Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/New editor requires assistance on various finer points of several MoSes

New editor requires assistance on various finer points of several MoSes

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

Editors involved in this dispute

1. Walter Görlitz (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. Speednat (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. !Hero (album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

• Problem edit

Issues to be mediated

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. The introduces a sea of red and most of the subjects will never get articles so it's in violation of WP:REDNOT.
2. It also adds references in headings, which is a violation of MOS:HEADING: "Citations should not be placed within, or on the same line as, section headings".

The editor has been here since 2009-01-01, more than eight years, so new editor may not be correct, and has racked-up more than 6,000 edits, but it is my considered opinion that the editor needs some clear direction.

Additional issues (added by other parties)

• Additional issue 1
• Additional issue 2

Parties' agreement to mediation

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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

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. Fails to satisfy prerequisite to mediation #3, "The dispute is not exclusively about the behaviour of a Wikipedia editor". The proper way to address the behavior of an editor is to speak to an administrator or file a report at Administrators Noticeboard/Incidents. But note that this request would almost certainly have been rejected under prerequisite #9 even if it had been about the question of whether the redlinks and headings were proper (rather than, as it was, the question about whether the editor's behavior in entering them was proper based on the filing party's firm conclusion that they are improper; and let me note that by that statement I do not intend to imply any opinion pro or con about whether that conclusion was or was not correct). For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:33, 1 September 2017 (UTC) (Chairperson)

I understand your opinion. This isn't about behaviour but about interpretation of a MoS. If that is ultimately about behaviour, that's fine. And ANI is also not the correct way to address this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2017 (UTC)