Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Reforms under Islam

Reforms under Islam (610-661) 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:

Inactivity.

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: 08:34, November 17 2006 (UTC)

Involved parties edit

Aminz (talk · contribs)
Truthspreader (talk · contribs)
Arrow740 (talk · contribs)
Itsmejudith (talk · contribs)
Str1977 (talk · contribs)
Szvest (talk · contribs)
Opiner 21:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles involved edit

Reforms under Islam (610-661)

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted: edit

WP:RFC We requested but haven't heard about it [1]

Issues to be mediated edit

Reliability of particular sources per WP:RS and WP:V
Neutrality of the article; and if the article is not neutral, how neutrality could be achieved.

Additional issues to be mediated edit

Additional issue 1
Additional issue 2

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 signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

Agree. Aminz 08:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. TruthSpreader^Talk 08:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Szvest → ^{Wiki Me Up ®} 10:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Itsmejudith 13:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 14:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Arrow740 23:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree.Opiner 21:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee edit

Accepted.

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) 03:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a member of the mediation committee, but do have experience and education in mediation, and would be happy to try and help resolve this, if the parties agree of course. JCO312 00:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, please take it! Contact the parties and ask them to offer their input. Essjay (Talk) 19:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I put notices on each of the involved parties talk pages yesterday, and hope to hear back soon. Cheers, JCO312 20:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm nor sure if this is the right protocol, but I'm very pleased that you have agreed to take the case on and I'll be happy to participate in the mediation as far as I am able to. All involved have already agreed to mediation, as shown above. Do we all have to formally agree again now?Itsmejudith 23:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as I understand it, to have a non-mediation committee member handle the case would require that you each agree again. Cheers, JCO312 00:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! TruthSpreader^Talk 19:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Aminz 02:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree.Opiner 06:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay by me. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 13:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.Itsmejudith 08:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am withdrawing, since only 5 of the 7 of you registered your agreement. Best of luck in resolving your dispute. Cheers, JCO312 22:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will take it, since all agreed to the first time and Im a full member. -Ste|vertigo 00:41, 13 January 2007 (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.