Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Whenaxis


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

Nomination by Whenaxis


'''I joined Wikipedia on March 21, 2008. I am a self-proclaimed "Wikipediaholic" because I enjoy every aspect of Wikipedia. I am the Chief Executive Officer and Founder of my own company, Ensemble Music. I left Wikipedia for awhile to focus on studies, however, I am returing to Wikipedia as an active member. I have created a number of articles and I have had experience on the recent years project as well as the articles for deletion project. As part of my company, I have studied law, business and music theory. Law and business work in harmony, similarly, as do I, it is very important as the leader of my company that I maintain a neutral point of view over issues that may arise. Very similar to Wikipedia's principles. I study Wikipedia policy, almost as if it was Wikipedia 'theory'. Perhaps that's why I enjoy Wikipedia so much, both Wikipedia and I have similar principles.

Questions for candidate

 * Candidate: Please answer these five questions. Members of the Committee: To pose an additional question, add it to the bottom of this section, and append your signature.


 * 1) What are the core principles of formal mediation?
 * The core principles of formal mediation, in my mind, are: 1) the ability to be open to other people's concepts; 2) neutrality; and 3) come to a consensus to effectively mitigate the issue at hand. These principles are important because as a mediator, you have to understand all points of view to the topic and try to determine a resolution to the problem.
 * 1) Discussions during formal mediation are privileged, in that they cannot be used against the parties in later proceedings (such as Arbitration or a Request for comments). Why is it important that this is so?
 * Arbitration is a binding decision that Wikipedia can enforce. Request for comments is open to all users to place their point of view on the topic at hand. However, mediation is different from both of these, in that, mediation is to resolve disputes so that everyone involved is satisfied with the result. It is important that everyone's rights are respected because the discussions in formal mediation are for the purpose of resolving the issue with overall satisfaction. Whereas, arbitration is a serious issue that needs to be enforced because other dispute resolution processes are not being effective.
 * 1) What prior experience do you have in resolving disputes on Wikipedia, and how will these experiences help you to be an effective Committee member?
 * I have prior experience through interaction with other users. I have successfully resolved disputes with other users through articles for deletion discussions as well as talk pages for recent years. In addition, I have experience outside of Wikipedia, in the workplace where I maintain a neutral, third party, mediator position as the CEO and founder of my company. Doing so, I resolve disputes with full satisfacation to all those involved. My experience in law can bring new insight to the mediation process.
 * 1) If your nomination is successful, how active do you anticipate in being as a Committee member? Unless you are appointed to serve in another capacity, such as on the Arbitration Committee, will you mediate a case at least occasionally?
 * If my nomination is successful, I will stay focused and fully committed to the well-being of the Mediation Committee. I will actively participate in mediation requests. I will be willing to mediate cases on an on-going basis, perpetually for the term. This is my first MAJOR intiative on Wikipedia, and I would like to have the chance to show my ability to commit, resolve issues and interact with other Wikipedians.
 * 1) If appointed to the Committee, will you be willing to subscribe to the Committee's private mailing list, to regularly read the (small number of) e-mails that are exchanged over the mailing list each month, and actively participate in discussions?
 * Yes. As I said above, I will stay focused and be fully committed.

Discussion of candidacy

 * General discussion of the candidacy should go here, not the talk page. Input from editors who are not members of the Committee is still very welcome.


 * Thank you for your nomination. I have notified the committee on our mailing list that there is a new nomination, so they should add their comments soon. AGK   [• ]  22:56, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Question for candidate: In #2 of the standard questions, you seem to answer as though you were asked what i the difference between mediation and other processes. However, the question asks you to discuss the importance of the so-called privileged nature of formal mediation discussion. I'm not sure if you mis-read the question or perhaps were not aware of the privilege (an important aspect of the MedCom's work), but could you submit another answer that is more focussed? Thanks, AGK   [• ]  21:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, I apologize for the misinterpretation. Formal mediation is of a privileged nature because all parties enter mediation voluntarily and can exit at any time. In my mind, discussions from formal mediation should not be used against the parties involved in further dispute resolution processes because it may affect the integrity of Wikipedia, as well as, the core principles emplaced by Wikipedia such as "Editors should interact with each other in a respectful and civil manner". The discussion from formal mediation may result in edit wars and blatancy when used against another party. Whenaxis (talk) 21:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Voting

 * Members of the Committee should support or oppose the nomination in this section, with a rationale if appropriate. If a candidacy attracts two or more oppose votes, it will be declined.


 * Oppose I hate to judge on edits but with less than 1,000 total and less than 100 this year I think a lot more seasoning would be needed to understand the complex issues that can come up in content disputes (which is most of what we do). I would regretfully oppose at this time but encourage you to check out the Mediation Cabal as they are always in need of good volunteers who want to assist in mediation. --WGFinley (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I commend the candidate for his enthusiasm, but even after the response to my follow-up question, I must conclude he is not familiar (and does not understand) what mediation is and how mediation works. The privileged nature of mediation, for instance, is in fact important because it removes the worries of a party that his or her comments may be used against them in later arbitration (or similar) proceedings. The candidate also has no experience in dispute resolution or mediation on Wikipedia, which compounds my worries - so I must oppose. Thank you for volunteering, and I encourage you to start with mediating at a simpler level within the Mediation Cabal if mediation interests you, or at Dispute resolution noticeboard if it is DR generally is your interest. AGK   [• ]  22:00, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Decision of the Mediation Committee

 * The Chairman will post the outcome of the nomination in this section. Nominations last no less than ten days.


 * Unsuccessful per the two-oppose rule. For the Mediation Committee, AGK   [• ]  22:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ''The above nomination to join the Mediation Committee is preserved as a discussion archive. Please do not modify it.