User:Elonka/ACE2013: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m fix link |
Two candidates withdrew |
||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
# {{usercheck|Bwilkins}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Bwilkins/Questions|questions]] </small> |
# {{usercheck|Bwilkins}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Bwilkins/Questions|questions]] </small> |
||
#: '''Undecided.''' |
#: '''Undecided.''' |
||
| ⚫ | |||
#: <font color="green">'''Support.'''</font> Current arbitrator, running for re-election. |
|||
# {{usercheck|David Gerard}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/David_Gerard/Questions|questions]] </small> |
# {{usercheck|David Gerard}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/David_Gerard/Questions|questions]] </small> |
||
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Longtime Wikipedian, was an arbitrator back in the early days, in 2004. However, he was recently involved in an arbitration case where it was determined that he had been abusing administrator tools. Last month (October 2013) he was formally admonished, [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute#David_Gerard.27s_use_of_tools|and was prohibited, indefinitely]], from using his administrator access in certain topic areas. Considering that he is currently under ArbCom sanctions, I really don't think it was wise for him to immediately respond by running for arbitrator. |
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Longtime Wikipedian, was an arbitrator back in the early days, in 2004. However, he was recently involved in an arbitration case where it was determined that he had been abusing administrator tools. Last month (October 2013) he was formally admonished, [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute#David_Gerard.27s_use_of_tools|and was prohibited, indefinitely]], from using his administrator access in certain topic areas. Considering that he is currently under ArbCom sanctions, I really don't think it was wise for him to immediately respond by running for arbitrator. |
||
| Line 53: | Line 51: | ||
#: '''Undecided.''' I opposed last year due to weak answers, and insufficient experience in dispute resolution. I will check again this year to see what has changed. |
#: '''Undecided.''' I opposed last year due to weak answers, and insufficient experience in dispute resolution. I will check again this year to see what has changed. |
||
# {{usercheck|Isarra}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Isarra/Questions|questions]] </small> |
# {{usercheck|Isarra}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Isarra/Questions|questions]] </small> |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Not an admin. |
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Not an admin. |
||
# {{usercheck|Kraxler}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Kraxler/Questions|questions]] </small> |
# {{usercheck|Kraxler}} <small>• [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Kraxler/Questions|questions]] </small> |
||
| Line 80: | Line 76: | ||
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Not an admin. |
#: <font color="red">'''Oppose.'''</font> Not an admin. |
||
==Withdrawn== |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
#: <s> Current arbitrator, running for re-election. (withdrew from election due to health reasons)</s> |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
---- |
---- |
||
Revision as of 07:49, 21 November 2013
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
Disclaimer: This page expresses my personal opinions and observations only. I encourage all voters to do their own research on the candidates.
Overview
For those who aren't sure what this is about: The Arbitration Committee is part of the Wikipedia dispute resolution process. In fact, ArbCom is pretty much the last stop. For a general real world analogy, ArbCom is sort of like the Supreme Court of Wikipedia. The arbitrators don't make decisions on article content, but they do issue rulings on complex disputes relating to user conduct, and they have considerable authority within the wiki-culture. Members of the committee are usually elected for two-year terms (sometimes one or three), with a new batch elected each year.
From October 1 to November 1, 2013, an RfC took place concerning the format of the 2013 elections, at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013. The standard questions to be asked of each candidate were discussed at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Questions/General.
Candidates are currently self-nominating from November 10–19. The election itself will run from November 25 until December 8. Votes will then be compiled and analyzed, and the results probably posted in mid-December.
For this 2013/2014 cycle, the top eight candidates will serve 2-year terms, and the next highest candidate will serve a 1-year term, on a Committee comprised of a total of 15 arbitrators (the remaining seven are continuing their terms from last year's election).
This page that you are reading, will contain my (Elonka's) thoughts on the 2013 crop of ArbCom candidates. My general standards for a candidate are: admin access, integrity, experience with article-writing, and hands-on knowledge of the dispute resolution processes.
To see my thoughts on previous elections, check the history of:
Candidates
- Candidates self-nominated from November 10–19, 2013. Voting will be from November 25 – December 8.
- 28bytes (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Likely support. Trusted member of the community, I just want to do a bit more research before changing to an official support.
- AGK (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Current arbitrator, running for re-election. I opposed AGK's candidacy in the past, but since then I have seen him mature into a competent and hardworking arbitrator, so if he's willing to take it on, I am willing to support him for another term.
- Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided. This name was familiar to me, but I had to dig into the archives to remember why. Evidently back in 2008 he was issuing several complaints about my administrator actions, and was threatening to block or try to de-sysop me because I was being (in his words) too "aggressively neutral" in adminning a dispute, I think around the Quackwatch article (will provide more diffs later). I don't think I've had much contact with him since then though.
- Beeblebrox (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided. Has administrator and oversight access. I opposed him last year due to lack of experience in dispute resolution, and insufficient content work (no FA or GAs). I will check again to see if anything has changed over the last year.
- Bwilkins (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- David Gerard (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Longtime Wikipedian, was an arbitrator back in the early days, in 2004. However, he was recently involved in an arbitration case where it was determined that he had been abusing administrator tools. Last month (October 2013) he was formally admonished, and was prohibited, indefinitely, from using his administrator access in certain topic areas. Considering that he is currently under ArbCom sanctions, I really don't think it was wise for him to immediately respond by running for arbitrator.
- Floquenbeam (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Firstly, Floquenbeam states openly in their candidate statement that they're not going to be very active. Secondly, I have concerns about how Floquenbeam has used administrator tools, making controversial blocks and unblocks with what appears to be little explanation. In October 2012 Floquenbeam blocked User:Jclemens, a sitting arbitrator, a block which was overturned within minutes. Further, the kind of generic template that Floquenbeam placed on Jclemens' page was unacceptable.[1] This kind of impulsive use of tools is not something I want to see in any administrator, let alone an arbitrator.
- Gamaliel (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- Georgewilliamherbert (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- GregJackP (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin.
- Guerillero (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided. I opposed last year due to weak answers, and insufficient experience in dispute resolution. I will check again this year to see what has changed.
- Isarra (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin.
- Kraxler (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin.
- Ks0stm (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. I opposed last year due to lack of experience with the dispute resolution processes. Since then Ks0stm has gained more experience, mostly with clerking. I would have preferred to actually see some uninvolved comments at various cases, but understand that that would be difficult to offer as a clerk. Ks0stm strikes me as someone who is fairly level-headed, so I am willing to support them this time around.
- Kww (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided. I had a "weak oppose" on Kww's run last year, but will check again to see what might have changed since then.
- LFaraone (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Likely support. Already has checkuser and oversight access, so is a trusted member of the community. I just want to do a bit more research before changing to an official support.
- NativeForeigner (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- RegentsPark (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided. I opposed RegentsPark's candidacy last year due to strong concerns about whether or not RegentsPark would be able to handle the workload of being an arbitrator (by the time voting began on November 26, they still hadn't even answered many of the official questions).[2] I will check again this year to see if things have improved.
- Richwales (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Richwales ran for ArbCom last year but did not make the cutoff. Hopefully he'll make it this year. I find him to be thoughtful and articulate, with experience in both content creation and dispute resolution. His answers to questions are thorough and well-diffed. I also like his pro-civility stance, and think he'd make a very good arb.
- Roger Davies (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Current arbitrator, running for re-election.
- Secret (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Secret has gone in and out of administrator status multiple times, most recently requesting de-sysopping in September, then decided to run for arbitrator as a non-admin, then chose to become an admin again on November 13. In total has gone through the RfA process 11 times, most recently in February 2013.
- Seraphimblade (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided.
- The Devil's Advocate (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin.
Withdrawn
Courcelles (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questionsCurrent arbitrator, running for re-election. (withdrew from election due to health reasons)
Kevin Gorman (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questionsOppose. Not an admin.
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |