Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Malcolm X

Malcolm X

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


 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk:Malcolm X

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)
 * 1) Unsubstantiated claim about biographical research on Malcolm X. The phrase "according to recent biographies, he also occasionally had sex with other men, usually for money" must be changed because the two biographies cited do not state that Malcolm had sex with other men (plural). Perry claims that Malcolm had sex with other men (plural). Marable claims only that Malcolm had "sexual contacts" with one other man. In an endnote, not included in the present citation, Marable acknowledges that Perry's "general assertions" have been supported: he gives only one example, evidence that Malcolm had sexual contacts with only one other man. The phrase should be revised to say: "according to biographers, Malcolm also had sexual relations with at least one other man, evidently for money." This should be a minor edit requiring no outside arbitration.


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

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Mccar408 (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Decline. Two months ago, Mccar408 walked away from the talk page discussion I cited above. Mccar408 changed the article to their preferred version without consensus or further discussion in February and March. The editor is welcome to continue the discussion on the article's talk page any time they'd like. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC) To clarify what I wrote earlier, mediation is the last step in dispute resolution, not the first, and no others have been tried. If Mccar408 doesn't think that further discussion will achieve anything, maybe we should ask for a third opinion, since there are only two editors involved in this dispute. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:05, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

McCar408: I didn't walk away from the talk page! I participated to the fullest, but you insisted that the "clear meaning" of the sources was something that the sources blatantly did not say. What can be said in response to that? Yes, I would like to seek a third opinion; this is a matter of fact, not opinion, so anyone who contributes will agree with me. I can't reiterate enough: I'm not saying that the statement is wrong, I'm saying that the statement is not substantiated by the citation; that is a fact. How do we request a third opinion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccar408 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Reject. Fails to satisfy prerequisite for mediation numbers 5, "A majority of the parties to the dispute consent to mediation". For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 20:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC) (Chairperson)