"

 Would you take on a project?? 

There are two users, currently both with a week-long block for edit warring over an article Che Guevara (photo), although the blocking admin is vacillating, suggesting an RFC which I know is useless. One of the editors, User:Redthoreau, I tangled with a while ago and ultimately ended up nominating the article in question for FAR, Wikipedia:Featured article review/Che Guevara/archive1. The other editor User:Damiens.rf I don't know, but his current complain is that 61 quotations in an article is too many. 

The blocking admin User talk:EdJohnston wants to handle the situation constructively but does not know how. I suggested to him that someone like you, an experienced editor might be willing to be a neutral editor between the two, focused on article quality.

I suggested you (and perhaps also User talk:Geometry guy) to direct the warring editors to concentrate on article quality. My experience in the past with User:Redthoreau is that he does rather well when a ""father figure"" type takes an interest. Some of his obnoxiousness, I believe, is due to youthful aggression and ignorance. I think he would respond positively to someone whose goal was to produce a quality article. As he dominates all things Guevara, the only way to improve the Guevara articles on Wikipedia is to move  Redthoreau over onto the side of the forces of good.

Since the focus would just be this one article, and your job would be to render advice/judgement on article criteria, I think the job would not be unduly burdensome. Redthoreau had a past mentor-like relationship with User:Coppertwig and did very well when pointed in the right direction behaviourally. (Of course, you may not be quite the right model there!)

Would you consider taking on this project? It might be just up your alley. I figure that since Redthoreau is not going to go away, he may as well put all that energy into writing articles that don't have 61 quotations in them. How about it?  — (Talk) "