This policy governs the Mediation Committee, formal mediation proceedings, and the formal mediation policy. Where this policy refers to mediation, it means formal mediation.
=== The Mediation Committee
==== Scope ====
Members of the Mediation Committee must recuse themselves from a case in which they are not impartial. If they do not, the parties to the case can ask the Catalyst Team to de-assign (remove) the mediator by dictum. The Catalyst Team can also remove a mediator from a case summarily, without an accompanying request from a party to the case.
<br>Standards for recusal<br> ====
Any mediator can specifically recuse himself from mediating a case, with or without a stated explanation. Mediators must recuse themselves from any case in which they have a significant conflict of interest - including, but not limited to, prior personal involvement with the dispute, or a significant personal involvement with one of the parties to the case. Previous formal mediation activity is not usually grounds for recusal, but previous administrator interaction with a party would be.<br>
New members of the Committee are appointed through the nominations process, which is governed by the Selection and appointment section of this policy.<br>
=== Mediation proceedings ===
Mediation is the assignment of a mediator to a dispute over article content, at the request of the contributors involved in the dispute. The role of the mediator is to direct and facilitate the discussion between the parties, in order to achieve agreement and establish a compromise. The mediator is a contributor who is uninvolved in the dispute and impartial to the subject matter, and must be a member of the Mediation Committee.
Mediation proceedings have no prescribed structure, and each mediator is granted wide latitude to develop and use his or her own method of mediation; but most cases have the following structure:
1. The listed issues to be mediated will be reviewed by the mediator and the parties. The mediation may request more specificity if the request for mediation does not outline in adequate detail the specific areas of article content which are being disputed;<br>2. The position each party has or opinion each party holds, in turn, on the various issues will be formally established;<br>3. The various stances on each issue, and the rationale for holding each position, will be established;<br>4. Possible compromises between the defined stances will be explored, and the merits of each stance will be examined;<br>5. The results of this exploration will be transferred into a draft agreement or compromise (often in written form);<br>6. This draft agreement will become the final agreement provided for in Outcome.
At the end of mediation proceedings, the mediator can set out a formal agreement (the final agreement) for the parties to accept, or guide the parties in developing their own agreement. Parties who consent to participate in mediation are not obligated to accept any proposed final agreement.<br>The mediator will use his or her judgment to recommend a final agreement to the disputants that serves the best interests of Family Search:Wiki. The final agreement is a formal codification of the result of mediation proceedings, but does not carry binding weight, because mediation is only as binding as the parties make it. Mediation is a tool for reaching agreement, and is never binding.<br>In cases where the position of one or more disputants is clearly unreasonable, the mediator is not required to subvert the integrity of the encyclopedia in order to reach a resolution. <br>
1. The dispute concerns the content of a Wiki article, template page, or image;<br>2. The dispute does not relate directly to the conduct of a Wikipedia contributor;<br>3. There has been substantial previous discussion of the disputed content;<br>4. Earlier steps in the content dispute resolution process, such as requests for comment, have been utilized without success;<br>5. The parties to the dispute are contesting the relevant content in good-faith.
The Committee has jurisdiction over disputes over article content (and the content of other pages used on article entries, including templates) on the FamilySearch:Wiki.<br>The Committee has no jurisdiction over grievances about the conduct of contributors of the Wiki.<br>The Committee has no jurisdiction over grievances about the processes or policies of the Wiki or grievances between contributors and bodies such as WikiProjects, the Arbitration Committee, or FamilySearch.<br>
Mediation cases closed as unsuccessful will not result in a summary of the agreements. When formal mediation is unsuccessful, the mediator will produce a case analysis that will be sent to the Arbitration Committee. <br>
This indicates the end of the proposed mediation policy.<br>Adapted from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee/Policy/Draft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee/Policy/Draft]