Wikipedia talk:Mentorship Committee

ArbCom and ProbeCom[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Apparently, I just became the spokesperson. A lot of this is "in the works". In fact, this probably isn't going to be a Probation committee as it may be a pool of mentors. We have had a few arbs come to the channel and discuss it with us. Don't take anything you see here seriously yet. Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 01:12, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All members are people in an IRC channel discussing everything. There is no bureaucracy, we just didn't want a single chairman (like at the medcom or medcab), and we prefer to go with several (a board). We've been talking to arbcom members in the IRC channel. Carbonite I recommend you get IRC, a lot happens there (in fact the arbcom only came into being after discussion on the mailing list, not even onsite!). As for being an auxilary of the arbcom, that won't be necessary, and shall be removed. We aren't bureaucratic as we're not even official. R e dwolf24 (talk) 01:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the clarifications, guys. Before I saw the response I already asked the ArbCom for clarification. Thanks! Flcelloguy ( A note? ) 01:17, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Once in a great while I do pop into the IRC channel, but in general I prefer to stay on the wiki (I'm also on the maling list, though I don't post very often). I really don't see any problem as long as the committee is less formal than it initially looked from its description. Removing the "auxiliary of the ArbCom" statement is a good move. Carbonite | Talk 01:21, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was also confused about that part; the "auxiliary" and other mentions to the ArbCom made it ambigious whether or not it was an official part of the ArbCom or sanctioned by them. It's a lot clearer with that part removed. Thanks! Flcelloguy ( A note? ) 01:24, 13 November 2005 (UTC)R[reply]

Argh![edit]

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)[reply]

This is not instruction creep; it's just a bunch of people getting together in an unofficial capacity to Get It Done(tm). As we've seen with other user group projects, such as WP:CVU, organizing in this way can prove quite effective. :-) ⟳ausa کui ^× 08:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Onefortyone[edit]

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)[reply]

By the way, thanks for this fine initiative. --Fred Bauder 02:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity has anyone calculated how many IP's have to be watched to keep track of all his possible addresses? Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 09:02, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

He has a user account now. If you have the articles he usually edits on your watchlist you will spot any likely edits. Fred Bauder 21:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zen-master[edit]

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)[reply]

I'm against taking Zen-master. It's not that he doesn't merit it, but that ArbCom has not put him under probation AFAIK and we already have about 4 or 5 people to watch- I'd rather wait a week or two to see how things work out, see what sort of workload we can handle. --Maru (talk) Contribs 16:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zen-master is under probation, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Zen-master#Zen-master_placed_on_probation. He could use help with some of his ideas about alternatives to framing questions of intelligence in terms other than race. Fred Bauder 16:31, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Others on probation[edit]

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)[reply]

Old_Right (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/OldRight#Old_Right_placed_on_Probation
Yuber (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber#Yuber_placed_on_probation
Guy_Montag (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Yuber#Guy_Montag_placed_on_probation
Zephram_Stark (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Zephram_Stark#Probation_2 (after 6 month ban)

Membership[edit]

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)[reply]

Page layout[edit]

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)[reply]

Confusing name[edit]

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)[reply]

I also object to the use of terms like Mentor, Mentoring, and Mentorship in connection with "cases" or "parole" agreements. I am a member of the New York City Mentoring program, a voluntary, corporate-sponsored program in the NYC public high schools.

Mentoring has nothing to do with disciplinary actions. It's entirely a voluntary activity, where an adult helps guide an adolescent.

Please change the name of Wikipedia:Mentorship Committee to something else, which honestly and clearly acknowledges the difference between a voluntary relationship and one involving coercion or power. Uncle Ed 15:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above; I mentioned as much in IRC. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with the above. the wub "?!" 18:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Turnbull's rollback of an edit by Tony Sidaway[edit]

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)[reply]

Some ground rules[edit]

The purpose of the committee is to monitor and act upon an editor who is under probation.
Aside from whatever powers each member may possess (eg. if they are admins, they may independently block a user for an egregrious edit), this committee has no actual power, and will take no actions: its role is to revert any objectionable edits a user on probation may make, and report these edits to ArbCom.
- While you are welcome to act as an administrator or as an editor, unless, acting as an administrator you ban a user on probation from editing an article you need not report edits to the ArbCom. If you do ban a user from an article, please follow the procedure outlined in the arbitration decision for that user and at Wikipedia:Probation Fred Bauder 20:39, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Probation is a privilege, as compared to being outright banned. If the same deeds are done which caused the probation, it shall be considered a blockable offense.
If the Arbcom assigns someone else mentorship, we will not interfere.

WMC's probation[edit]

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))[reply]

Maoiririder mentorship[edit]

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)[reply]

Membership[edit]

Hi, are there any particular qualifiers for membership? I am interested in becoming a member Brian | (Talk) 02:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also interested as well. Will (^E_@) T 01:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stepping down[edit]

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)[reply]

I'm sure you will be missed - You seem to be the main project maintainer. Ian¹³_ID:540053 20:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be truthful, my guy, 141, is making me feel the same way; while he is still controversial, I'm starting to think that ever since being placed on probation, he's been in the right. --maru (talk) Contribs 20:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:JarlaxleArtemis[edit]

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)[reply]

Are there active mentors working on this case? I notice that no one responded to this question, that user:Linuxbeak is on semi-Wikibreak, and that User:Cool Cat has resigned the case (above). -Will Beback 16:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no mentors watching this user then he cannot be in compliance with the terms of his parole and will be blocked. -Will Beback 22:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linuxbeak has functionally withdrawn from this case, so I will take his place, alongside Cool Cat and Spum who have both consented to stay on as mentors. -Will Beback 09:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shultz III[edit]

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)[reply]

We need to restart[edit]

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)[reply]

Agreed. Right now, we're in disarray. As it stands, about half of the original members (such as me) are too busy to do this, and the people being mentored are similarly mixed up: Jarlaxle Artemis seems to be doing ok, asides from some copyright and weird redirect-making issues, 141 seems to be taking care of himself (judging from what I saw up until I removed myself from this case, apparently he was in the right), and MARMOT's just gone. --maru (talk) contribs 00:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas on how to make us more functional though? If we have a case, well, we have a case, not a huge lot happens, besides monitoring the individual whilst they go about their stuff. Ian13/talk 16:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mentorship[edit]

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)[reply]

I want a mentor. Where do I ask?[edit]

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)[reply]