Talk:Mediation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Please sign/date comments with ~~~~. Boud 21:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The article (Nov 2003) reads as if mediation didn't exist before legal systems. Heck, it's probably very pre-historic, if not pre-human.

Contents

[edit] Intro

This page needs a more generalized and clear introduction. Alternatively, the entire article could treat the subject much more broadly, linking to specifics in other articles. In any event, its very unclear at the moment. -Acjelen 00:21, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

I am interested in improving this article. Presently much of it reads like a laundry list and needs to be fleshed out. The external links seem relevant but almost no specific sourcing inside the article. I would like to start with the section on community mediation. Talk about specific program models (Atlanta-Community Boards) and add section on criticism ("second class justice") WP currently has no separate article on Community Mediation. Perhaps we should create and develop a stub on this. I don't know what to make of the acrimony above. It kind of chills my desire to edit. --Edivorce 22:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I haven't looked this article recently with a critical eye, but like all articles it can be substantially improved (often by removing the "improvements" of others). I suggest revising a paragraph at a time rather than a wholesale rewrite. That way if you throw the baby out with the bath water no one will put all the bath water back in to save the baby. But if you feel piecemeal revisions will not work create Mediation/Temp and do a complete revision there before you replace the main article. Fred Bauder 15:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
(Reverted deletion by Paul August): This article has far too many lists. Not sure about the best way to fix this, but several pages of lists is not brilliant prose. If Edivorce has a great vision for this page, I think the temp page creation may be the best method of fixing up the article. This temp page could be submitted to Wikipedia:Peer review before inclusion in this page, resulting in something that's agreeable to many and doesn't end up being abandoned or diluted by reinclusion of crud from the current version after its adoption. I think that Edivorce is a great user to create this rewrite, provided that he suitably addresses mediation outside of the (somewhat narrow) scope of the legal profession. - JustinWick 15:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


Ed, (can I call you Ed ;-) I wouldn't worry too much about the above discussion, If you look at the history, you'll see its really very old. Paul August ☎ 17:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
i shifted the old stuff to an archive page - see at top - to avoid further misunderstandings... time heals all wounds Boud 21:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the adjustment and the refining of the accessory aspects

It seems to me that

the adjustment and the refining of the accessory aspects

is putting the cart before the horse. Surely, after discussing and analysing various solutions, first it makes sense to adjust+refine the preferred solutions before going to accessory aspects (meaning additional stuff?). While waiting for someone who knows the subject better, i've adjusted and refined the line to:

the adjustment and the refining of the proposed solutions

i hope this is a good solution that i've proposed. If not, we might need help from a mediator ;). Boud 21:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need for disambiguation?

This page could do with a clean-up. One thing i would suggest is perhaps a disambiguation of the various meanings of mediation. The quotation at the beginning seems to hint at the basic prinicple behind mediation, but then the article seems to focus on dispute resolution (in a list form).

Mediation can be used in many contexts

  • Dispute resolution (there are many different domains and approaches)
  • Mediation in the terms of Computer-mediated communication (e-mail, chatrooms, videoconferencing.
  • Mass mediation (TV, intenet, radio, newspapers).
  • Statistical mediation.
  • Mediation of action and reality through tools (activity theory).
  • Mediation of thought and language through signs (semiotics).

Perhaps disambiguation might give a way of making this article a little more focussed. Any thoughts? MattB2 (yet to set up a user page!)

[edit] Merges

Trentw (talk • contribs) has created a number of articles I suggest be merged into this one. They're over-specific, and possibly original research.

eaolson 03:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merges and Article Rationalisation

I've finally found some free time :) , so have had a proper chance to look at this article in detail.

It seems to me that there is a great deal of good information here, but its layout is haphazard, which makes it confusing. There is also a lot of information that is repeated in various guises in different sections (namely: what mediation is; and what the mediator tries to do). I also feel that it is a bit too focussed on mediation in Australia - although I appreciate that that's where a lot of new ideas/developments are coming from (the move to accrediation being a good example), the mediation culture in Oz is light-years ahead of anything we have here in the UK and is probably far ahead of the US and most of Europe.

The referencing also needs to be looked at - a lot of it comes from one source (Boulle 05). As the article points out, mediation means many things to many people, and varies wildy within and between various contexts, so a wider range of references might be appropriate. At the moment, the second half especially reads as being largely anecdotal.

As for the merges, IMHO they offer a good view of important aspects of mediation, the difficulty is incorporating them into the article as it stands. I believe that it would just confuse things further - adding more information to wealth we already have here. If the article is revised, then they should be considered as part of that revision.

I'd suggest piecemeal revisions of a few paragraphs at first, to see where that takes us. I also think that a rationalisation of the article might help - if we can cut some of the repeated information and perhaps organise the topics in a more coherent manner, this could be a much improved article.

Any suggestions/comments?

MattB2 14:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation/Temp created

I've crudely reorganised the article over at Mediation/Temp. I've cut a few sections that seemed to be duplicating other parts and tried to ensure that the remaining sections follow each other in a more logical fashion. I'll try and edit that page a little more, but comments suggestions, heck - even criticisms - are appreciated before I get stuck into it. . . Cheers, MattB2 16:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I write the mediation part on the French-speaking wiki. Couldn't you look at so that that corresponds better?
Jean-Louis Lascoux 22:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Bien sur! Mais ma Francais est tres, tres mal . . . MattB2 13:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Question

I don't want to sound counter-productive. I am just a reader interested in this subject. There is a lot of good stuff about different types of mediation, history, suitable environments, choice of mediators, legal implications etc. But does anyone have any information they can insert into the article about how to actually do it? So you sit the two combatants down at a table... and then what?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/e/d/Talk%7EMediation_7126.html"