Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-09-02 Relationship between religion and science

Some initial questions
I've never been a party to one of these before, so would like to ask some initial questions/issues: HrafnTalkStalk 05:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Shouldn't User:Firefly322 be on the list of "involved parties"?
 * 2) Firefly322 also appears to edit frequently as a number of IP (identifiable due to writing/editing style & areas of interest): 72.197.115.254, 76.201.17.231, 76.212.169.152 (and probably some others). It would be helpful if Firefly322 could self-identify which IPs (s)he has edited under, in the articles under dispute.
 * 3) When is it appropriate to pitch in with my own take on what happened? Is it more appropriate to 'dive in' now, or to let JeremyMcCracken get his feet under the table as Mediator first?

Further query, have the other 'parties' been informed that this mediation exists? I only knew about because I saw the templates that Firefly322 posted on article talk pages and assumed (rightly as it turned out) that his dispute was with me. HrafnTalkStalk 06:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Definitely go ahead and post your side; I'd asked Firefly322 for diffs because I couldn't tell what the actual dispute was. Since they're the initiating party, I'd assumed that they were an involved party anyway, but I've added them to the list. As for the IPs, I'll post that on the main page. I'd seen many IP edits at the article, but as I said, I couldn't tell what was being disputed. I'm holding off on notifying the other users until I can figure out what the actual problem is. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 14:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Gatecrashing
Is it permissible for a non-'involved party' to simply wander in and dump a whole heap of (generally baseless and/or inaccurate) complaints about unrelated articles into a mediation, as User:Catherineyronwode has done? HrafnTalkStalk 08:14, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not going to help with things here; I'll post on the main page to explain. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 15:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Mapping the 'crusading' "cabal"
Given that a number of editors are making an issue of some form of crusade/cabal/collusion, I think it might be a good idea to give my own personal impression of the level of relationship between the purported members, and both myself and this dispute:


 * Most distantly, there is Ludwigs2, who I'm fairly sure I've locked horns with on intelligent design (due to differences in opinion on ID's legitimacy), so the only commonality he has with me is that bad writing serves no POV (including NPOV). He has recently been involved in a disagreement involving ScienceApologist and Firefly322 about the lead of Relationship between religion and science (to which none of the other 'involved parties', including myself, appear to have been a party to).
 * Next in distance is ScienceApologist, who appears to share similar views to myself on pseudoscience, but with whom I have had little contact, beyond (I think) briefly locking horns with me on this article on a sourcing issue some months back.
 * Mid-distance is Jim62sch, who edits a number of articles in common with myself, but with whom I haven't had recent contact with. As far as I know, his sole invovlement on this article was three months ago.
 * Closer is Orangemarlin, with whom I interact fairly frequently, giving each other 'heads ups' on issues that might be of mutual concerns. We are both opinionated, but are able to get along fairly well, because neither of us appears to object to the other pointing out the other's stuff-ups. I did not however solicit his involvement on this article (or for anything else in the recent past).
 * My closest interaction (both generally, and on this dispute) has been with Dave Souza. He's wiser than I am and probably smarter too -- so I do my best to follow his advice. I sought his advice in dealing with Firefly322 back in July, and a couple of weeks ago raised concerns about Issues in Science and Religion.

For the record, at no time have I had off-wikipedia contact with any of these individuals during the timeframe of this dispute (or for the past year or so). HrafnTalkStalk 17:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oopa, had forgotten about these, and sorry that the July request seems to have fallen by the wayside – I was actually in the middle of a rather rushed break just then, and there was a lot of other very time consuming Wikipedia stuff going on in the run-up to the break so it was all rather a scramble. Not sure what I could have done, but a lost opportunity. Not so wise of me. . . dave souza, talk 20:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC)