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

Ral315[edit]

This user has been promoted to the medcom, I hope to make good use of him soon... Redwolf24 (talk—How's my driving?) 04:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ral315 (talk · contribs) Seeing as the mediation committee has been overworked and understaffed lately, I'd like to volunteer my services, if needed. I'll try to be level-headed, as I always do, and I'll try to keep an open mind toward all sides of a conflict. My activity will not be infinite, but I will try to make sure that I mediate in a swift-enough manner. Any questions or comments can be addressed here or on my talk page. Ral315 W_S 06:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note; I know a few of you usually request to talk to Committee applicants over IRC. I'm usually busy on weekends, but most evenings you can catch me on IRC, and I'd be welcome to answer any questions that you might have. Ral315 W_S 20:40, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation committee:

• Support. A 15 year old college sophomore? Seems fair. Redwolf24 (talk) 22:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, bright, levelheaded, kind, has done great work on the Signpost and elsewhere. — Catherine\^talk 03:36, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 14:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. -- Essjay · Talk 22:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Well balanced, calm, yet also officious. Would be a good addition to the committee. [[Sam Korn]] 17:48, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Andre (talk) 02:24, 11 October 2005 (UTC)*[reply]
• Oppose. It's nothing personal, and you may be a good mediator, but we have too many mediators as of now, and if there are any problems, they're structural and not because of a lack of people. I am willing to discuss this with anyone interested, and am open to be convinced the other way, but as of right now given how I feel, I'm going to have to oppose (and thus veto) all new nominations. --Improv 18:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I currently count 10 mediators. When Jimbo first started the Mediation Committee in December 2003, there were nine. Since then, Wikipedia has grown substantially, and I guess I don't see "too many mediators". I respect your decision, though since you have veto power on my appointment, I disagree strongly with your view. Ral315 W_S 19:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ral315, note that this is something that I am not yet convinced on, it's basically a "hold the boat to let us discuss things" vote. As stated, I presently have no objections to you personally, and the civil way you have handle this speaks well of your character. I am hoping we have some enlightening discussion on the mailing list, and if I am convinced the other way, don't be too surprised if I change my vote and you are elected. For the good of the committee, I feel that it's premature to keep holding elections until the issue of size is satisfactorally resolved. --Improv 21:18, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's fine...I just wanted to make sure that this was being discussed elsewhere :) Ral315 W_S 22:52, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • I withdraw my oppose, having discussed it with Essjay. I ask that the committee accept a temporary moratorium on new applicants after Ral315's acceptance so we can adequately discuss the matter though. --Improv 01:29, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Outside opinions:

• Strong Support. Responsible, courteous, and helpful. Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 17:36, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Oppose. Although I have had my differences of opinion with Ral, he seems quite capable and qualified, and often offers has in areas of assistance, such as when he reminded me of my obligation to tag images under GFDL. I oppose (weakly) because I feel that, while Ral would be a good asset to Wikipedia, this would not be a wise use of his time and energy (unpaid job here in Wikipedia vs his college responsibilities and other real life duties), but that choice is his, so I will not be offended if he chooses to help out in this or other capacities.--GordonWatts 17:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • With all due respect, re: [1], Might I ask why my vote was moved to outside opinions? Are only admins allowed to vote or something?--GordonWatts 18:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Read the headings. The above section is for mediators only (mediators all have vetoes), this section is for non-mediators. [[Sam Korn]] 18:09, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, it is kind of confusing. I thank you for voting, Gordon, and do respect your opinion. Ral315 W_S 18:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • "I thank you for voting..." You're welcome; Yes it is confusing. Thank you for your feedback, Ral and Sam. I certainly didn't mean any disrespect to Rvw for his moving of the comments; It makes sense better, and as I suspected, this is open to voting by admins. Anyhow, I too think I'm spending too much time online, and I am deleting pages off my watchlist at a high rate and such as that.--GordonWatts 18:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

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