Wikipedia talk:Mediation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Use of the Ulster Banner on Wikipedia
I'd be grateful if anyone has an opinion on whether this situation is mediatable. I previously posted this request here. The issue started on the Northern Ireland page over six months ago, over the use of the Ulster Banner or any other flag in the country infobox. It has now spread to the use of the Ulster Banner on templates and other pages. I'm not going to state my position as I want to present this neutrally. See Talk:Northern Ireland, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Proposal for warning against inappropriate use of Northern Ireland flag templates, Talk:List of British flags, Template:British Isles, Template talk:UKFlags, Template talk:United Kingdom regions, Template talk:Country data Northern Ireland and probably have a dozen other places. This has resulted in numerous edit wars. Both sides have valid points and no outcome is foreseeable. Needless to say, this needs to be sorted out. It's causing far too much disruption to several articles. I'm unsure whether mediation will work, the issue has been discussed over and over. I'm told Arbcom will reject it as a content dispute, but Im starting to think a enforced decision will be the only solution. Stu ’Bout ye! 10:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AMA mention
The mention of the AMA is no longer required and 'advocate' should probably link to the mainspace article. Addhoc 22:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, although there is is still a mention of the AMA remaining. Addhoc 15:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed it. Thank you for bringing it to the Committee's attention. Daniel 09:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Disambi link to Help:Merging and moving pages
{{editprotected}}
- Done. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comment
First, I've edited the page to correct the wording referring to arbitration as a disciplinary process. Like mediation, arbitration's focus is on resolving disputes, not punishing the participants... so, I hope this was a relatively uncontroversial edit which the Mediators will have no objection to.
Second, I unprotected wikipedia:arbitration policy a few weeks ago. This page was protected a while back because it is the sister page to that - so now that reasoning doesn't hold up any more. :-) I hope the Mediators will consider unprotecting, since the history prior to protection doesn't suggest much disruption. Picaroon (t) 05:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Only one disputant?
A couple of points I would like to have copyedited:
The article contains the text: "Where the position of one disputant is clearly unreasonable, fringe, or based on a strong point of view, the mediator is not required to subvert ..." It's a minor point, but I recommend changing that to "one or more disputants", since there are often multiple editors "ganging up", and even multiple groups of different "fringe" viewpoints.
The section "People involved" contains: "Mediators listen to both sides, they attempt to help each party recognize and value the other party's position." This is a run-on sentence; the comma should be a semicolon, or a period. Actually, I would have changed it to "Mediators must listen to both sides, since they will attempt to..."
Also, I really think point #2 in "What mediation is not" should work in a slightly better explanation, perhaps text to the effect that "The sole purpose of mediation is to assist editors in a sincere effort to achieve consensus; attempting to use mediation to "prepare for" arbitration (or other action) is considered devious. For this reason, the communications that take place during..."
Eaglizard 13:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Interwiki link for Farsi page
{{editprotected}} Please add interwiki link for current Farsi page of this policy to prevent users from creating duplicate copys in Farsi wikipedia. The link should point to fa:ویکیپدیا:میانجیگری. Ammar (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done. --- RockMFR 22:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nutshell
Suggest removing "among the Mediation Committee members" from the Nutshell. All policies derive authority from either the community or the Wikimedia Foundation, and this is no exception. The community has the authority to change the mediation policy including authority to abolish the Mediation Committee if it wishes. The Mediation Committee is respected and trusted not only to mediate disputes but to provide the community with its expertise and wise guidance on mediation policy. But this is a matter of respect, trust, and wisdom, not of right. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Template for closed mediation
During the mediation of the cold fusion article, its talk page had a header saying that the article was the subjet of mediation. Now, that the mediation is closed, it would be great to have a header that says "this article was the subject of a mediation", with a pointer to the discussion page. This way, new editors would be made aware of the past mediation. Who could take care of that ? Any thoughts ? Pcarbonn (talk) 16:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
