Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis

Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis edit

Mediation of this dispute has been completed. The case pages should not be edited.

To report a problem with the outcome of this case, contact the Mediation Committee.
If additional mediation proceedings are required, a new mediation request should be filed.
These case pages should not be edited, even to correct article content problems. Case pages are not indexed by search engines.

Resolved:

Successful in resolving the dispute, discussion exhausted with the appearance of one version being accepted over the other

This mediation case is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this case page.

view edit delete watch
Filed: 22:55, January 22 2008 (UTC)

Involved parties edit

Articles involved edit

Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted edit

Talk:Abortion-breast_cancer_hypothesis#WHO_source - Discussion in the article.
User_talk:Phyesalis#Status_of_ABC_article - Continued discussion on the talk space.
Solicitation of third parties such as SOPHIA (talk · contribs) and MastCell (talk · contribs).
A RfC was discussed, but can't remember if it was done. However, I want this content dispute resolved in a deliberative manner as it involves careful weighing and interpretation of scientific sources.

Issues to be mediated edit

The party filing this request uses this section to list the issues for mediation. Other parties can list additional issues in the section below.

The main issue is Phyesalis' good faith POV that the abortion-breast cancer hypothesis has been "rejected"; while my POV is the scientific evidence and notable conclusions show it to be "unsupported". This relates to the first sentence of the article.
Phyesalis moved Brind's meta-analysis outside the "Epidemiological studies" section. As it is peer reviewed science, whether ze likes the authors or not, it should be moved back to the appropriate section.
Resolve any outstanding issues Phyesalis may have with the article, so that the "disputed" banner can be removed; and it can be resubmitted for GA review.

Additional issues to be mediated edit

Other parties can use this section to list any others issues they wish to include in the mediation. Please do not modify or remove any other party's listing. Please sign all additions to this section if there are more than two parties involved in this case.

Additional issue 1

Parties' agreement to mediate edit

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only "Agree" or "Disagree" and signatures should appear here; any comments will be removed, but can be made at the talk page.

Agree. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 22:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. MastCell ^Talk 05:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree --IronAngelAlice (talk) 22:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree ^ross ^nixon 01:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree --Phyesalis (talk) 19:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee edit

A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate acceptance/rejection/other relevant notes in this section. Non-Committee members should not edit this section.

Accept

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 15:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taking case. Daniel (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.