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

Journalist[edit]

Journalist (talk • contribs) I want to be a mediator because...I am respectful, respected, fair, and approachable. I have been on Wikipedia for over a year now, and I consider myself sort of a senior member of the neighborhood. I have had very positive interactions with the community, and I have built close friendships with many. Also, I would be honored to lend more of my services to Wikipedia. Im an Admin (for the past 9 months), Advocate, "Esperanzian" and a member of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, and I believe that I'm fully equipped with the knowledge and expreience that is needed to become a mediator. Orane (talk • cont.) 21:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• (An example of my attempt at dispute resolution: [1], [2], [3])

Mediation committee:

• Support. I believe Journalist would make a quality Mediator. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 15:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as well. Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Ral315 (talk) 10:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Experienced, committed, kind. -Will Beback 21:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outside opinions:

• Oppose. Too many personal attacks on user pages and project pages, inappropriate edit summaries, etc. Examples here:- [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. -- Funky Monkey  (talk)  15:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Ditto (the MC members comments). SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Comment— directed at Funky Monkey: How does "inappropriate edit summaries" relate to my sutability as a mediator? Please read the point that says Comments should relate to the candidate's ability to serve as a mediator. Comments that raise issues unrelated to the candidate's suitability for the Committee will be disregarded, and may be removed at the descretion of the Committee members.

I will comment on each of your examples seperately.

• Your first example: That comment was directed at an editor who has found a problem with every single potential FA since he's been here. In no way did I attack him (I even mentioned that in my question).
• Second example: that anon editor has had a long history disrupting the WMA page as well as Mariah Carey et al over album sales. After I repeatedly straightened out the incident, he/she returned with his/her 'shenanigans'. Additionally, in now way did I attack him/her. (I reiterate: How does this show me as an unfit mediator?)
• The third example: I did not disrespect the editor, and I tried to control my anger ...It cannot be called a personal attack unless you insult/attack the person.
• The fourth example: a long quarrel between two anons over record sales made me angry. In hindsight, my language may have been harsh, but 1. they were not directed at anyone, and 2. I will not censor my language. Ofcourse I will try not to be vulgar, but many editors here use "sh*t", "f*/k" ... with no penalty imposed.
• The fifth example: An editor attacked me (and quoted WP:Dick). When I proceeded to reason with the editor, he became cheeky (the full story, which Funky Monkey ignored is on my talk page).
• I'm really having trouble understanding your last example (which was when I was giving a statement in a request for arbitration).

Orane (talk • cont.) 16:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Promoted. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 08:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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