Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Video games developed in Japan

< Wikipedia:Requests for mediation
Resolved:

For an explanation of why the case was closed, refer to the talk page or contact the Mediation Committee

This mediation case is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this case page.

WP:VG/GL edit

Request for formal mediation
ArticleVideo games developed in Japan (talk) 
Submitted17 Sep 2010
MediatorNot yet assigned
StatusAwaiting party agreement
NotesNone

Dispute specifics edit

Involved users
  1. Prime Blue (talk · contribs), filing party
  2. Ryulong (talk · contribs)
  3. Jinnai (talk · contribs)
  4. Nihonjoe (talk · contribs)
  5. Guyinblack25 (talk · contribs)
  6. Odokee (talk · contribs)
  7. Megata Sanshiro (talk · contribs)
  8. Nomader (talk · contribs)
  9. Bridies (talk · contribs)
  10. Joren (talk · contribs)
  11. Ost316 (talk · contribs)
  12. Golbez (talk · contribs)
  13. Shiroi Hane (talk · contribs)
  14. Kusunose (talk · contribs)
  15. Anomie (talk · contribs)
  16. Squilibob (talk · contribs)
  17. jgp (talk · contribs)
  18. White Cat (talk · contribs)
  19. XinJeisan (talk · contribs)
  20. Keahapana (talk · contribs)
  21. Thibbs (talk · contribs)
  22. DKqwerty (talk · contribs)
Articles concerned in this dispute
Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted

Issues to be mediated edit

Primary issues
  • no strict site-wide guideline on including/excluding romanizations for katakana words of English origin
  • WP:VG/JP currently says to omit these romanizations, but not all editors agree with it
  • WP:VG/JP cannot be convinced to drop their guideline, just as those wanting to remove the guideline cannot be convinced to follow it
  • site-wide compromises are rejected on grounds of WP:ACCESS and WP:ENGLISH
  • users have grown tired of discussing just like last year, though the issue is still unresolved and reverting continues
Additional issues (added by other parties)
  • Additional issue 1
  • Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation edit

All parties please indicate below whether they agree to mediation of this dispute; remember to sign your post. Extended comments should be made on the talk page of this request.
  1. Agree. Prime Blue (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Agree. Nomader (Talk) 23:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Agree. -Thibbs (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Agree.陣内Jinnai 03:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Sure. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 04:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. I agree. I'm a bit busy so I might not be able to respond to things very quickly, but am happy to participate. -- Joren (talk) 06:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Agree - Odokee (talk) 08:42, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Agree bridies (talk) 13:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Agree Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Agree (Guyinblack25 talk 16:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC))[reply]
  12. Agree Ost (talk) 16:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC) - Sorry, I was on vacation, but I'll plan to participate when this gets picked up.[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee edit

A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate whether this request is to be accepted or rejected. Notes concerning the request and questions to the parties may also be posed by a committee member in this section.
  • Note: Parties notified. AGK 22:56, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • We do not yet have the agreement of all the listed parties, and seven days (the customary maximum time an RfM can remain pending for) have elapsed. Are we unable to proceed without the editors who have not commented yet? Is there any reason why they haven't commented yet, other than inactivity? AGK 11:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The users further down were a little less involved with the discussion, some of them came in to comment on the RfC. As far as I remember, Ost316 and jgp are the only ones who could qualify as interested in this. Could be wrong, though. Prime Blue (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • If the filing party can gather some more widespread agreement from those editors who have commented on this request that mediation can proceed without those who are absent , then I would accept this request. We unfortunately cannot proceed without the agreement of all the parties unless there is consensus that the absent parties are not essential to the dispute, so otherwise I would be compelled to reject this request. I'll give you guys a couple of days' working room to get statements of agreement. Sorry for the awkward hoops that have to be jumped through, but we simply need to confirm that all the important parties to the dispute are on-board before proceeding. AGK 11:25, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think the major parties have already accepted the mediation request, so I have no objections to proceeding with the people we have here. Nomader (Talk) 14:11, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Looks like the major members are here. I'd have someone send a notice to those who signed to confirm.陣内Jinnai 15:01, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have notified jgp and Ost316 again, and additionally left messages for all parties that have signed up so far to ask for their agreement to commence without the other parties. Prime Blue (talk) 11:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have no objections to proceeding. bridies (talk) 12:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • It seems that all major players are here and even some lesser involved (like me). Let's proceed. -Thibbs (talk) 13:08, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Where would you like me to comment? DKqwerty (talk) 22:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To make things easier, just strike yourself off the following list if you do not object to proceeding without the rest of the parties:

  • Nomader
  • Thibbs
  • Jinnai
  • Nihonjoe
  • Ryulong
  • Joren
  • Odokee
  • Bridies
  • Megata Sanshiro
  • Guyinblack25

Prime Blue (talk) 13:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Accept. For the Mediation Committee, AGK 21:33, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So what's the status on this? Is there another page I should be watching?
-- Joren (talk) 07:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you'll note from WP:RFM/G#Accepted requests, cases that have only just been accepted will essentially remain in limbo until a mediator becomes available. This can take upwards of two or three weeks, and probably will. But no, if you add this page to your watchlist, then you'll see changes to both this page and the talk page attached to this page, which are the only pages that will be used. AGK 10:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anything we can do if the time passes and no one comes along?陣内Jinnai 23:21, 12 October 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Video_games_developed_in_Japan&oldid=1138662934"