User talk:SSS108

TOP ^[1]

^ Personal Messages

If you continue to break blatantly violating wikipedia policy Wikipedia:verifiability on Sathya Sai Baba then I may start a Wikipedia:request for comment against you. Andries 01:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

---

^ Important Links

ANDRIES

• Wikipedia Bias
• ExBaba Webmaster Status

ANDRIES MODIFYING POLICY

• Example 1 Here, Andries amended the policy, making it less strict so he can push his POV Reference

• Example 2 Here, Andries modified the policy so that he can cite the personal homepages of Anti-Sai Activists, who have changed their position on SSB Talk

SATHYA SAI BABA

• Sathya Sai Baba Categories
• Sathya Sai Baba Main Article
• Allegations Against Sathya Sai Baba
• Belief And Practices

MY PERSONAL SITE

• SaiSathyaSai.com

MEDIATION ACTIVE

• Mediation Main
• Mediation Nagel
• Mediation Websites
• Mediation Reminders: Editors
• Mediation Reminders: Mediator

MEDIATION NOT-SO-ACTIVE

• Mediation Miscellaneous

WIKIPEDIA POLICIES AND GUIDELINES

• External Links
• Reliability
• Personal Websites As Primary Sources
• Personal Websites As Secondary Sources
• Partisan Websites

---

^ Mediation:

Hi, I have added two new pages. The first page is a Mediator Reminder Page. Occassionally, I will lose track of things to which I ought to respond, or upon which I ought to take action. This page is the place to give me reminders of such things. Please do not use this page for discussion. As I respond to the item of which you are reminding me, I will delete the reminder. So don't place anything on the page that you want kept. The second page is a Reminder Page for the Editors. Please put this page on your watchlist, and review it from time to time. Just as I do, editors may also lose track of items. Questions may be asked which are forgotten or the answers to these questions may not be clear to readers such as myself. I will place such questions on this page. Please do not edit this page at all. Just look at it. If I have included an item that you believe has already been addressed, just let me know on the Mediator Reminder Page. I've added larger links below for your convenience --BostonMA 03:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

---

Hi. I was originally accepted as a mediator by Andries only for a trial period of 2 weeks. On the 19th, I wrote to Andies [2] requesting that he express whether he wished me to continue as mediator. Andries responded on the 21st [3] accepting my continued role as mediator and acknowledging that there were a number of mediation questions that he had not yet answered. I felt that it was appropriate to give him some time, and to wait to see what would happen next. I did not want to pressure parties to focus on the mediation if the parties did not themselves find the issues to be burning. You have expressed curiosity regarding the status of the mediation. It is difficult to know for sure whether you are only curious, or whether you are also anxious for more active mediation. (I am guessing the latter). So please let me know if you would like me to more energetically encourage Andries to participate in the mediation. I think sufficient time has elapsed since his acknowledgement that there are open issues that I may justifiably ask him to focus on these.

There is another issue that I would like to address, however. I have been personally disappointed that you have not been more active in editting the SSB articles, for example in adding new material. I don't mean to single you out, I am also disappointed the Andries has been reluctant to make improvements to the article in ways that we have all agreed would be beneficial. I point this out because other editors who look at this conflict might form the impression that those in the conflict, (I do not mean only your side), are more interested in the struggle over the point of view than in the overall writing of a good article or a good encyclopedia.

One of the issues that appeared to be close to settlement is the issue of using material from Alexandra Nagel's later articles. I believe Andries has reluctantly agreed that Wikipedia policy does not support using these articles as sources even though they may be more up-to-date, or at least is very close to agreeing to such. My suggestion is that you write a note in the SSB talk page stating that you intend to make some edits removing material that has been sourced by Nagel's later writings. Describe which things you will remove. Then wait some time, perhaps a day. Then, if there is no contention about this, I suggest that you remove those materials from the article. I would urge you to be exceptionally careful in this, because if you remove things other than what you have described in the talk page, or if you add things during the same edits, there is a potential for an edit war. I hope that this will not happen, but it is worth it to be careful.

So that is my suggestion. However, if you wish for me to suggest to Andries that he focus his attention on the open mediation issues I will do that (either in addition to, or instead of, the suggestion above). I apologize in advance if my suggestion does not work out, however, I think it is worth it to test where things actually stand. --BostonMA 19:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)