Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/20006 Archive 3

message: So, how do you join this thing? Just add your name to the list and take a case? Lurker talk 16:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well - yes. :) It's a highly informal and (hopefully) autonomous process so we rely on mediators watching out for eachother on tough cases - the most important thing you should do is ask for help should things get tough. Cowman109Talk 17:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aspiring Cabalist

message: I would love to help with mediation. So, I would like to know how I can join, and if I can help. Thanks! WikieZach| talk 01:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As it's an informal process, you can go ahead and volunteer to mediate a case in the new cases section. I would recommend that you read Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Suggestions for mediators first for some guidelines, and I cannot stress enough the importance of asking for help should you feel lost or are experiencing difficulty. Also, feel free to add yourself to the list of cabalists on the main page. Cowman109Talk 02:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Edit conflict :) I will also add that before I took my first case, I looked at how some other mediators handled things, but ultimately it's up to you.  Just remember to stay neutral and help them reach a consensus.  I and others are always available to help or answer questions. --Aguerriero (talk) 02:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  May I join? 

message: I've noticed a backlog of open cases. Is there anything we can do to close cases that are still left open, which are in fact old? Possibly ask the mediator to close it? Review the case and close it ourseleves? SynergeticMaggot 02:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I recently closed about 6 innactive cases - I usually look at the old ones that don't seem to be active and leave a note in the mediator response section asking if the case is innactive. After a few days, if there is no response, I leave a note asking those involved to file a new case request if they are still having issues and I change the category to closed. Feel free to help clearing out the old ones that no longer seem to be in need of assistance. In many cases disputes just die down with time, which helps :). Cowman109Talk 02:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do. I just find that discussion first in these cases are going to be beneficial. I recently just had a close (for another mediator) I did blow up on my RfA. :) Everything was worked out but I gave it some thought and decided that I should at least address the issue here first. SynergeticMaggot 02:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean that someone brought up the manner in which you closed a mediation case in your RfA?  I would love to take another case right now, but I got involved in an "unofficial" case that is taking up a lot of my time. --Aguerriero (talk) 02:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once I handle a few off wiki things and a few off-cabal cases I'll try to cut the backlog in half as well :P Cowman109Talk 03:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, get to work, ya slacker!  It's not like you have your own RfA going right now... :) --Aguerriero (talk) 03:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cowman109Talk Sighs.
Hi, 
* UN Resolutions is mentioned in the "OpenTasks" section, but I think is solved
* John Prescott has reached a compromise and I think is also solved
* Scally is effectively solved, it was only about opposing a merge proposal 
* Catman Cohen is closed, because the article has been deleted
* The Root of All Evil doesn't really seem to have a dispute
When I grow up can I join the cabal?
Addhoc 16:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Cowman109: There is a case at the top of the list in which you corresponded with another user via e-mail. I'm gonna close that one out if you didnt already. SynergeticMaggot 17:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm - which one is that? Oh, and I haven't responded to Scally or The Root of All Evil - I'm not too sure if those cases are necessarily over with. There seems to still be the need for some help there as people are having some heated discussions in the talk pages. Cowman109Talk 17:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I meant at the very top of the cases list, not the one provided by Addhoc. I've responded on your talk page about it. SynergeticMaggot 17:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also Bonza bottler day is closed, because the article has been deleted. Addhoc 12:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backlog 

message: Unregistered users can't enter a case.
And no, I don't want to register, and I have a reason for not doing so. But I wanted to add Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-08-12 Coulrophobia and didn't realise you had to start a new article in order to do so. 69.181.120.218 06:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have created the case page at Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-08-12_Coulrophobia for you. Cowman109Talk 06:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Merci69.181.120.218 23:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Case request

message: I volunteered to mediate the CSICOP case. There has been substantial mediation in the past, which went on hiatus because the mediator left the case.  One participant has indicated that they do not wish to go through mediation; see the talk page.  I'm inclined to let them know I'll wait a week to see if there is a change of mind.  However, after that, what happens to the case?  The participant who requested mediation is still willing to participate.  Should I proceed with that participant alone, and attempt to make appropriate edits?  Any advice would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance -- Mike Christie 13:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, we appear to have gotten past the obstacle, so I think I'm OK now.  Thanks.  Mike Christie 23:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about the CSICOP case 

message: As some of you may have noticed, we have now implemented a template for cases that specifically allows the bot to do three things - it lists the category, lists the name of the mediator on the case page, and lists the status of the case as how you would like to say it. Here is how it works:
At the top of the page you'll see this:

{{Medcabstatus
|status = open
|article = 
|requestor = 
|parties = 
|mediators = 
|comment = 
}}

Status There are three options for status: new, open, and closed. These affect the listing of the case - new is in new cases of course, open goes into the open cases section, and closed simply delists the case (we're still not archiving cases yet, so they're hiding in the closed cases category).
Article Here you can list the name of the article, the source of the dispute. At the moment you just write the name of the article with   and   around it, so you can list multiple links if needed. This does not affect anything, but just lists the name of the article at the top of the case page.
Requestor, here you can put the name of the requester - once again, it's just to make the top of the page look nice and organized.
Parties, here you list the parties, same as above.
Mediators, the mediators listing shows up on the case list. Preferably you could use the format , but anything works.
Comment, this also shows up on the case list. If you feel it is necessary, please put a short comment here about the status of the case, such as needs new mediator, or waiting for parties to respond. This is entirely optional, however, though in some cases it is good to signal to other mediators that there may be some help needed.
And that's about it! Any questions? This should be implemented shortly into the case list, and the format of it is still changeable should any issues arise. Cowman109Talk 20:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for putting this together; I really like the automatic mdoerator and status listings on the main page that this generates.  Very nice.  Mike Christie (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, dear, I didn't mention him - thank User:Ericj for all of this, as he's the mastermind behind the bot and the recent changes :D. Cowman109Talk 14:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for mentioning me!  I changed your information slightly, after your requests, so the   is now needed in the article link.  It makes it possible to list multiple pages, too.  It doesn't matter if they're not linked, though.  Tell me if there are any problems. --Ericj 22:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, thanks, Ericj; very nice.  One enhancement occurs to me that would be handy; is it possible to have the display on the main page show the date of last update to the template or the case?  Automatically, if possible.  That way it would be possible to see cases that appear to have gone inactive, or at least where the mediation may have gone inactive. Mike Christie (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahah, Ericj actually brought up the possibility of getting some sort of color code system or something similar that could show case pages that were left unupdated, but I felt that when mediation occurs on the talk page of articles instead of on the case page, the information could be skewed. We'll see what others think, though :). Cowman109Talk 03:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Hm, I tried moving it down below the header in preview and that seems to fix it, but I think that might also make it look worse in other cases if it's done that way - the text in the etiquette box still remains readable; it's just pushed to the side. We can always play around with the position though and see which works in all situations.. Cowman109Talk 01:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add a bunch of  tags below the template, and it'll fix the format-vomit. --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 20:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The new case templates! 

message: Hi, a few hours ago, I created a Request and it showed up on the list. What's up? -- Selmo 21:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything looks fine. Its in the category. Either the bot is broke or it just hasnt updated yet. SynergeticMaggot 21:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does look like the bot went kaput. I'll speak with Ericj and see what's up... Cowman109Talk 21:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've added the case manually. SynergeticMaggot 21:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. -- Selmo 22:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not a problem :) SynergeticMaggot 22:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Case didn't show up 

message: Amarent keeps on removing information that is perfectly valid from Hospitality Club, and adding information that has no references to hospitality service. Please mediate! Guaka 19:05, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not yet a member of the mediation cabal, but I'll give a third opinion if that could be useful. The info you're adding, that Amarent keeps removing, appears to be original research. While the information you are removing that Amarent introduces, could be considered unencyclopedic. Currently, both Amarent's and your information has been removed. If you want to reintroduce your paragraph, then could you indicate on the talk page why this isn't original research. Similarly, Amarent should indicate why his information should be considered encyclopedic. Thanks, Addhoc 13:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Hospitality Club]] and [[hospitality service]]

message: I've noticed a large bunch of mediators never come on the IRC chatroom we have set up. So... just reminding everyone that we have a IRC chatroom ( irc://irc.freenode.net/Wikipedia-medcab ). IRC is a suprisingly useful method of communicating, and I'd love to see everyone using it a bit more. Yay! --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 22:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First time I've tried to use Mediation of course.  Tell you for sure, the reaction I got gives me no confidence that the group intends either to be helpful nor intends to be responsible for their stated purpose.   Terryeo 19:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medcab chat 

message: As some of you may have noticed, we have now implemented a template for cases that specifically allows the bot to do three things - it lists the category, lists the name of the mediator on the case page, and lists the status of the case as how you would like to say it. Here is how it works:
At the top of the page you'll see this:

{{Medcabstatus
|status = open
|article = 
|requestor = 
|parties = 
|mediators = 
|comment = 
}}

Status There are three options for status: new, open, and closed. These affect the listing of the case - new is in new cases of course, open goes into the open cases section, and closed simply delists the case (we're still not archiving cases yet, so they're hiding in the closed cases category).
Article Here you can list the name of the article, the source of the dispute. At the moment you just write the name of the article with   and   around it, so you can list multiple links if needed. This does not affect anything, but just lists the name of the article at the top of the case page.
Requestor, here you can put the name of the requester - once again, it's just to make the top of the page look nice and organized.
Parties, here you list the parties, same as above.
Mediators, the mediators listing shows up on the case list. Preferably you could use the format , but anything works.
Comment, this also shows up on the case list. If you feel it is necessary, please put a short comment here about the status of the case, such as needs new mediator, or waiting for parties to respond. This is entirely optional, however, though in some cases it is good to signal to other mediators that there may be some help needed.
And that's about it! Any questions? This should be implemented shortly into the case list, and the format of it is still changeable should any issues arise. Cowman109Talk 20:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for putting this together; I really like the automatic mdoerator and status listings on the main page that this generates.  Very nice.  Mike Christie (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, dear, I didn't mention him - thank User:Ericj for all of this, as he's the mastermind behind the bot and the recent changes :D. Cowman109Talk 14:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for mentioning me!  I changed your information slightly, after your requests, so the   is now needed in the article link.  It makes it possible to list multiple pages, too.  It doesn't matter if they're not linked, though.  Tell me if there are any problems. --Ericj 22:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, thanks, Ericj; very nice.  One enhancement occurs to me that would be handy; is it possible to have the display on the main page show the date of last update to the template or the case?  Automatically, if possible.  That way it would be possible to see cases that appear to have gone inactive, or at least where the mediation may have gone inactive. Mike Christie (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahah, Ericj actually brought up the possibility of getting some sort of color code system or something similar that could show case pages that were left unupdated, but I felt that when mediation occurs on the talk page of articles instead of on the case page, the information could be skewed. We'll see what others think, though :). Cowman109Talk 03:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Hm, I tried moving it down below the header in preview and that seems to fix it, but I think that might also make it look worse in other cases if it's done that way - the text in the etiquette box still remains readable; it's just pushed to the side. We can always play around with the position though and see which works in all situations.. Cowman109Talk 01:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add a bunch of  tags below the template, and it'll fix the format-vomit. --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 20:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The new case templates! 

message: I am taking an extended leave from Wikipedia immediately due to personal circumstances.  I need someone to take over my one current case, at Yoshiaki Omura.  The mediation is ongoing at Talk:Yoshiaki Omura/Mediation.  The participants have been very civil and communicative, and I have just been guiding them through discussion each of their citations, which is where most of the contention lies.  
No edit wars or personal attacks have surfaced, although just within the last few days another editor has come in and posted a large bit of text on the Talk page that I have not had time to fully read or understand.  The editor also edited the article, and was reverted and referred to the mediation by another involved party.  If someone can take this I would really appreciate it; I don't want to just leave them hanging.  Please contact me ASAP if you can take it with any other questions (most information is on the mediation page) and I will post to the mediation page that I am leaving. --Aguerriero (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm seeing if I can help out the case, but I'm busy during weekdays so a more active mediator is still requested. Cowman109Talk 13:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take it. Wikipedia's False Prophet  holla at me   Improve Me 18:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-08-07_Yoshiaki_Omura :P. Cowman109Talk 18:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll include this case in the open tasks section, if that's ok. Addhoc 13:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm workin on it - Che Nuevara 23:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assistance needed 

message: We have no new cases? How can that be? That boggles me :D. And hey, that rhymes - wee! Cowman109Talk 21:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the backlog? 

message: I recently took on a mediation case based at Talk:Conseil scolaire de district du Centre-Sud-Ouest, but am not getting anywhere. Both parties accept my mediation in principle, but maintain the other is entirely at fault and should stop making what they see as damaging edits. Every time I attempt to calm things down, another person posts inflammatory accusations, provoking fury from the other side. There seems little I can do. Should I close the mediation? Clearly there is a case here. Should I transfer it to the Mediation Committee? If so, how? Should I keep trying to engage with these editors, none of whom appears to be acting in bad faith? What should I do? Dev920 00:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a look at this when it was still in the new cases section and honestly, I'd have to advise they go to ArbCom. No, it's not pretty for either of them, but the dispute (which is basically namecalling, etc) will be settled. WP:RFAR has directions as to how to file a case, have one of them do it. :] Anyhow, that's what I'd suggest. Cheers. --Keitei (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for help. 

message: Hello all – Real life suddenly decided to interfere with my Wiki-life, and I'm going to have to take a health break/family leave for an indefinite period of time. Because of this, I need someone to take over my one open mediation case at Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-09-12_Electrical_engineering_page. We had an automobile accident about 10 days ago, and some complications have developed because of it; also, a family member is hospitalized, and her needs take precedence over Wikipedia. I won't be back here full-time for at least two weeks, and the two parties to this mediation can't wait that long. I'm sorry to bail and run like this, but I also don't want to leave two people waiting on me for an indefinite period. Thanks very much, and I'll let you all know when I'm back, hopefully by the end of October. BaseballBaby 01:55, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope everything works out! I'll look into the case shortly. Cowman109Talk 02:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't be able to look into the case due to family matters, so someone else will need to take the case. Cowman109Talk 22:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help! 

message: There really is a cabal! --WikiSlasher 14:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe that's what they want you to think. - Che Nuevara 17:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who's they... --WikiSlasher 08:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I knew it! 

message: I dont know if anyone has done this, but I created templates to place on user's talk pages and the talk page of the article itself.
This is the template for user's talk pages:
*  ~~~~
where page-name is the location of the page in dispute and case-page-location is the location of the mediation case page.
This is the template for the article's talk page:
*  ~~~~
where case-page-location is the location of the mediation case page.
So far, the only problem I've noticed is that you have to put in the ~~~~ manually when you put the message on a page.
Any comments? Nwwaew(My talk page) 22:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're supposed to have to put the ~~~~ in manually I thought - you do with most templates anyway --WikiSlasher 10:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Templates can add the markup: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>, which, ultimately ends up as ~~~~ on the page. Then when you save it, the server goes ahead and translates that into your signature. ~Kylu (u|t)  16:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notification templates 

message: Hello, I'd like to join the Cabal, and I've added the page to my watchlist. What else do I have to do? Is that it? I would appreciate  some help; thank you in advance. | AndonicO Talk 13:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're going to find this a bit simplistic of an answer, but it's true: Find a case you're interested in, sign up as a mediator, and start. Really. I'd like to suggest reading over Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Suggestions for mediators first, but that's technically an optional step rather than mandatory. You can add your name to the list of mediators if you'd like, also. Just make sure you stay neutral during the mediation. Thanks! ~Kylu (u|t)  18:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joining 

message: Hello. I'm currently mediating the case on Ruckus Network (see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-09 Ruckus Network and Talk:Ruckus Network/Mediation). However, I'm operating in a different time zone than the participants, so the discussion often heats up when I'm asleep. Thus, I'm requesting another mediator (preferably in the U.S./Canada time zones) to help out. Many thanks. Gzkn 01:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look in on the debate and see if I can figure out what's transpired to this point.  Please let me know anything that can help me better understand the current situation. →Bobby← 13:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another mediator needed 

message: Did MedcabBot just break?  --Ideogram 03:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea. They've approved my toolserver account but it's not active yet, and they haven't +bot'd KyluBot that I know of, so I can't kick on my botscript yet. Hopefully soon. ~Kylu (u|t)  03:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's definitely broken.  I closed a couple cases half an hour ago and it has not updated.  Who can fix it?  --Ideogram 03:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wolf needs to do it, but he's not on chat nor otherwise online, looks like. Mind leaving him a memo to fix the poor thing? ~Kylu (u|t)  03:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MedcabBot 

message: I have created a new version of the cases page at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/New that removes the edit links, since the lists are not supposed to be edited directly.  Please make sure MedcabBot can work with this new page and, if there are no objections, I will replace the old page.  --Ideogram 06:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks great! I have no idea whether that would work with the bot though - I would assume it would, but I'll see if I can hunt down Ericj and ask him. Cowman109Talk 22:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that it looks good. It will work with the bot, as long as it is at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases and the comments (the BEGIN and END ones) are included. I'd say go ahead and replace it at your leisure. :] --Keitei (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  I'm crossing my fingers.  --Ideogram 18:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New cases page 

message: Hello, I'd appreciate it if someone looks at the Ataturk request. The page is currently blocked for all editing and was the subject of an edit war. --AW 17:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've volunteered to look at the dispute.Shawn Fitzgibbons 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ataturk 

message: Where is the message to applicants suggesting they volunteer to mediate someone else's case?  --Ideogram 06:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for ... 

message: Is the MedcabBot having an oil change? Addhoc 13:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Kylu is switching around the script to user:Kylubot, so there might be some confusion on that end. Cowman109Talk 15:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MedcabBot 

message: I just accepted Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-18 Singapore Changi Airport, but I'd like a second mediator to help me, to avoid any claims of bias. I'm Singaporean, but have never worked on the article in question or related articles, but I feel it would be better to have someone else helping. – Chacor 09:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeking a second mediator 

message: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival Can I not be afraid anymore since nothing is happening and the mediator never turned up? This mediation thing is not for real? What happens?  Timmy12 22:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you feel this case still needs mediation or can I close it?  Sorry about the mediator never turning up, this is an informal group and we don't have any control over individual mediators.  Other than that, we are for real :-).  If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me on my talkpage.  --Ideogram 11:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well today he turned up and asked one question. But people have asked a lot of questions since it openned. And I don't even understand the question he is asking. The person he is asking it to probably has given up as has everyone else. Could you check out the page and see what you think? Other interested people have left messages on his talk page and he never responded so they probably gave up too.    Please check it out. It's important that this issue gets resolved. There are hundreds of articles involved on Starwood Festival, Association for Consciousness Exploration, WinterStar Symposium all by User:Rosencomet  (who runs the festivals) with help from User:999, User:Ekajati, and User:Hanuman Das.  Timmy12 17:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, this case is still unresolved.  Discussion between the parties in the absense of the mediator have not led to any consensus between the parties.  --BostonMA talk 21:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediator never turned up 

message: Although I haven't requested any assistance on a case, It shows as requesting assistance from another mediator. What gives?SFinside 15:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do you see that?  I only see a request for assistance on the one above yours. --Ars Scriptor 16:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I must be confused about the format of the page. My apologies.SFinside 16:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey man, who's stepping on my toes? 

message: I was asked by someone to summarize   Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-03 Starwood Festival which, I later learned, was the mediator that had been removed from the case. I felt it was strange that he should ask me. I did not understand his instructions and did not understand what was going on. His instructions were confusing to me, his signature went to a disguised addess, I did not know where my summary went.  It turned out to be an Esperanza page; User:Geo.plrd/Esperanza. My ignorance -- also I am extremely anxious about this whole thing. And I am not good at technical things. The mediatior kept changing his signature to go different places. I was told not to worry about my summary or User:Geo.plrd/Esperanza's behavior but I did anyway.
Once User:Geo.plrd/Esperanza was off the case he offered to help User:Rosencomet, one   of the parties in the unresolved mediation, fix up the articles in the unresolved mediation.
Now he is consulting with another party in the mediation about blocking me. He sent this message to User:999.
:Would you be kind enough to look in my talk archives, 6 and 7, and tell me if Matisse's comments (to me)are rational? Geo. 18:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am trying to determine if the comments to me show that this person needs to be blocked Geo. 18:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I indented/italicized the other user's comments to make it a little more clear. I'll take a look later. - Che Nuevara 20:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I can't see any admin taking seriously a request to block you on those grounds.  You are rightly confused about the status of your mediation case - it was confusing to me as well.  I don't think Geo was trying to hide his identity; rather, he has a signature that takes you to different places depending on which letter you click. --Ars Scriptor 21:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for answering.  Sincerely,  Mattisse(talk) 21:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please help me! 

message: Hmm, I'd forgotten that I'd put in a request for mediation by the cabal until it popped up in my watchlist again. Anyway how does one stop a request? I would go ahead and list the page for deletion but that seems presumptuous and I'm not sure of the policy. Anyway the user that was involved and that I'd requested mediation against/with in the first place was banned due to linkspamming and the problem has stopped. Thanks to anyone who replies! --ImmortalGoddezz 15:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup that's the one. Thanks I appreciate it! --ImmortalGoddezz 16:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question