Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rachel Marsden

I agree to mediation. Arthur EllisArthur Ellis 18:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not agree to mediation; the BLP policy which Arthur Ellis cites for his position explicitly states the following:

If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article — even if it's negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it.

Therefore, AE's position is untenable, and I cannot and will not agree to anything that undermines Wikipedia policy by even entertaining anybody's desire to override written policy for reasons of personal image management. The article conforms to BLP as written. So I'm sorry, but no. Bearcat 20:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• As Bearcat points out, AE is clearly misinterpreting the BLP. In addition, it should be noted that there is currently a case coming to a close before the Arbitration Committee that is largely concerned with Arthur Ellis' behaviour on a number of pages, including this one. Since the result of the Arb. Comm. decision will be a ban of AE from articles which relate to Canadian politics and its blogosphere (see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Warren_Kinsella/Proposed_decision#Arthur_Ellis, mediation would be moot. Bucketsofg✐ 23:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Per Bucketsofg, I do not agree to mediation at this time. I'll reconsider after the ArbComm is finished with its case involvoing Ellis and his edit-warring on related pages. Ianking 19:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• I wonder what these people are afraid of. Craigleithian 23:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)