disposition here, but since both replying parties do not seem to wish to participate here, prerequisite #5 which requires majority acceptance is also a reason for rejection. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 19:43, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (Chairperson)