Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Nazism/Sandbox
 Archives |
|---|
Mediator's Opening Statement edit
Good evening (GMT time) my fellow Wikipedians; thank you for opting to reach a consensus in decision making through formal Mediation. The simple action of accepting participation in the mediation demonstrates each party's desire to achieve a solution that will benefit each user as much as possible, the article and the encyclopedia as a whole.
As you may have discovered, had you been reading previous threads on this page, I run any Mediation I am involved in in three stages - "inventively" named, Mediation stages 1, 2 and 3 :) each stage deals with one or more of the common elements of Mediation.
These three stages shall encompass:
- Mediation Stage 1 — a short statement from each party, indicating what aspects of the article, etc..., they are opposed to, and what they would like to see changed at the end of the Mediation. Underneath each statement shall be a discussion section, where civil discussion and comments may be posted;
- Mediation Stage 2 — the desired outcomes of each party are then converted into possible solutions - "Requests for Implementation". Editors then barter over these terms, by either posting adaptions or retiring that Request for Implementation in favour of a heavily revised version.
- Mediation Stage 3 — by this stage, the Requests for Implementation will be coming on thick and fast, and some will hopefully begin to be agreed upon; this is where I come in - as the neutral third party, it's my duty to implement all the edits agreed upon; remember - if you change your mind on an edit, express so and (under normal circumstances) the implementation will be reverted.
The role of me as Mediator shall encompass:
- Kick-starting each stage, when such times occur as it is necessary/suitable for them to begin.
- Maintaining the Mediation location, including archiving expired/stale threads, organising/reformatting posts and comments to a form that is more pleasing on the eye, and thus easier to read - all catalysing the Mediation process.
- Moderating uncivil comments - in line with this section of WP:CIVIL. This includes: refactoring or modification of posts to a less aggressive stance; and removal of outright personal attacks and extreme incivility.
- Generally striving to ensure that the Mediation is travelling in a direction that the most likely end product is the disputing parties achieving a satisfactory outcome for as many parties and pages as possible.
Editors are asked to remember that...
- Mediators are not Emissaries. It is not the job of mediators to pass messages between individuals who are not able to communicate. Mediators work to establish the trust and common ground to allow direct communication.
- Mediators are not Private Investigators. Mediators do not "work for you," nor will they work to build a case against someone or research the facts in an article. Mediators will examine the facts surrounding the dispute in an attempt to understand what each party is looking for and to determine what may end the dispute. The communications that take place during mediation are not appropriate ammunition for an arbitration case, and mediation should not be used as a case building exercise for arbitration. Abuse of mediation communication in an arbitration case will be reported to the Arbitration Committee with a request for appropriate sanctions.
- Mediators are not Psychologists or Social workers. Mediators work with all parties as a neutral third party; they cannot and will not counsel or give advice to either party involved in the dispute.
- Mediators are not Advocates. Mediators will not take sides or promote one person's point of view or request over those of another person. If you require a spokesperson, request an advocate from the Association of Members' Advocates.
- Mediators are not Security Guards. Mediators do not protect articles or talk pages from edits by parties, and will not watch for improper behavior or violations of rules and guidelines. Administrative functions like page protection may be utilized in the furtherance of mediation, but only where supported by Wikipedia policy. Mediators will not report any incidents, and will not serve as witnesses or complainants in incident reports. The contents of mediation are privileged.
Hopefully the ground rules laid down at the start of this mediation will set the ball rolling for a ideal Mediation environment, with pre-established understandings between the parties, and - above all - an inspirational goal to benefit the encyclopedia, this stage in the Dispute Resolution chain shall be the final one attempted.