Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Lutici

Resolved:

For an explanation of why the case was closed, refer to the talk page or contact the Mediation Committee

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

---

Lutici

Formal mediation case
Articles	Lutici (talk) Pomerania during the High Middle Ages (talk)
Opened	16 Apr 2013
Mediator	Feezo (talk)
Status	Closed
Notes	None
view talk edit delete watch

Users involved in dispute

1. Skäpperöd (talk · contribs), filing party
2. Volunteer Marek (talk · contribs)

Woogie10w (talk · contribs)

Articles concerned in this dispute

• Lutici (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Pomerania during the High Middle Ages (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Other steps of dispute resolution that have been attempted

• Talk:Pomerania during the High Middle Ages#1130
• Talk:Lutici#Attempts at removing well sourced material
• Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 145#Andrzej Michalek "Slowianie Zachodni. Monarchie Wczesnofeudalne"
• Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive 68#Lutici, Pomerania duringthe High Middle Ages
• User talk:Skäpperöd#DRN dispute

Issues to be mediated

All aspects of article content over which there is disagreement should be listed here. The filing party should define the scope under "Primary issues", which is used to frame the case; other parties to the dispute can list other issues under "Additional issues", and can contest the primary issues on case talk page.

Primary issues

• In 1121, Boleslaw III of Poland campaigned in the Lutician areas, heading an expedition from the Oder river to the Müritz lake. There is a dispute about whether the articles should state, in-text and in a map, that this 1121 campaign covered the Demmin (Dymin)/Stralsund (Stralow, Strzalow) area. This information stems from a map in what VM and Skäpperöd agree is a tertiary source. Per VM, this is sufficiently established in literature for inclusion. Per Skäpperöd, this is not sufficiently established for inclusion.
• Another, related dispute is whether the article should include another information from the same tertiary source, that in 1130 a joint Polish-Danish campaign succeeded in taking Rügen. Per VM, this is sufficiently established in literature for inclusion. Per Skäpperöd, this is not sufficiently established for inclusion.

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

All parties please indicate below whether they agree to mediation of this dispute; remember to sign your post. Extended comments should be made on case talk page. Every party listed above will be automatically notified that this request has been filed.

1. Agree. Skäpperöd (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

   Decline.--Woogie10w (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

2. Agree, with reservations. The first issue is straightforward and should have been settled long time ago - it's simply info based on reliable sources being removed by Skapperod per WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The second issue might be worth discussing once the first issue is settled.Volunteer Marek 15:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

A member of the Mediation Committee will indicate whether this request is to be accepted or rejected. Notes concerning the request and questions to the parties may also be posed by a committee member in this section.

Case accepted. PhilKnight (talk) 08:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.