The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.
- Editors involved in this dispute
- Chewbakadog (talk · contribs) – filing party
- Tachfin (talk · contribs)
- Articles affected by this dispute
- Mounir Majidi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted
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)
- Edits being undone with little discussion
- Previous DRN failed to remedy the problem.
- Additional issues (added by other parties)
- Additional issue 1
- Additional issue 2
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.
- Agree. Chewbakadog (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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." Also, there has been no talk page discussion about this issue since January 7, 2015; recent extensive talk page discussion is needed to satisfy prerequisite to mediation #4. Just a suggestion: Since both of the editors involved here edit intermittently to one degree or another, a request for comments might be the best way to address this dispute since it does not require the consent or participation of the disputants; however I would note that RFC's work best if limited to just one or two issues at a time, so dropping in a laundry list of issues such as in this edit or has been attempted in this request may not get much of a response. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC) (Chairperson)[reply]
