Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Seddon

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

Seddon[edit]

Nominated:
19:47, August 6 2008 (UTC)
view edit watch

Seddon (talk · contribs) - I'd like to nominate Seddon to join our committee. He's got a vast amount of experience in mediation through his work at MEDCAB and has helped to successfully mediate a number of cases there. Recently, he took one of our cases for us when we had a slight back log, and I've got to say, he did an amazing job with it. I encourage everyone to take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/New antisemitism - It was a long, long process but was led superbly throughout by Seddon and we could all learn a lot fromt he techniques he used in the case. It was closed yesterday as successful and from what I can see, all parties are happy with the outcome.

He's a neutral guy as well, he never judges people and can work with (just about!) anyone - some key skills for a strong mediator. His ability to stick with cases even when they become slow and tedious is another important atrribute that he has. His understanding of mediation is obviously very good, and I think he's now ready to take the step from informal to formal mediation. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from Committee members:

What are the core principles of Mediation Committee mediation?
- It is important for a mediator to remain impartial in all aspects of a case. Firstly that all editors, whatever their history on Wikipedia, be treated with the uppermost care and respect. Secondly that no matter what the subject is, that agreements and compromises made in mediation result in neutral, verifiable and reliable information. There is also a certain trust that comes with being a mediator and so must respect the confidentiality of all parties involved.
Discussions during formal mediation are privileged; they cannot be used against the parties in later proceedings (e.g. RfArb/RfC). Why is that important?
- The views and comments of users in mediation are important and users must not feel that anything they say can be used against them. There must be an understanding of trust otherwise it can be counterproductive in forming a consensus. Parties in a case should feel able to give their true thoughts, and it is important for this to happen so the dispute can be ended successfully without any loose ends. Without this trust and openness that comes with a request for mediation, the mediation will be likely to succeed in the long term.
What prior experience do you have in resolving disputes on Wikipedia? Please provide links, and how will these experiences help you to be an effective Committee member?

My first mediation was one of the biggest learning curves I faced in my time of mediation and as a user. The case generally was a success in that the issues the case opened with were dealt with, however more issues with the article came up and the mediation continued. It was a test of my own character in that the users involved were constantly assuming bad faith of each other and even had insults directed towards me in regards to my competence as a mediator. Following continued conflict between the users, one party took the case to arbitration and despite being taken on by Arbcom, a lack of participation from both parties resulted in the case being closed.
The second mediation that I was involved in was the 9/11 conspiracy theories case. I worked with User:Xavexgoem in this case and although not active on the case page tried to guide User:Xavexgoem through a mediation. Despite the case being relatively smooth, it was eventually taken to arbitration
I then took over a case regarding the series 24 and the merging of minor characters, which up to that point had been focusing too much on the conduct and hadnt managed to deal with the issues of the content of the article. This was a fantastic success resulting in processes with in the 24 wikiproject to help with the merging of articles and the users who were formally head to head with each other have been working together since then, and one disputed article has been promoted to GA.
My most recent mediation was the case I took up with the Mediation Commitee regarding New Antisemitism and the choice of lede image, a topic which is disputed to exist let alone in what form it take. This had been an 18 month long dispute that had been through previous request for comments, mediation and had been waiting to be mediated by medcom for 2 months due to a backlog. Over the last 4 months working with this mediation I had bring as many people back to the negiotiating table as possible and keep them their which isn't easy when the users in your case have had to deal with other more important issues on wiki including other mediations, arbitration cases and blocks. A proposal was recently agreed apon by the remaining active parties and hopefully will nolonger be an issue for the future.
I am currently working on a mediation with the mediation cabal regarding the start date of world war 2 which I am looking forward to working on. This is an interesting debate in that what is an accepted norm in most most western countries is supposedly different in some west pacific countries. At the moment I have requested sources that discuss alternative start dates for the war. As with most mediations its almost impossible to successfully plan far into the future so for now I intend to keep working with the parties as much as possible to work towards an agreement.

Mediation Committee:

Support as nominator. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Ryan's nomination statement says it all for me: Seddon is a talented Mediator (best exemplified, I think, by his recent guidance of the New antisemitism case) who has shown the ability to calmly and efficiently guide complicated disputes to a conclusion as acceptable to all involved as possible we require in the Mediators we take on. Seddon is well regarded in the Mediation Cabal, where he has served in excellent regard for some time (often dispensing advice when requested to newer mediators there). Seddon also has a solid general contribution history, and has been being urged to seek admin'ship for some time now, but he undoubtedly has a knack for Mediation, and I am pleased that he has chosen to approach the Committee first with his time and abilities, rather than file a request for adminship. I look forward to Seddon joining the Committee, and wish him good luck in this nomination. Anthøny 20:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Wow. I wholly support Seddon's inclusion into the Mediation Committee. seicer | talk | contribs 00:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent mediation work and general demeanor; time to bring him on officially before he wises up and runs away. Shell ^babelfish 02:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm familiar with Seddon due to his work at MedCab. He is an excellent mediator and a generally clueful fellow. He would be a wonderful addition to MedCom. Vassyana (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, no problems at all with his work. Wizardman 19:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Martinp23 14:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Community opinions:

I have full trust in Seddon's patience and discretion. Durova^Charge! 21:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Full support (with full disclosure, Seddon and I have chatted many times over at 'Not The Wikipedia Weekly') - have full confidence that he'll do a great job. Privatemusings (talk) 00:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)you guys are aware that he's welsh though, right?[reply]
Without a doubt, his mediation skills are exemplary, and I'm very happy with how he handled the 24 medcab case :) :). Hope this goes well. Steve Crossin (talk) (contact page) 16:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My interactions with this user have always been good, and he has my full confidence :-) Stwalkerster [ talk ] 22:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
w00t!!1 (what they said) Xavexgoem (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness this was a joke, or I'd be issuing odd looks in #wikipedia-medcab. :-) Anthøny 00:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I should elaborate: Seddon is one of the best mediators at medcab - where I know him - and I learned a lot reading his new antisemitism case. I have absolute trust in him, and believe that he has great skill in moving folks towards consensus. My w00t may have been immature, but it was absolutely appropriate as far as I was concerned - I apologize in advance ;-) Xavexgoem (talk) 00:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion and comments:

Decision of the Mediation Committee:

Promoted.

For the Mediation Committee, Daniel (talk) 15:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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