Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-08-19 FairTax
| Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Article | FairTax |
| Status | closed |
| Request date | 15:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC) |
| Requesting party | Unknown |
| Parties involved | Kbs666 (talk · contribs) |
| Mediator(s) | Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) |
| Comment | Closed due to ineffective mediating of the case on my part. This should be a prime example of how not to mediate a case, and I'm going to take a time out to view where I've gone wrong. The users do, however, seem to be heading in the right direction. |
[[Category:Wikipedia Mediation Cabal closed cases|FairTax]][[Category:Wikipedia Mediation Cabal maintenance|FairTax]]
Request details
Who are the involved parties?
What's going on?
The FairTax article (FA) is in a dispute over WP:FRINGE and to some extent WP:V and WP:NPOV. Editor Kbs666 states that Americans for Fair Taxation (AFFT) are extremists and their commissioned research is fringe economics, arguing that their material should, in some cases, be removed from the article if not critically peer-reviewed. Kbs666 also argues that they are a WP:SELFPUB source. Editor Morphh states the topic is not fringe, which was stated by a super-majority (Talk page and Fringe Noticeboard). The article is on the specific topic of the FairTax, making AFFT a important source for academic and institution research on the topic, as well as the proponent viewpoint. Morphh argues content removal of their research and point of view is a violation of WP:NPOV. The issue for me (Morphh) is more around the justification used for removal, which I find against policy and guidelines. The argument is being raised for the removal of additional content (economics section and theories of pricing), which creates much larger content disputes. Of Kbs666's edits, the only content actually changed that I (Morphh) object to is here, which I can find another source for and reinsert. I'd also be open to rewording. So in some sense, this has yet to become a content dispute. We're banging heads on the talk page.
What would you like to change about that?
Review the debate (Current, History, Noticeboard 1, Noticeboard 2, Med Query). Add thoughts with regard to policy. Help us move toward a state where we can compromise on specific issues.