Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Redsox04

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

[edit] Redsox04

Redsox04 (talk · contribs)

I feel that it is my duty to keep Wikipedia running as smoothy as possible. Yes, I have made quite a few mistakes in the past but those mistakes had no malicious intent but only the intent to better keep this website as informative as possible. If you nominate me for the Mediation committee, I will try my best to resolve any issue that is being brought to me. I am fair and reasonable with my decision and I am aware of the Wikipedia policies. I will continue to review, at least once or twice a week, the polices here at Wikipedia and work towards making this site safe, fun, and as accurate as possible.

Mediation committee:

• Resolve any conflicts that users have to the best of my ability.
• Intervene when deemed necessary.
• Will work with the administration to make any improvements that I can to policies.
• Keep communication lines open with the Wikipedian community.
• Keep communication lines open with the administration.

Comments: I will make all decisions fairly. I am not a bias person but a person who believes in justice, fairness, and safety. If you elect me, I will better serve you!

Mediation committee:

• Oppose, strongly. The quotes Intervene when deemed necessary, Will work with the administration to make any improvements that I can to policies, I am fair and reasonable with my decision, I will make all decisions fairly, and fairness when describing how you will serve the Committee immediately ring alarm bells that you don't have any idea what the Mediation Committee does. When I go beyond that and review your recent contributions, I only have to go looking back less than a week to find all of these:-
  • This, where you suggest blocking for punishment.
  • This ANI thread about you, from three days ago, where you demonstrate you have no clue how thew higher-end processes on Wikipedia (which includes this Committee) work.
  • You can throw in editing the archive as well, a no-no in anyone's book.
  • This. "I...will take such harsh measures, such as excercising user blocks" - oh, really? I wasn't aware you have the technical ability to do this. It's apparent you have no idea how administrators operate, between the punishment bit and the fact that you think you're an administrator (the truth). So much for "knowing how Wikipedia policies work", as you claimed.
  • User talk:147.114.226.173. I need not add anything more to the comments by others at the bottom.
  • This. You recall blocking that user? If so, I can't trust your recollection in the slightest.
  • This. In adidtion to another occurance of the above, the fact it took you seven or eight goes to actually get the template message right says a lot.

So, put frankly, you have absolutely no idea how Wikipedia works, and the net gain on the Committee if you were added would be negative, and embarrasing at that. Strongest oppose I've given in a while, because you are quite clearly unqualified to assume any position on Wikipedia given the above incidents from the last week. Daniel 10:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• Per Daniel. I find it disturbing that you've more than once presented yourself as an administrator. Ral315 » 19:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. You don't seem to have any experience of resolving disputes on Wikipedia - as a mediator or otherwise. The comments I've been pointed to suggests that you tend to be rather combative and are quick to judge other users. These aren't good traits in a would be mediator. On top of this, the fact that you have held yourself out as an administrator so recently leads me to question your judgment. WjBscribe 22:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Outside opinions:

Comments:

Result:

• Not promoted per the two-oppose rule. Daniel 01:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

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