Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-11 Islamic democracy

Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal
Article	Islamist democracy
Status	closed
Request date	Unknown
Requesting party	User:Patchouli
Parties involved	User:Patchouli, et al vs. User:Farhoudk, et al
Mediator(s)	Somitho
Comment	Possible stale case?

Mediation Case: 2007-01-11 Islamic democracy

Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

Request made by: Patchouli 16:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the issue taking place?: There are two viewpoints of Islamic democracy as described in the lead section. A POV fork of the second type has been started.

Who's involved?: Mainly User:Patchouli & User:Farhoudk.

What's going on?: User:Farhoudk has chosen the extremely broad title of "Religious democracy" and refuses to acknowledge it is a theocracy.--Patchouli 18:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have never touched the article Islamic democracy and believe that its content is not related to the term Religious democracy. since the later describe a wider viewpoint of relation between religions and democracy. But the article named as Islamic democracy is a political article not philosophical. Leave the article Religious democracy as it was and do not change its title to Islamist democracy. I think User:Patchouli tries to make confusion in the terminologies of politics and philosophy. Farhoudk 11:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like to change about that?: Merger with Islamic democracy, or renaming to Islamist democracy with an acknowledgement that theocracy is being described.--Patchouli 18:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islamist democracy is a term invented by User:Patchouli and it does not refer to political or philosophical term. There is not any reference book or article describing it. Farhoudk 11:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?: Work openly.

Mediator response

I am accepting this case, and will review all documentation listed in the next 48 hours. Somitho 22:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had the two cases unmerged, as the party merging them did not have permission of all parties. Somitho 22:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will be contacting users on talk pages concerning this possibly going stale. If there are no responses within 14 days I will be closing the case. Somitho 18:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing. --Ideogram 19:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Discussion

While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.

The article is an Iran-centric article that claims Islamist democracy is novel presented to the world by Ruhollah Khomeini. It has been articulated by Yusuf al-Qaradawi and other Islamists [1][2]"...Two points by the author deserve further illumination. First, Feldman makes a distinction between Islamic and Islamist democracy.... " .--Patchouli 18:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Employees of the Islamic Republic who edit Wikipedia in their spare time have been dithering & can't decide on censoring Wikipedia. See User_talk:Gerash77#I_have_retired.21.

Please be advised:

It is evident that User:Patchouli does not separate the terms Islamist democracy and Islamic democracy which is the title of another article in the WP. Since the title of Mediation which is proposed by him/her is not Islamist democracy but Islamic democracy!
The term Islamist used by Feldman as a synonym for Islamic exterimists. In this view Islamist democracy can not exist. Since Islamic extremists are theocrat and Theocracy and Democracy can not coexist in a country at the same time.
But Dr. Soroush uses a wider concept of legalism instead, to cover all religions. A legalist could be a Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu etc. The term legalism together with secularism has mentioned in the Religious democracy article as opposing groups to religious democracy. This is also the gap between religious and secular Jews which proved too difficult to bridge. See Jewdasim and Democracy in the Religious democracy article.
It is not claimed in the article Religious Democracy that Ruhollah Khomeini introduced the term Religious democracy, but his opinions related to Religious democracy has been introduced to show the compatibility of Islam and Democracy from Shia POV.
Opinions of Ruhollah Khomeini mentioned in the Shia section. Opinions of sunni scholars such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi can be put in the sunni section as well.

Farhoudk 06:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islamist democracy is a sub-article of Islamic democracy.--Patchouli 06:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They were separate articles. Farhoudk 08:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no merit to further forking Islamist democracy into Shia Islamist democracy & Sunni Islamist democracy.--Patchouli 06:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore to avoid confusion, it is better to merge all articles under the name of Religious democracy to show all opinions of Jews (Religious extremist and secular), Christians (various branches), Muslims (Sunni and Shia) etc. in its different sections. Farhoudk 08:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are creating a mishmash.--Patchouli 09:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No editing

I would ask all parties to affirm they are willing to refrain from editing the article in question until the case has be settled. If you're willing to do so, please use '''accept''' or if not '''reject''' and sign. Somitho 22:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]