Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-04 Cisgender: Difference between revisions

Request made by: Catamorphism 19:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the issue taking place?

On the article Cisgender and on Talk:Cisgender.

Who's involved?

AlexR, FemVoice, and myself.

What's going on?

Originally, the terms "cisman" and "ciswoman" were removed from Cisgender because of a lack of reliable sources that indicate these terms are commonly used (analogously to "cisgender", which refers to people who are not transgender, "cisman" and "ciswoman" are supposed to refer to a man or a woman respectively who are not transgender). AlexR continues to revert these changes and insists that these terms belong in the article, but has refused to provide sources for them even when asked (the only source AlexR was able to come up with to show that these terms are used was a blog). AlexR has also used a very aggressive and incivil tone when it isn't warranted, as in this edit. Finally, AlexR has reverted good-faith edits using the edit summary "rvv".

What would you like to change about that?

I would like to either have reliable sources showing that "cisman" and "ciswoman" are in common usage added to this article, or have the article restored to this state with no further edit-warring.

If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?

Reaching me on my talk page is fine.

Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?

Sorry, don't have the time right now.

Please see [1], --Usrnme h8er 07:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This link does not work, and oddly enough, deletes User:AlexR/060607, which shows the evidence the would-be mediation claims is absent. -- AlexR 09:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see [2], --Usrnme h8er 07:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to enter this as a mediator. Since AlexR (talk · contribs) seems unwilling to continue discussion I wonder if there is meaning in continuing this Mediation page. Participants, feel free to comment on this and I am happy to give this more time before I close it. Usrnme h8er 16:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see [3] for responses to this. --Usrnme h8er 07:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Closed. Unfortunatelly AlexR was not interested in pursuing a discussion on this and continually blanked the project page while citing slander and verbal assault. Since I saw no evidence of such assault and the other participants in the mediation were in agreement, I'm choosing to close this mediation. Any further problems on the page will most likely have to be handled through more formal chanels. I don't particularly like closing a mediation without a consensus being reached, but in this case the only user not in consensus is unwilling to contribute to the discussion. Usrnme h8er 07:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the one who lies and slanders, as I have shown above with the link you so conveniently deleted. I am seriously considering "more formal channels", too -- because you, as a would-be mediator, should not exactly participate in lying and slandering against me, which the edit above shows very, very, very clearly. I invite everybody who doubts this to check out the history of this page for themselfes. For example, I blanked this page twice after FemVoices slandering rant appeared, and was threatened with blocking. I stopped because, well, I should have just deleted that one. By then the would-be-moderator had taken most obviously sides, and pretty much blamed me on everything, without ever bothering to remove content from this page, or even comment on its utter inappropriateness, (namely FemVoices slandering rant). It can, therefore, hardly be surprising that I refuse to participate in this travesty, which has absolutely nothing to do with a mediation, and a lot with harassment, in which the would-be-moderator happily participated.

And, I might add, I have not edited the article in question for days, so what exactly was this "mediation" supposed to be about? Exactly, nothing. Nothing but harassment, that is. -- AlexR 09:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see [4], --Usrnme h8er 07:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]