![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
"Remove chart as original research" please explain this! Araz ( talk) 17:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Neoliberalism". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 23 June 2016.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee. 03:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Neoliberalism, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
TransporterMan (
TALK) 19:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
In your last comment (which I appreciate, separately from my nitpicking here), I think you meant to say "independent" rather than "secondary". WP:Secondary does not mean independent. News reports that merely report facts, especially eyewitness news ("This journalist went to the meeting last night at the town hall and saw the Mayor sneeze") are primary sources regardless of their age. See this simple explanation: The primary source "always comes into existence first. It is information directly from the source... Secondary information comments on primary information. It is a critical analysis... something primary has been changed in some way ... added to."
If there's no commentary, analysis, or intellectual transformation of another source, then the source is primary source. Or, to put it more simply, it's wrong to say that everything in this morning's newspaper is a secondary source. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 18:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)