Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Film censorship in China

{{RFMpointer|The filing party (the editor who opened this request) will add the basic details for this dispute below.}}

; Editors involved in this dispute

1. {{user|Supermann}} – filing party
2. {{user|Erik}}
3. {{user|TenTonParasol}}

; Articles affected by this dispute

Film Censorship in China

1. {{pagelinks|Film_censorship_in_China}}

; Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Talk:Film censorship in China

{{RFMpointer|What is this dispute about? What sections, sentences, or issues in the article(s) can you not agree on? If you are the editor who opened this request, list these issues to be mediated under "Primary issues". If you did not open this request, you can add additional issues to be mediated under "Additional issues". The issues to be mediated would be properly agreed upon later, if this request for mediation is accepted.}}

; Primary issues (added by the filing party)

1. Should the release date and runtime of censored films be kept? Is it really violating original research without providing any encyclopedic value to Wikipedia? I welcome other editors' suggestions on combining it with the banned films or adding more scholarly literature. Banned films don't have to show runtime since it will be meaningless to show zero, n/a, nil in the column. But movies that got minutes lopped off is a form of censorship that needs to be well documented. At the time of this filing, Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Chinese cinema task force has no one shown up. I am not taking ownership of the project to violate ownership rules. I am just taking leadership since other editors are not subject matter experts in this topic area of film censorship in China. I have kept my opinions on the talk page but not the main page. The main page is only a collection of verifiable facts.

; Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

{{RFMpointer|If you are a named party, please sign below and indicate whether you agree or refuse to participate in mediation. Remember that all editors are obliged to resolve disputes about content through discussion, mediation, or other similar means. If you do not wish to participate in mediation, you must arrange another form of dispute resolution. Comments and questions should be made underneath the numbered list below, to avoid confusion.}}

1. Agree. Supermann (talk) 03:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

{{RFMpointer|This section should only be edited by a mediator. The Mediation Committee's representative will indicate in due course whether the request is accepted (meaning a mediator will be assigned) or rejected (meaning you will have to try a different type of dispute resolution). If the mediator asks you a question in this section, you may edit here.}}

• Reject. I was already leaning towards rejecting this under prerequisite to mediation #9, which allows the chairperson to refer cases back to lower forms of dispute resolution, before seeing the postings of the two replying parties on the talk page here. Since no one is required to participate in any form of moderated content dispute resolution if they do not care to do so, for any reason whatsoever, but both of the responding parties seem willing to participate at DRN or in a RFC, #9 would, indeed, seem to be the proper disposition here, but since both replying parties do not seem to wish to participate here, prerequisite #5 which requires majority acceptance is also a reason for rejection. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:43, 14 June 2017 (UTC) (Chairperson)

{{Medcombox/bottom}}Sample