Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Map with GEOMAR calculations of wing flaperon (MH370) origin deleted from Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article

Map with GEOMAR calculations of wing flaperon (MH370) origin deleted from Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article

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

Editors involved in this dispute

1. KOT-TOK (talk · contribs) – filing party
2. WikiHannibal (talk · contribs)

Articles affected by this dispute

1. Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
2. File:MH370 Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 map GEOMAR calculation 01 EN.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Other attempts at resolving this dispute that you have attempted

Talk:Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370#Map_of_MH370_flight_path_with_GEOMAR_calculations_of_wing_flaperon_origin

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. Should the deleted map with GEOMAR calculation of flaperon drift be restored in the MH370 article?

First of all: this map existed on the MH370 article for more than 2 years (from September 2015). I suppose that one can use that fact as a proof of some sort of consensus among the editors and administrators about the usefulness of this map for that article. Second, the map is based on analysis and calculation made by oceanographers from official ocean science institute GEOMAR in Kiel, Germany (Dr. Jonathan Durgadoo and Prof. Dr. Arne Biastoch). Here is the source in English: (text) and the map in another format.

The TBILLT (talk · contribs) (which doesn't exists now) initiated the whole story 20:38, 4 May 2018 (UTC). This TBILLT (talk · contribs) without any reliable source, links or whatever proposed to delete the map because as it was stated: "Somebody told me about it, people are interpreting it to mean the aircraft crashed in a location other than SIO where the search is ongoing." I doubt that such an explanation/opinion can be counted as the reliable source for delete.

The WikiHannibal (talk · contribs) one day later has joined the talk and has deleted the map from the article "To prevent confusion mentioned above" as it was stated. I really do not understand: how one can delete the 2-years old map in the article because somebody was told about "somebody interpretation" and some personal feelings about "confusion"? The oceanography is a living science and it's normal that it has different models, tools used, so the analysis made by different groups may vary. If "somebody" told or feel bad about the map (consider the map being outdated) it doesn't really enough to call it "outdated" in Wikipedia.

I reminded to WikiHannibal (talk · contribs) the WP:UNSOURCED and WP:NOTRELIABLE rules. I insist on WP:BALANCE for the article as well. As long as WikiHannibal (talk · contribs) still didn't provide any reliable source showing that GEOMAR analysis (and the map) somehow being outdated I have insisted on the restoring the map in the article. And I am asking for the mediation help now.

References

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. KOT-TOK (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
2. Agree. As it would be impolite to not agree. All I had to say is here: Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 370#Map of MH370 flight path with GEOMAR calculations of wing flaperon origin (Feel free to move this comment to an appropriate place on this page.) WikiHannibal (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2018 (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. I'm going to reject this case under the discretion given to the Chairperson under prerequisite to mediation #9, "Although disputes that satisfy the first eight prerequisites may be mediated by the Committee, the Committee has the discretion to refuse or refer back to other dispute resolution venues (e.g. dispute resolution noticeboard, third opinion, request for comment, or additional talk page discussion) a dispute which would benefit from additional work at lower levels of the dispute resolution process." I'd suggest that you take this to Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and, if that does not resolve the dispute, to Request for Comments. If none of that works to resolve the dispute, you can consider refiling here. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC) (Chairperson)