Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/WebGL
Not sure if RFM is necessary
editI certainly would like to see a serious review of an adequate amount of materials surrounding the article section in question. So far, editing on the section has worked by means of rather indiscriminate inclusion of information. In one particular case, even a Reddit post and a search result page on the US-CERT website were cited as sources. However, it seems to me that invoking WP:RFM is an overkill at this stage.
According to WP:MC/P#Preconditions, WP:DR and alike need to have failed before a RFM is necessary. For the section in question, in my opinion, a well-formed DR process has not taken place. No formal request for DR has been raised. Only editors showing tendency favoring or neutral to WebGL participated in Talk:WebGL#Security; editors in the other camp never showed up. In other words, even there is an edit history-implied dispute, no attempt at a resolution has taken place.
But again, I am not immediately against a RFM. As long as it is an appropriate step by policy and serves the purpose of reviewing related materials, I am okay with it. Kxx (talk | contribs) 16:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)