Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Terra Lliure

Terra Lliure

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


 * Articles affected by this dispute


 * Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
 * Talk:Terra Lliure

Issues to be mediated
The issue is whether Terra Lliure was a terrorist organization or not. Most, if not all the wikipedia pages for the organization in languages other than English, call it a "terrorist" organization. There is a a sentence by the European Court of Human Rights calling it a terrorist organization. There are several hundred pieces of newspaper histories calling it "terrorist". 5 people were killed because of its bombings. There are sentences condemning members of the organization to repair damages. There is no shortage of evidence of its use of bombings and kidnappings in order to carry on its political agenda. In plain English, it was a terrorist organization, and I am afraid the deletion of this fact is motivated by reasons beyond the nature and mission of Wikipedia. --Danielhythloday (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Primary issues (added by the filing party)


 * 1) Not just one court (European Court of Human Rights) but several courts in Spain formally called Terra Lliure a "terrorist organization" in several sentences against it. Therefore, it is not a personal opinion, but the official opinion of the judiciary that ruled criminal actions of Terra Lliure
 * 2) The group meets all definitions of terrorism, even the definition that appears at the beginning of the Wikipedia article terrorism that, incidentally, has no claim to be a generally accepted one. Terra Lliure provoked the killing of 5 persons in several bombings during his continued political fighting in time of peace. It clearly fulfills the criteria defined in a Secretary-General of the United Nations report (quoted in the same article) describing terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act"--Danielhythloday (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Additional issues (added by other parties)


 * 1) The opinions of one court is irrelevant.
 * 2) The opinions of editors on other wikipedias is completely irrelevant.
 * 3) WP:NPOV would be breached. The reader can decide for themselves. There is no reason to shove a narrative down their throats.
 * 4) The group does not meet the definition of terrorist as laid out in the terrorism article which defines it as the indiscriminate killing of civilians.
 * 5) WP:LABEL would be breached which says "Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided"Etruscanman114 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

After the Mediation Committee decision to reject the mediation, how is the article supposed to look like? Does the mediation means that the version of the part deleting the adjective "terrorist" must stand or does it mean that the adjective can stay? --Danielhythloday (talk) 01:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Parties' agreement to mediation

 * 1) Agree. I agree to participate Danielhythloday (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)--Danielhythloday (talk) 18:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * Reject. Fails to meet prerequisite for mediation #4, "The parties must have first engaged in extensive discussion of the matter in dispute at the article talk page and discussion only through edit summaries will not suffice." For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 23:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (Chairperson)