Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Opus Dei

Mediation of this dispute has been completed. The case pages should not be edited.

To report a problem with the outcome of this case, contact the Mediation Committee.
If additional mediation proceedings are required, a new mediation request should be filed.
These case pages should not be edited, even to correct article content problems. Case pages are not indexed by search engines.

Resolved:

as parties have resolved most issues, and are happy to end the mediation

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

Opus Dei

Involved parties

Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request:

Article talk pages:

Talk:Opus Dei

User talk pages:

User talk:Ndss

Other steps in dispute resolution that have been attempted:

Issues to be mediated

Should the NPOV Dispute template be added to the article?
How should the article balance space between supporters and critics? Should the article devote less space to supporters of Opus Dei and to rebuttals of criticism, devoting more space to critics of the Opus Dei? Should it keep the current proportions of support -vs- criticism? Or should it devote more space to supporters and less space to critics?
Should all commentary opinions (from supporters and critics) be placed in their own sections, or should they be interspersed throughout the article ("folded into the narrative")?
Should the overall tone of the article be changed so as to be less theological and more historical?
Should most of the images be removed from the article?
Should the introduction contain multiple specific details about the controversies?
Should the extensive discussions of theology be reduced to a short summary (linking to a second sub-article if needed)?

Additional issues to be mediated

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.

Agree. --Alecmconroy 09:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Ndss 03:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Pvazz 08:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Thomas 03:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Anonimus 17:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decision of the Mediation Committee

Accept.

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk • Connect) 10:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to help mediate this - however parties should be aware that I am not actually on the mediation committee, though I would like to be. Would everyone be alright with me mediating? Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 18:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me, so long as everyone else agrees to accept you! Thanks for helping out. --Alecmconroy 08:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, a more experienced mediator is desired. See Thomas S. Major's comment here. Thanks to both users who responded (Alecmconroy for his or her confidence in me, and Thomas for being nice.) Good luck to all of you! Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 02:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm happy to take this case then. --Wisd e n17 01:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.