Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Restoring Honor rally

Dispute specifics

 * Involved users
 * , filing party
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)
 * 1) (from the Mediation Cabal)


 * Articles concerned in this dispute

List of talk page discussions:
 * Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted
 * Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-09-09/Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.135.29.209 (talk) 09:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 1
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 1
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 2
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 3
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 3
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 3
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 3
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 3
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 4
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 5
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 5
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 5
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally/Archive 5
 * Talk:Restoring_Honor_rally/Archive_6 82.135.29.209 (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally
 * Talk:Restoring Honor rally 82.135.29.209 (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues
 * Let us be happy with "the crowd section" being the primary issue for now. We'll tighten up the issues before mediation begins, so for now, everybody sit down and start behaving like an adult. AGK   10:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

We seem to have no problem on the first paragraph: Here is a previous version, sightly modified, which accurately notes that the Parks Service has released an estimate for the Obama inaguration:
 * Additional issues (added by other parties)
 * Additional issue 1: 1st paragraph
 * According to the Wall Street Journal the crowd "packed nearly a mile of the National mall", but the New York Daily News said estimates of how many attended depended "dramatically on who you ask," and that controversies over crowd estimates of recent large political events had drawn almost as much attention as the events themselves. Because of previous controversies, including the threat of a lawsuit in 1995 by the organizers of Million Man March over an alleged under count, the National Parks Service no longer releases estimates, with the notable exception of the Obama Inauguration.

Removed was the CSM "hotly contested" line (which was not part of the article, but drawn from a sub headline) which was made redundant by the NYDN citation. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 20:32, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Additional issue 2: What sources to include or exclude?
 * A lot of theoretical discussion on what sources are appropriate and how much weight they are due has produced very little consensus and difficult to follow discussions. A more productive approach could be to go over sources one by one to determine which is a primary, secondary or tertiary source and how reliable they are. Here is a partial list of sources for discussion. At this stage it might be better to avoid discussing the merits of particular sources to get a list that all agree is thorough. Please add sources, and links that are citation sources left off of this list which makes no pretense of starting off as anywhere near complete.
 * Note: the hope is that after gaining consensus on some sources, gaining consensus on the remaining sources becomes a matter of categorization of the source and much easier to do.


 * Brian Williams on Meet The Press
 * Tweet by NBC's Montanaro
 * Olberman via Twitter
 * NYT on NBC estimate
 * Joe Scarborough
 * NBC Nightly News independent of the above three
 * On The Media
 * Steve Doigs' blog
 * LA Times/Lawrence Krause
 * CBS news
 * Michelle Bachmann via Washington Post and CNN
 * Glenn Beck
 * Colbert (on his show as response to Beck on his show)
 * FOX


 * Additional issue 3: Media reaction section.
 * Arzel rejects changes in the "Post-rally response" section, saying these are not allowed because of this mediation, see for example, and . Since it seems to be not possible to get consensus about this on the Restore Honor talk page, I suggest to officially add the "Post-rally response" section to the mediation. Thank you. 82.135.29.209 (talk) 06:48, 16 November 2010 (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 the talk page of this request.


 * 1) Agree. BS24 (talk) 20:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Agree. BritishWatcher (talk) 21:38, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Agree. Morphh   (talk) 21:48, 03 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Agree. I believe my informal attempts at mediation have failed. Alpha Quadrant    talk    21:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) Agree. Arzel (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 6) Agree. Akerans (talk) 00:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 7) Agree. AzureCitizen (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 8) Agree. Hodgson-Burnett&#39;s Secret Garden (talk) 13:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 9) Agree. Xenophrenic (talk) 19:20, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 10) Agree. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 17:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 11) Agree. 82.135.29.209 (talk) 09:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC))
 * 12) Estoy de acuerdo. Soxwon (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2010 (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.


 * Note: Parties notified. AGK   22:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been involved in this dispute in an administrative capacity having protected the article due to this edit war. If all parties agree I would be happy to try to mediate since I've been involved but if any party feels I am WP:INVOLVED I will happily recuse.  --WGFinley (talk) 02:11, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Accept. For the Mediation Committee, AGK   19:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Accept case. --WGFinley (talk) 00:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Status of case: We will presume that Wgfinley is inactive on this case from now. Is mediation of this still necessary? Comment welcome on the talk page. For the Mediation Committee, AGK  [&bull; ] 09:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * }