Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Asbestos
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful nomination to join the Mediation Committee. Please do not modify it.
I would like to assist as a member of the mediation committee. I am a long-time contributor in good standing, and have been involved in unofficial mediation between warring parties in the past (at the request of the parties). I've paid close attention to Requests for Mediation in the past, and believe that they can do a lot of good. I have read and understood Wikipedia:Mediation, and will have the time to be a fully-active member. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:05, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mediation committee:
- Support I have some reservations about your not being an admin, but I see no reason to oppose making you a mediator. -JCarriker 10:51, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Will soon be an admin. Support. Andre (talk) 19:02, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
- Support. — Catherine\talk 02:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Uncle Ed 11:55, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
Outside opinions:
Comments:
- You seem to be will qualified, but I have one pressing concern. You are not yet an admin. No there is nothing that says that you must be an admin to be a mediator, however RFA is an important vetting process. Is there a reason you do not want to be an admin or have you just never been nominated? If it is the latter why not nominate yourself or better request to be nominated to a wikipedian you've worked closely with. I'll consider my vote per your response. Thanks. -JCarriker 00:42, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
- While I would accept a nomination if someone nominated me, I have never felt the desire to be pressing enough to nominate myself. The "no big deal" comment about admins cuts both ways: it shouldn't necessarily be someone's goal on Wikipedia to become an admin. I don't think it would allow me to do much that I can't do already. Mediation, on the other hand, is something I believe I can contribute to, and something that I think there is a great need for on Wikipedia. There are too many long-standing arguments and fights between editors that go nowhere towards really improving articles, and usually end up with one or more of the parties too hurt or offended to have any desire to continue editing. Calling in an admin to help resolve the problem is often what new editors do, but really they ought to be calling in a mediator: arguments are better solved if conducted in a rational atmosphere than by one editor asking an admin to block another. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 09:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like to note that Asbestos is currently up for RFA nomination. While it hasn't ended yet, he, so far, has been supported unanimously. He should be an administrator by Saturday! Acetic Acid (talk) 14:49, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
- While I would accept a nomination if someone nominated me, I have never felt the desire to be pressing enough to nominate myself. The "no big deal" comment about admins cuts both ways: it shouldn't necessarily be someone's goal on Wikipedia to become an admin. I don't think it would allow me to do much that I can't do already. Mediation, on the other hand, is something I believe I can contribute to, and something that I think there is a great need for on Wikipedia. There are too many long-standing arguments and fights between editors that go nowhere towards really improving articles, and usually end up with one or more of the parties too hurt or offended to have any desire to continue editing. Calling in an admin to help resolve the problem is often what new editors do, but really they ought to be calling in a mediator: arguments are better solved if conducted in a rational atmosphere than by one editor asking an admin to block another. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 09:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above nomination to join the Mediation Committee is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it.