Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/ThorHT
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Thorht
Thorht (talk • contribs) Education and Experience: hold two Master of Art degrees; current graduate student seeking a Master in Dispute Resolution and law student at Marquette University (Milwaukee, WI USA); trained Mediator - have taken courses in dispute resolution and mediation; and have mediated small claims cases in the Milwaukee County Circuit Court Civil Division. Will be supervising mediators as of 5/08.
In the past few months, I have discovered the wiki world and have been trying to get more involved with Wikipedia. Most of my contributions have been editing and fighting vandalism. I've dealt with disputes before and currently server as the editor of an academic journal. I would enjoy the opportunity to further help the Wikipedia community focus on writing a good encyclopedia. Thor Templin 22:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Mediation committee:
- Oppose. I'm sorry, but with only 77 edits, you just don't show the experience needed to serve on the committee. Get some more edits in the Wikipedia: namespace so you can show some more familiarity with process. ^demon[omg plz] 17:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
→→With all due respect, the process of mediation requires no specialized knowledge; in fact, knowledge can be more cumbersome than useful. My experience and training in dispute resolution really outweigh such. Thor Templin 01:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. I'm sorry, but with so few edits, we cannot be sure that you know even how to interact within the Wikipedia community, let alone hold this kind of position. If you truely do have experience and training in disupute resolution, then once you have the experience with this site, I'd be glad to support you. --דניאל - Danielrocks123 contribs 18:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't judge editors based on their edit count, but I don't think you have enough experience with Wikipedia's policies, trends and inner workings and this may prove a barrier in your mediations. Come back to us in a few months :-) —Xyrael / 17:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Outside opinions:
Comments:
- Wow. I didn't know this was a cover for admin-ship. You have people on this committee who I would surmise have no formal training in dispute resolution. Here you have the opportunity to have someone who is professionally trained in the field, and instead make non-substantive reasons for opposition – what does the number of edits that I have to do with mediation. Further, "once I have experience with this site" is based on what? I have used this site for many years and made edits as an anon. Some 18-year-old is telling me that I need familiarity with the "process" - the process of mediation; this is a joke of a committee. You gave other candidates opportunities to defend/clarify but not me; why? Next time you play a game be sure to pick the guys who have played a little before versus those who know the rules - clearly that is what you've done here. Have fun with your faux-DR and good luck with your pop culture encyclopedia. Thor Templin 15:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Calling this a "cover for adminship" is completely false. There are a few (myself included) of us who are not admins. In addition, as Daniel said, we just don't know how well you know/understand Wikipedia policies. I'm not doubting your claim to having been here as an anon for some time, there's just no way to see that. Your experience asa professional mediator will be a great asset to the committee, once we've seen you as a Wikipedia editor for some time. Come back after you've shown some experience with Wikipedia policies, and we'll be happy to support you. ^demon[omg plz] 00:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- The sole basis being used is number of edits. Such is not substantive to my familiarity to wikipedia nor its policies. That's my point. You did not ask for clarification/explaination, rather made an assumption based on number of edits. If you do get accepted to law school (as your user page indicates that you aspire to do), than I sure hope that that flaw of yours is fixed. Thor Templin 03:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm doing that because as a general rule of thumb, users without a high level of contribution are not as familiar with process as they'd like to think. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, but there are some things that are usually safe to assume. ^demon[omg plz] 00:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- So if someone reads but doesn't contribute, you can assume that they have no experience. Stupid but interesting. Good way to get a failing grade. Thor Templin 23:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'm doing that because as a general rule of thumb, users without a high level of contribution are not as familiar with process as they'd like to think. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, but there are some things that are usually safe to assume. ^demon[omg plz] 00:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- The sole basis being used is number of edits. Such is not substantive to my familiarity to wikipedia nor its policies. That's my point. You did not ask for clarification/explaination, rather made an assumption based on number of edits. If you do get accepted to law school (as your user page indicates that you aspire to do), than I sure hope that that flaw of yours is fixed. Thor Templin 03:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Calling this a "cover for adminship" is completely false. There are a few (myself included) of us who are not admins. In addition, as Daniel said, we just don't know how well you know/understand Wikipedia policies. I'm not doubting your claim to having been here as an anon for some time, there's just no way to see that. Your experience asa professional mediator will be a great asset to the committee, once we've seen you as a Wikipedia editor for some time. Come back after you've shown some experience with Wikipedia policies, and we'll be happy to support you. ^demon[omg plz] 00:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
