Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Tomlillis


 * ''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of an unsuccessful nomination to join the Mediation Committee. Please do not modify it.

Tomlillis
talk|contributions

Having gotten myself tangentially involved in a number of disputes through AfD debates and accidentally stumbling upon edit wars through vandal-patrolling, I've had some success informally moderating arguments and nudging them to mutually acceptable results. I believe it'd be an activity I'd be suited for in a more formal capacity in the future. Therefore, I'm going to take the bad form action of nominating myself. Tom Lillis 04:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Update: As I watch the incoming questions and opinions, I again find myself wondering if this is "too much, too soon." I'd appreciate it, then, if that's the case, if someone who knows better would just tell me as much. I'd be more than willing to withdraw my nomination at this time and try again at some later date. The other side of that coin, of course, is that I'd also like some suggestions as to where else I could be helpful. Cheers. :) Tom Lillis 08:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

MC opinions :
 * Abstain, as I have just written to the mailing list, I will from now on abstain from voting on nominations (just saying this so everyone else can see). R  e  dwolf24  (talk)  Attention Washingtonians!  05:04, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Undecided, I see reference to your having been a Wikipedian longer than you've used your current Username. Did you just not create an account prior to this one or did you have another username? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I've been contributing in various ways for about two years. I didn't register until March, 2005, though.  I can try to hunt down some IP-only contributions if needed.  Most of them were done from various IP addresses belonging to the University at Buffalo, where I'm a student.  Those contributions, however, would be more in the way of evidence of my editing style than anything else. Also, a lot of my activity comes in the form of Speedy delete nominations. Tom Lillis 08:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now due to experience. Ral315 (talk) 19:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Undecided as well, though I'm considering your nomination. Can you provide some links to cases where you've informally done some moderation?  Ral315 (talk) 07:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly. Take a look at the various pre- and post-AfD discussion regarding American terrorism.  That's actually how I got myself involved with AfD.  Also, I'd suggest asking OwenX about my involvement with the Talker debacle, specifically regarding Crystal Palace (chat site).  In both cases, I did have a position that I was advocating for.  And in the latter case, it got heated.  However, both of those very contentious situations were resolved in a way that everyone found acceptable.  Tom Lillis 08:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Important Comment: I have left a note for Tom suggesting he take one of the RfMs. It's win-win: practice makes perfect for him, we get more to judge, and we have less overflow. Also he can learn if he really wants to do this. R  e  dwolf24  (talk)  Attention Washingtonians!  10:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmm... it appears that you're not an admin yet. While certainly not a requirement or indicator of how well a mediator you will be, being a sysop indicates community trust. Also, you have 551 edits - not to get into editcount-itis or anything, but generally I prefer to see more experience on Wikipedia. Would you mind telling me what can show that you have community trust? Thanks a lot! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 23:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - nothing personal, but I would prefer more experience. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 22:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral I have never come across this editor.  [[Sam Korn ]] 13:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Experience in the community is important, and shows a commitment to the project. I encourage you to continue editing and helping others towards consensus. -Will Beback 10:05, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Community opinion : Denied due to opposition from the Committee. Essjay Talk • Contact 07:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I concur regarding Tom's prior experience as an informal mediator.  I first met Tom Lillis during the unfortunate incident he described above and have bumped into him now and then since then.  He's certainly earned my respect and trust as a calm third-party.  In addition to what he's already mentioned, he's also popped into the American terrorism (term) hotspot where he's again shown himself to be a cool head in a hothouse.  FWIW, I think he'll make an excellent mediator.  -- ShinmaWa(talk) 07:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


 * ''The above nomination to join the Mediation Committee is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it.