Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Martinp23

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

Martinp23 (talk · contribs) I've been a member of the Association of Members' Advocates since August, and in my time there have gained invaluable experience in advocating for a user or mediating in a dispute (where appropriate, as some AMA cases need a form of informal mediation rather than simple advocacy). I've also informally mediated in the past with disputes brought to my attention through requests for page protection or on AMA cases which I have not taken on as advocate. I've also offered third opinions in the past. I would like to be a member of the MedCom so that I can provide my help with dispute resolution to disputes, and ultimately help to clear the backlog! Thanks for your consideration - Martinp23 14:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• An update on the case: In the middle of December, I took the case Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Juan_Cole. After a slow start (due to parties not noticing that we'd started), the mediation is now progressing as we may hopefully soon have a solution in sight, at least for one or two of the issues. The mediation itself is taking place on the case's talk page. Martinp23 23:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation committee:

• Support. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 21:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support —Xyrael / 12:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -Ste|vertigo 00:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Outside opinions:

• Support his work for the AMA has been very good. Recently gained adminship and didn't appear to have any skeletons lurking in his cupboard. Addhoc 17:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - In all my contacts with Martin, including his adminship nomination, I have never gotten the impression that he is ever any less than a very fair, reasonable, and good-tempered individual. In my eyes, he would be an excellent mediator. Badbilltucker 17:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Badbilltucker Geo. 21:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Everything looks good thus far, except you've stated that you saw cases at AMA that needed a mediator, and you declined to choose them. Could you please clarify exactly why you chose not to take such cases, when that is exactly what you'll be doing here? ^demon^{[omg plz]} 18:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ahh - what I meant for that to mean was that for one or two AMA cases I have seen which are better candidates for mediation, I have not taken them as an advocate, but rather introduced myself on the article talk page and informally mediated between parties there (rather than as an advocate, supporting one party only). I hope this clarifies (as, of course, in MedCom I'd be doing mediation :)) Martinp23 19:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh ok, makes sense now. Your wording was a bit odd. Thanks for clearing it up. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 01:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ah OK. At some point, I hope to take a case to demonstrate my abilities - unfortunately illness is delaying me, but as soon as I'm confident I'll be able to mediate fairly, I'll do so Thanks Martinp23 18:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just felt compelled to further clarify why I've taken one or two AMA cases as a mediator rather than an advocate. Some AMA cases are clear cut, and easy to advocate for, but it's hard to advocate when the person on your side seems to be misinterpreting policy (or is just unwilling to co-operate), and more broadly on most content disputes, where it is often neccessary to form a compromise. A lot of the time, advocacy can be a more informal, quicker and easier solution to problems, but the difficulty can be the actual tie to your advocee, when you knwo that the issue needs someone in the middle , mediating. Martinp23 23:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Promoted. Essjay (Talk) 09:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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