User:SebastianHelm/Mediation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 How I got into mediation 2 Mediation cases 3 How I work 3.1 Informal mediation 3.2 Formal mediation 3.3 Proposed guidelines

[edit] How I got into mediation

I never had considered explicitly doing mediation before, but after receiving several compliments for mediation skills and civilty in tough cases I thought I might actually be good at it, and when CakeProphet made me aware of the Mediation Cabal, I took on my first case, Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-20 Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which resonates with my admiration for the mediation efforts of Nonviolent Peaceforce.

[edit] Mediation cases

I closed the following - thanks to all involved parties!

• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-20 Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/User:Lucky 6.9 reverting his own Talk page
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-19 Carson
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-08 Turn Left
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-28 Metropolis Magazine
• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-09 Kbdank71

Ongoing:

• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-26 Decline of Buddhism in India

[edit] How I work

Mediation cases can span a wide range from informal to formal, depending on how big and complicated the issue is and how familiar each party is with Wikipedia. The two sections describe ideal end points of this continuum.

[edit] Informal mediation

In some cases, party A is just not familiar with our guidelines and party B is unable to explain them to A, or A doesn't care. In that case, I contact A first, usually secretly before I accept a case and talk with them to find out what A's underlying issue is, what A is actually trying to achieve and guide them towards achieving this in accordance with our guidelines. Often, a case then can be closed without ever making it public.

[edit] Formal mediation

In more complicated cases, I use the mediation page and its talk page as follows:

1. Add the following note to section "Quick info about this case":

   This section has been filled out by requestor. Please edit it after explaining your edits on the talk page. Mediator reserves the right to revert any edits without discussion.

2. Delete all personal attacks.
3. Investigate allegations. If they're unclear, I remove them and ask requestor what they meant.
4. Add a section "Updates" as a timeline for this case, with a table for "Date/time (UTC)" and "Status"
5. Add an entry into that table saying e.g.

   Case accepted by mediator {{user|my name}}, parties have been informed, edited "What's going on" section

6. Notify both parties. Clarify to requestee that either side can edit the "Quick info about this case" section, and remind them to watch the page.

If I gather the impression that the current version mainly reflects one party's version (e.g. because they was the last to revert) I may edit the page to a temporary compromise. Since this requires some judgement, I usually only do this as a way to get the last reverter back to the mediation table, when that party lost interest in the mediation after they pushed their opinion.

This is of course an idealization; real cases don't follow this ideal thoroughly. I first did this in Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/User:Lucky 6.9 reverting his own Talk page, which got deleted since by an involved party. One case that comes close is Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-26 Decline of Buddhism in India, although I haven't edited the "What's going on" section there since my impression was that it already was quite factual.

[edit] Proposed guidelines

I proposed a number of guidelines specific to my main area of mediation, the Sri Lanka conflict. See User:SebastianHelm/NCSLC or new project#Guidelines.