Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Race and intelligence

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.

Race and intelligenc

view edit delete watch
Filed: 18:39, February 18 2007 (UTC)

Involved parties

Articles involved

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

Issues to be mediated

What should the organization of the main article be?
What should the organization structure/relationships of the many articles be? talk-page example
What should be done with the large table that was in Race and intelligence (explanations)? see table in this archived page talk-page example
What should be done with this section?
In what article does the survey of academic opinions regarding the cause of the black-white gap belong? talk-page example
What should the lead image be? talk-page example
What should the title, lead content, and organizational placement of Race and intelligence (interpretations) be?
Should the content of nav-boxes be limited to "Race and intelligence" prefixed articles?
Is this section policy compliant with NOR?
What should be done with the special reference system currently in use in many parts of the article series? Put another way, what reference system should be used?

Additional issues to be mediated

Is this section policy compliant with NOR?
Is this section policy compliant with WP:NPOV#Undue weight?
Reverting the page over the objections of others resulting in lost information. (Talk page link)
Should this remain as one article (as at 2-11-07) or be divided into many subarticles (as at 2-17-07)
Should this article focus on US based racial animosity or be limited to scientific research in this field, with notations to the former
Incivility by Kevin Murray, refusal to apologize, posting usertalk page comments on article talk page.
Does the current article rely too heavily on the acceptation of the two "controversial assumptions" described in the current intro? Should the consequences of not accepting either or both assumptions be spelled out right at the beginning?

Parties' agreement to mediate

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. W.R.N.
Agree. Ramdrake 22:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. futurebird 18:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. --Kevin Murray 20:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. JJJamal 20:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. --JereKrischel 21:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. --Ultramarine 23:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee

Accept:

For the Mediation Committee, Shyam ^(T/C) 06:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Due to private request, I will take this one. I'll post a few comments on the talk page, where mediation will proceed. KillerChihuahua^?!? 17:38, 21 February 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.