[WikiEN-l] Situation deadlocked, how to solve it?

[JAY JG]

>Thank you for posting this. It nicely addresses the case of references 
>being
>used which when you check them out, turn out to not actually support the
>information which they supposedly support. The advancement of references to
>support information implies that when the supposed reference is consulted
>you will find (and not by exhaustive search) information which backs up the
>information inserted in Wikipedia; not a confused and ambiguous situation.

Hold on there, I don't think it shows anything of the kind.  He hasn't seen 
the source itself, he merely claims to have written Bard, and not received a 
response that was to his liking.  That's quite a different thing.

>As we offer no alternatives to you other than giving up or breaking
>Wikipedia rules yourself, the problem must be solved using our dispute
>resolution procudure. Your request for comment is a good start, as is
>continued discussion with Jayjg. If those actions do not result in
>agreement, you may try mediation. If mediation fails after a good faith
>effort (or if it is refused or not engaged in with good faith) you can then
>request arbitration (hopefully the mediation committee itself will do that
>in such cases).

I that an even better start would be for Bjorn to actually post some of the 
information he has on the Talk: page, rather than simply reverting the 
article and bringing his evidence (such as it is) here instead.

>Jayjg has been the "victor" in a recent arbitration since the other party
>aggressively broke most Wikipedia policies.

I didn't feel victorious; the whole experience (and that with Alberuni) made 
me seriously consider leaving Wikipedia.  Other editors did leave.

>However it has long been
>observed that there are problems with bias in the articles which concern 
>the
>Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I will not support anti-Semitism masquerading
>as "balance" but I will welcome responsible insistance on our Neutral Point
>of View policy. Hopefully the rest of the Arbitration Committee is of the
>same mind.

Well, I'm certainly of the same mind.

Jay.