Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Shang Dynasty

Shang Dynasty

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


 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk: Shang Dynasty
 * Dispute_resolution_noticeboard

Issues to be mediated

 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)
 * 1) Should additional material proposed by User:Easy772 be added?
 * 2) Do any of the proposed additions amount to synthesis constituting original research?
 * 3) Comment - Some progress has been made at the dispute resolution noticeboard, but the scope of the issues appears to be expanding and formal mediation is requested in place of informal mediation.


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

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. Abstain as neutral party as per advice from chair. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) I do not believe mediation would be helpful, and have already suggested that an RFC would be the appropriate way to garner new views on the content question. Kanguole 11:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Agree. I am open to RFC if formal mediation does not go through, though I don't think a 'brief description', mentioned in the RFC page, is adequate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Easy772 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 4) I was not alerted to this RfM! Is this RfM active, or has it just been forgotten and not closed by accident? Ogress smash! 23:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Chairperson's note: It would appear to me that you acted as a neutral party during the DRN discussion and are not an actual party to this case (unless you care to make yourself one at this point in time and are taking a position as to how the article should be edited). If you do consider yourself a neutral party, please change your acceptance vote to "Abstain as uninvolved neutral, will not participate in mediation" and I will not count you in adjudging whether we have enough acceptance to go forward with this case. For the Mediation Committee,  TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 20:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC) (Chairperson)
 * Reject. Failed to satisfy Prerequisite to mediation #5 "A majority of the parties to the dispute consent to mediation." For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 21:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC) (Chairperson)