User talk:Leonmon

Mediation of Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-11-07_Sterling_Management_Systems

Hi Leonmon, I see that you have been editing Wikipedia since 31 October 2007. Do you think you are sufficiently familiar with Wikipedia policy to be able to mediate a contentious article dispute? I would encourage you to find a more experienced mediator for this article as it is one of a group that is under ArbCom article probation. I do appreciate your wanting to help, but you have not even been an editor for two weeks yet.--Fahrenheit451 05:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed a good question. See also Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal#New mediator on Crown Heights Riot case. — Sebastian 05:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am an mediator/arbitrator by profession and have done so for 19 years. I am sufficiently familiar with Wikipedia policy to mediate this case. However, if you desire that I step aside for someone with more Wikipedia-specific experience, I shall do so. --Leonmon 19:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, absolutely not! I looked at what you wrote, and I'm very impressed! This truly shows the hand of an experienced professional. Please let me know if I can assist you in any way. I am also very interested in learning from you; please don't hesitate to give me your feedback. I'm quite active on WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation and I would be very happy if you could take a look at it and you would of course be very welcome to join. — Sebastian 19:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leonmon, I would like you to take notice of this instance of incivility from User:Misou:[1] I have warned him.--Fahrenheit451 (talk) 05:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leonmon, it appears that User:Misou is attempting to disrupt the mediation: [2] and [3]. I think this requires administrator attention at this point. --Fahrenheit451 (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leonmon, User:Misou has made disruptive comments in the mediation and User:Ibeme has repeatedly evaded answering questions about his relationship with the subject of the article Sterling Management Systems. I consider this informal mediation to be a failure at this point and see no point in continuing it. You have my agreement to end it as there is no indication of resolution or consensus.--Fahrenheit451 (talk) 19:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leonmon, the mediation is essentially dead. I ask that you terminate it. If we open it again, I would advise we have a different mediator. --Fahrenheit451 (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leomen, just wanted to let you know that I did not leave mediation because of you. I just can't assume good faith with all parties and do not want to make "compromises with certain editors anymore. As far I can tell you might be a good mediator but without AGF from all parties I think it would be a waste of time to continue. Best Wishes! -- Stan_talk 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preferred place of communication

Which place of communication do you prefer? You wrote to me on my talk page, but I am not sure if you saw my reply. It may have escaped your intention; unfortunately, by default you don't have pages on your watchlist to which you contributed. (You can change that in your preferences unless you prefer to manually check the "Watch this page" box for each page.) Also, I was wondering how you feel about e-mail; is my impression correct that you seem to prefer talk pages? — Sebastian 17:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail is great for communicating. My talk page is also completely OK. I don't have a lot going on here on my talk page. (BTW, I did actually see the reply and I appreciate your help.) I'm still getting used to the logistics but I'm catching on rather quickly. Thanks for your help.

--Leonmon (talk) 05:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closing of the Sterling Management Systems case

When you closed the case, you made some blaming statements that have raised eyebrows. I understand your frustration, but please be aware that we here always tell our parties that they need to back up their accusations (e.g. with WP:DIFFs), so we need to hold our mediators to the same standard. Please cite or reword your statement appropriately. (You may also want to address the concerns directly at Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal#Closing of the Sterling Management Systems case.) — Sebastian 22:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your comments and as you requested, I reworded my statement.

Crown Heights

I saw the 3rd draft when you posted it. Are you waiting for something from me?Edstat (talk) 22:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Leonmon (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crown Heights Riot

Thanks again for all of your assistance with the mediation. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 08:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crown Heights Riot Archive #2?

Can you archive the discussion page up to the post mediation discussion? I don't know how to do it. Thanks in advance.Edstat (talk) 12:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stubsensor

As a previous volunteer at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stubsensor I though you might like to know there is a new set available for work at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stubsensor/20100826. Hope to see you there. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]