Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Guanaco
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.
Promoted as of 01:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC). Redwolf24 (talk)
I have been a Wikipedian for about a year and a half. I have some experience with dispute resolution on Wikipedia, including discussion on various requests for arbitration, requests for comment, and talk pages of disputed articles. I would like to help create fair and mutually acceptable solutions to content disputes as a more productive alternative to banning users who generally have good intentions. —Guanaco 22:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mediation Committee
- Full support. Capable person. Andre (talk) 18:09, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Yea. Good reputation. Will probably make a fine mediator. --Improv 20:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I trust Guanaco will do a good job. Ral315 (talk) 20:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm... it appears that you've been through 3 RfAs (1, 2, 3), the latest a month ago, following your de-adminship by the ArbCom a while ago. While a mediator and adminship are different things, I'd like to hear your view of the RfAs. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I wish the RfAs had succeeded, but I see why they did. RfA1 failed because it took place immediately after the RfAr and significant minority of people were angry over various decisions I had made. RfA2 would have passed, but I was questioning the listing of Willy on Wheels on Wikipedia:List of banned users, and some people misinterpreted this as a campaign to unblock WoW vandal accounts. RfA3 happened almost immediately after I had returned from a Wikibreak. It failed mainly because of my lack of recent edits. —Guanaco 05:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I would prefer that you re-become an admin first before joining us; don't take this personally, but I simply think that adminship shows community trust in the person. Do you plan on re-applying anytime soon? Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't intend to nominate myself in the near future, but I would accept someone else's nomination. —Guanaco 04:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I would prefer that you re-become an admin first before joining us; don't take this personally, but I simply think that adminship shows community trust in the person. Do you plan on re-applying anytime soon? Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I wish the RfAs had succeeded, but I see why they did. RfA1 failed because it took place immediately after the RfAr and significant minority of people were angry over various decisions I had made. RfA2 would have passed, but I was questioning the listing of Willy on Wheels on Wikipedia:List of banned users, and some people misinterpreted this as a campaign to unblock WoW vandal accounts. RfA3 happened almost immediately after I had returned from a Wikibreak. It failed mainly because of my lack of recent edits. —Guanaco 05:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support [[Sam Korn]] 13:54, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Support — Catherine\talk 00:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Others
- Just out of interest, could you point to a talk page or two where you've done a bit of mediation? Dan100 (Talk) 23:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I can't think of any examples at this time. —Guanaco 19:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Never mind. Support. Dan100 (Talk) 21:47, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The above nomination to join the Mediation Committee is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it.