Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Iyalawo

Iyalawo

The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Lozen8 (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. Iyalawo (talk · contribs)
3. Omo Obatalá (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. Iyalawo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Talk:Iyalawo#Controversy

Issues to be mediated

What is this dispute about? What sections, sentences, or issues in the article(s) can you not agree on? If you are the editor who opened this request, list these issues to be mediated under "Primary issues". If you did not open this request, you can add additional issues to be mediated under "Additional issues". The issues to be mediated would be properly agreed upon later, if this request for mediation is accepted.

Primary issues (added by the filing party)

1. • There is a major controversy in {{Ifa}} regarding whether the role of Iyalawo is a valid one. Both sides should be addressed.

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• There might be a conflict of interest as Lozen8 indicates on his user page that he "is also the author of the work Babalawo, the High Priests of Santería from Llewellyn Worldwide to be released on February 8, 2015."

Parties' agreement to mediation

If you are a named party, please sign below and indicate whether you agree or refuse to participate in mediation. Remember that all editors are obliged to resolve disputes about content through discussion, mediation, or other similar means. If you do not wish to participate in mediation, you must arrange another form of dispute resolution. Comments and questions should be made underneath the numbered list below, to avoid confusion.

1. Agree. Lozen8 (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
2. Agree. Omo Obatalá (talk · contribs) 20:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

This section should only be edited by a mediator. The Mediation Committee's representative will indicate in due course whether the request is accepted (meaning a mediator will be assigned) or rejected (meaning you will have to try a different type of dispute resolution). If the mediator asks you a question in this section, you may edit here.

• Reject. I'm going to reject this case under the authority granted to the chairperson under prerequisite to mediation #9, "the Committee has the discretion to refuse or refer back to other dispute resolution venues (e.g. dispute resolution noticeboard, third opinion, request for comment, or additional talk page discussion) a dispute which would benefit from additional work at lower levels of the dispute resolution process." For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:10, 19 January 2015 (UTC) (chairperson)