Clarification: Did the ArbCom officially sanction or approve this, and if not, is this officially recognized by them? Many thanks. Flcelloguy ( A note? ) 01:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I just came across this page on recent changes and I'm a bit concerned by it. This page was only created about an hour ago and already four users have been appointed (by themselves as far as I can tell) as a board. The page also claims that "The committee is an auxiliary of the Arbitration Committee." Has the ArbCom sanctioned or even heard of this committee before? I think the last thing Wikipedia needs at this point is another committee or more bureaucracy. -- Carbonite | Talk 01:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Probations/mentorships = good. More committees and specific officer type roles like "probation officers" = m:Instruction creep. Could we perhaps just have Wikipedia:Mentorship that indicates who is on mentorship and who their mentors are without any committee structure overseeing it? -- Phil Sandifer 02:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I have listed this case as the situation is troubled with all three participants complaining to me, see User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Re:Your_message_concerning_reverting_on_the_Nick_Adams_article, User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Re:_Onefortyone_placed_on_Probation and User_talk:Fred_Bauder#141. As you may see, given my position as an arbitrator, I am unable to satisfy them. Fred Bauder 02:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm listing Zen-master here. I recently banned him from Race and intelligence for two weeks for disruptive editing. User:dmcdevit has questioned the propriety of this action because he feels that I am a disputant in a conflict with Zen-master. Although I wholly disagree, if the mentorship committee believe they can take this case, I will abdicate and allow them to handle it however they see fit. ⟳ausa کui × 08:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Since three MENTCOM members have taken this case, they may reverse the ban I placed on Zen-master with my blessing, if they so choose. However, I maintain that the ban was properly imposed, and I urge them not to do so. ⟳ausa کui × 00:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
We began putting folks on probation a month or so ago, recent closed cases often include probation. I'll try to come up with the names today. Fred Bauder 16:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Are there any particular qualifiers for membership? I ask largely out of curiosity, but I also feel that I could be of assistance. Whatever the case, this should probably be noted under the "members" header. -- Sean| Bla ck 09:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps we could do with directories for each case (ie Wikipedia:Mentorship_Committee/JarlaxleArtemis). This is sort of like the style that the ArbCom is using. It would make the main page less cluttered along with other goodies. What do you think? Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 00:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
This group seems to be primarily involved in monitoring editors who are on administrative probation, and although it's called the mentorship committee it seems to have little or nothing to do with mentorship as it is understood on Wikipedia.
Please choose a more suitable name. There are existing mentorships set up by Jimbo Wales and the Arbitration committee, and they have nothing to do with any of the activities carried out by the group of subscribing members on this page. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 08:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I edited the project page to change the reference to the Mentorship Committee in the introductory sentence to add "informal, self-selecting, self-organised". As far as I'm aware this is an accurate description, and serves to distinguish it from the Arbitration Committee and the Mediation Committee, which have a more formal role in dispute resolution and are bodies with closed membership.
Nicholas reverted these changes, without explanation, in what looked like a use of his administrator rollback function. Could we have an explanation of this revert, please? Did I get it wrong? -- Tony Sidaway Talk 14:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Fred Bauer's list of those on probation missed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute#William M. Connolley: Six-month revert parole on certain articles. On probation for almost five months, and violations were not noticed for months. What existing process is there for monitoring and enforcing parole? ( SEWilco 06:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC))
I had originally asked the mediation committee to handle the maoiririder mentorship - Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Maoririder. However, I think this would be more suited for the mentorship committee. Would this be acceptable to you guys? Raul654 22:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi, are there any particular qualifiers for membership? I am interested in becoming a member Brian | (Talk) 02:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
I do not want to be a part of mentorship anmore, I havent done anything as my guidance for JarlaxleArtemis was not necesary. He was no longer a dick since he was unblocked. --
Cool Cat
Talk|
@
19:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
User:JarlaxleArtemis apparently has not fulfilled the requirements of his unbanning, has been engaged in edit warring, has been bending the rules on images, has been ignoring the MOS, and has shown incivility. With all due respect to User:Linuxbeak, it appears that he has not been engaged in the case. I started a thread on RfAr asking for clarification of his status, and we eventually figured out that the user was paroled to the Mentorship Committee, with requirements. The discussion has been at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#JarlaxleArtemis, though it now appears to be more appropriate at AN/I. Were it not for his agreement to meet certain requirements, the user would have been banned for a year, or even indefinitely. Either mentors or admins need to hold him to his commitments to respect the project and the community. - Will Beback 08:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Shultz III ( talk · contribs), who is currently blocked, has agreed to mentoring and is now in need of a mentor who can keep close tabs on him. Prospective mentors should contact TShilo12, MarkSweep, Linuxbeak, or Freakofnurture. Thanks, -- MarkSweep (call me collect) 03:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't think we're doing anything *useful* right now... perhaps we should restart? Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 23:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Not sure where to make this request. Dschor ( talk • contribs) would like to request a mentor. Any takers? -- 71.36.251.182 23:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
There are specific things on Wikipedia that I find frustrating but I think somebody more experienced may be able to help solve the problems, or help me achieve Zen when contemplating them, anyway. I think a mentor is the solution, but I'm open to other suggestions. Uucp 15:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Clarification: Did the ArbCom officially sanction or approve this, and if not, is this officially recognized by them? Many thanks. Flcelloguy ( A note? ) 01:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I just came across this page on recent changes and I'm a bit concerned by it. This page was only created about an hour ago and already four users have been appointed (by themselves as far as I can tell) as a board. The page also claims that "The committee is an auxiliary of the Arbitration Committee." Has the ArbCom sanctioned or even heard of this committee before? I think the last thing Wikipedia needs at this point is another committee or more bureaucracy. -- Carbonite | Talk 01:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Probations/mentorships = good. More committees and specific officer type roles like "probation officers" = m:Instruction creep. Could we perhaps just have Wikipedia:Mentorship that indicates who is on mentorship and who their mentors are without any committee structure overseeing it? -- Phil Sandifer 02:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I have listed this case as the situation is troubled with all three participants complaining to me, see User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Re:Your_message_concerning_reverting_on_the_Nick_Adams_article, User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Re:_Onefortyone_placed_on_Probation and User_talk:Fred_Bauder#141. As you may see, given my position as an arbitrator, I am unable to satisfy them. Fred Bauder 02:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm listing Zen-master here. I recently banned him from Race and intelligence for two weeks for disruptive editing. User:dmcdevit has questioned the propriety of this action because he feels that I am a disputant in a conflict with Zen-master. Although I wholly disagree, if the mentorship committee believe they can take this case, I will abdicate and allow them to handle it however they see fit. ⟳ausa کui × 08:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Since three MENTCOM members have taken this case, they may reverse the ban I placed on Zen-master with my blessing, if they so choose. However, I maintain that the ban was properly imposed, and I urge them not to do so. ⟳ausa کui × 00:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
We began putting folks on probation a month or so ago, recent closed cases often include probation. I'll try to come up with the names today. Fred Bauder 16:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Are there any particular qualifiers for membership? I ask largely out of curiosity, but I also feel that I could be of assistance. Whatever the case, this should probably be noted under the "members" header. -- Sean| Bla ck 09:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps we could do with directories for each case (ie Wikipedia:Mentorship_Committee/JarlaxleArtemis). This is sort of like the style that the ArbCom is using. It would make the main page less cluttered along with other goodies. What do you think? Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 00:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
This group seems to be primarily involved in monitoring editors who are on administrative probation, and although it's called the mentorship committee it seems to have little or nothing to do with mentorship as it is understood on Wikipedia.
Please choose a more suitable name. There are existing mentorships set up by Jimbo Wales and the Arbitration committee, and they have nothing to do with any of the activities carried out by the group of subscribing members on this page. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 08:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
I edited the project page to change the reference to the Mentorship Committee in the introductory sentence to add "informal, self-selecting, self-organised". As far as I'm aware this is an accurate description, and serves to distinguish it from the Arbitration Committee and the Mediation Committee, which have a more formal role in dispute resolution and are bodies with closed membership.
Nicholas reverted these changes, without explanation, in what looked like a use of his administrator rollback function. Could we have an explanation of this revert, please? Did I get it wrong? -- Tony Sidaway Talk 14:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Fred Bauer's list of those on probation missed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute#William M. Connolley: Six-month revert parole on certain articles. On probation for almost five months, and violations were not noticed for months. What existing process is there for monitoring and enforcing parole? ( SEWilco 06:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC))
I had originally asked the mediation committee to handle the maoiririder mentorship - Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Maoririder. However, I think this would be more suited for the mentorship committee. Would this be acceptable to you guys? Raul654 22:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi, are there any particular qualifiers for membership? I am interested in becoming a member Brian | (Talk) 02:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
I do not want to be a part of mentorship anmore, I havent done anything as my guidance for JarlaxleArtemis was not necesary. He was no longer a dick since he was unblocked. --
Cool Cat
Talk|
@
19:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
User:JarlaxleArtemis apparently has not fulfilled the requirements of his unbanning, has been engaged in edit warring, has been bending the rules on images, has been ignoring the MOS, and has shown incivility. With all due respect to User:Linuxbeak, it appears that he has not been engaged in the case. I started a thread on RfAr asking for clarification of his status, and we eventually figured out that the user was paroled to the Mentorship Committee, with requirements. The discussion has been at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#JarlaxleArtemis, though it now appears to be more appropriate at AN/I. Were it not for his agreement to meet certain requirements, the user would have been banned for a year, or even indefinitely. Either mentors or admins need to hold him to his commitments to respect the project and the community. - Will Beback 08:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Shultz III ( talk · contribs), who is currently blocked, has agreed to mentoring and is now in need of a mentor who can keep close tabs on him. Prospective mentors should contact TShilo12, MarkSweep, Linuxbeak, or Freakofnurture. Thanks, -- MarkSweep (call me collect) 03:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't think we're doing anything *useful* right now... perhaps we should restart? Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 23:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Not sure where to make this request. Dschor ( talk • contribs) would like to request a mentor. Any takers? -- 71.36.251.182 23:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
There are specific things on Wikipedia that I find frustrating but I think somebody more experienced may be able to help solve the problems, or help me achieve Zen when contemplating them, anyway. I think a mentor is the solution, but I'm open to other suggestions. Uucp 15:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)