User:Elonka/Notes

Tips for other admins dealing with disputes:

Identify the editors involved
Ensure that talkpage discussion is ongoing
When talkpages get too long (50-100K), start archiving the older threads to make discussions easier to follow. Archiving instructions can be found here.
Encourage civility
Be civil. Authority figures are rolemodels, and editors will pattern themselves after your example.
Before blocking, always give a polite "warning shot across the bow" at the editor's talkpage
- For longterm editors, 2 or 3 escalating warnings are a good idea, as you'll probably have to diff them later when your block is challenged
On a page where there are many editors engaged in the dispute, it can be helpful to provide a list of the editors right on the talkpage. This is both useful for managing the page, and also lets all the involved editors know where they stand. My own lists are organized as:
1. List of uninvolved admins
2. List of those editors who have been formally warned of ArbCom restrictions
3. List of other frequent (and recent) editors. Put a note at the top of this section to emphasize that these editors are not in trouble, otherwise they may immediately object to being listed.
4. At the top of the "formally warned" section, include notes, in bold, indicating who is under active restrictions, what those restrictions are, and when they expire
5. Where applicable, identify which editors are participating as "uninvolved" admins, and which are "admins participating as involved editors"
Provide an "admin log" to give more details about major changes to the list, such as adding or removing restrictions
When first starting the moderation of a dispute, expect that a lot of attention will be needed within the first 24-72 hours
It can be a good idea to periodically scan the contrib lists of major participants, to see if they are overflowing the dispute to other articles. If you don't have popups turned on, do so! It's an amazing tool.
If a dispute is taking place on multiple articles, it may be useful to set up a centralized place of discussion. Either one article's talkpage (and then link to it from subarticles), or a WikiProject, or perhaps make a new Cooperation Board
When you make a statement, be aware that some editors may see it as "law", even if they don't reply. Keep in mind that anything you say, might be diffed later, so choose your words wisely.
If one editor disagrees with you, don't feel that you have to react right away. It can give you more "gravitas" to only reply slowly. Whether this is because you're busy, or because you're really thinking about a reply, or you're waiting to see what others say first, it generally doesn't hurt to wait before you reply. Remember, that sometimes the more you talk, the less likely that people will listen. Also, if you wait, someone else may come in and say what you planned to reply anyway.
Assume good faith. Even if you are certain that someone's intent is malicious, do them the courtesy of at least one respectful and good faith reply. Even the worst editors, when treated with respect, may respond in kind.
Be an educator. If an editor is continually doing things "wrong", it may simply be because no one ever taught them how to do it right, or it may be because they got conflicting instructions, and didn't know which version to believe. Use your authority as administrator to clarify the "right" way to do things, and many editors will immediately adapt.