This mediation case is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this case page.

Involved parties

• Seraphimblade ( talk · contribs)
• Jayjg ( talk · contribs)
• Homestarmy ( talk · contribs)
• Ramsquire ( talk · contribs)
• Humus Sapiens ( talk · contribs)
• Mackan79 ( talk · contribs)
• MPerel ( talk · contribs)

Articles involved

• Jews for Jesus ( Talk)

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

• Extensive discussion on article talk.
• WP:RFC diff

Issues to be mediated

• Are qualifiers such as "many" and "most" appropriate to use when a number of examples are sourced, or do they constitute an unacceptable use of weasel words?
• Is the making of blanket statements such as "Jewish organizations oppose..." appropriate when only the positions of some such organizations are sourced, should each individual organization be named, or should a qualifier such as "several", "many", or "most" be used?
• Is it appropriate to make statements which present the majority side of a debate as correct when the opposing side is clearly a very small minority, on a page devoted to the minority group?

Further Reading

Below is a list of relevant policies and/or guidelines relevant to the dispute being mediated:

• WP:WEASEL (Weasel Words).
• WP:NPOV (Neutral Point of View).
• WP:CITE (Cite Your Sources).

Additional issues to be mediated

• Is the inclusion of the Christianity banner appropriate in the article on Jews for Jesus?

Parties' agreement to mediate

All parties should sign below, indicating that they agree to mediate the issue. If any party fails to sign, or if a party indicates they do not agree, then the mediation will be rejected. Only signatures and "agree" or "disagree" should appear here; any comments will be removed.

1. Agree. Seraphimblade 02:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
2. Agree. Mackan79 03:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
3. Agree. ← Humus sapiens ^{ну ?} 03:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
4. Agree. Homestarmy 13:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
5. Agree. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 18:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
6. Agree. -- MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 22:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC) reply
7. Agree. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Parties' re-agreement to mediate

1. Agree. Homestarmy 03:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
2. Agree. Seraphimblade 03:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
3. Agree. -- MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 03:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
4. Agree. Mackan79 13:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
5. Agree. Ramsquire ^{(throw me a line)} 17:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
6. Agree. ← Humus sapiens ^{ну ?} 22:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply
7. Agree. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Decision of the Mediation Committee

Accepted, hoping that mediation will not stall out this time.

For the Mediation Committee, ^ demon ^{[omg plz]} 16:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Pending my current Mediation Committee nomination, I am willing to mediate this case on behalf of the Med Com. My style of mediation will be identical to that I operate on my Med Cabal (and AMA) cases. Awaiting the decision of a member of the committee, Anthony cfc ^{[ T • C} 20:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC) reply

This cases has been approved by User:Danielrocks123 (a current Mediation Committee member) to be mediated by a trial committee member. ( source). Anthony cfc ^{[ T • C} 03:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC) reply

• I'll take it. This has been on the books for a while. - Ste| vertigo 22:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC) reply
• Double-mediator case: User:Anthony cfc and User:Stevertigo as of 13/ 1/ 07.
  • I do not accept Stevertigo as a mediator, only User:Anthony cfc. Stevertigo has been involved in many disputes with me, and it was entirely inappropriate that he volunteer for this in the first place. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC) reply

I am only in the back seat on this one, and will read things over occasionally as things progress. This is Anthony's case. I have been involved in several disputes with you Jayjg because you sometimes write in a way which is not clearly neutral. May I ask why you think my volunteering was inappropriate? - Ste| vertigo 05:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Please let us not argue; Stevertigo has stated he is taking a backseat. I trust you are happy with this Jayjg? Hoping for peace, Anthonycfc ^{[ T • C} 00:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Fine. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your co-operation; it is much appreciated, and is by far the most efficient format of achieving a successful mediation to the dispute we are focusing on - rather than having to solve additional disputes. Once again, thank you for your co-operation - I respect and thank you for it. Regards, Anthonycfc ^{[ T • C} 22:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC) reply