User:Lar/ArbComm2006
< User:Lar
Herewith my thoughts on the 2006 ArbComm elections. I am now (finally!) done evaluating all candidates. If you have comments you are welcome to make them on either the talk page for this page, or on my main talk page. You should do your own research, don't go by what I think, but in case you were wondering, there you are. Man there are a lot of candidates to evaluate, this took a while but it's important...
This was generated and there are some small bugs in the edit count link for people with spaces in their names, you'll have to fix them yourself.
For the record I estimate I put somewhere around 6 hours into evaluating all the statements, doing research, doing up this table, etc. It's that important.
See also
[edit]- Interiot's tabulation tool... after this is all over I may have to go back and see if I'm a sheep (voted the way the majority did most of the time) or a wolf (not).
- Main voting page: Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote
- Signpost page Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-01-02/ArbCom candidates (part 1, earlier candidates)
- Signpost page Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-01-09/ArbCom election (part 2, newer candidates)
The table
[edit]| User/Talk/Contribs | Statement/Detail | My thoughts |
|---|---|---|
| Ajwebb, t,c e | statement | Seems too new, has only been editing since October, less than 200 edits. Good answers to questions though. Abstain, or oppose reluctantly |
| AntonioMartin, t,c e | statement | Has been around (17,000 edits, mostly articlespace but some mix of other stuff). Organised several projects. Seems like a nice guy but answers not really deep. Abstain. |
| Aranda56, t,c e | statement | |
| blankfaze, t,c e | statement | |
| Charles Matthews, t,c Matthews e | statement | Very old timer, 50K+ edits!!! Excellent mix of edits, 45K articlespace. A bit prickly in answer to the probing questions but seems to have good principles. Doesn't suffer fools and wikilawyers gladly. Support. |
| Dbiv, t,c e | statement | Politician in real life. Unsuccessfully campaigned for deleting his own article! Good edit history, and good head. Cannot tell how he feels about the Kelly Martin affair, which is concerning. Support nevertheless. |
| DG, t,c e | statement | Did not answer all the questions very well. Somewhat flippant. Way too low edit count. But amusing. Neutral to oppose |
| Dmcdevit, t,c e | statement | K edits, 1 year history… lot of non articlespace edits but good articles too. Welcomed me to Wikipedia, doesn't bite newbies, generally nice guy and very level headed. Great IAR answer. Support. |
| Doktorbuk, t,c e | statement | Seems to be saying he doesn't think he can be an arbitrator, but I like his answers to some of the quesitons. 1000 edits may not be seasoned enough Neutral to oppose |
| DoctorMike, t,c e | statement | 37 edits! Not serious candidate. Opposed |
| Edivorce, t,c e | statement | I like the arbiration background and the pledge NOT to be an admin… some non admin background seems good. TERRIBLE newbie editcountwise. Needs more experience. Maybe next year. Neutral. |
| Emt147, t,c e | statement | No detailed answers to questions. 660 edits is too few. Oppose. |
| Everyking, t,c e | statement | Everyking is right about the inisidious effect of IRC as a backchannel/elitist vehicle.But he's scuffled too many times, he can't work within the system for change. Has a good handle on how things work around here. Reluctantly oppose. |
| Filiocht, t,c e | statement | Would prefer he made up his mind better. Thought he was on the wrong side of the webcomics RfAr. Good edit count. Good answers, especially about IAR, but can't quite tell what he thinks of it vs consensus. (reluctantly) support. |
| Fred Bauder, t,c Bauder e | statement | Fred works very hard and seems to write good opinions although hasn’t been as active lately. 10K edits. The not practicing law thingie seems concerning but not that much. Big issue is I think he acted incorrectly in Kelly's recent RfAr. |
| Golbez, t,c e | statement | Good detailed answers. LOADS of edits. MANY in articlespace but good smattering elsewhere. Support although didn't yet answer Tony's attack Templates question |
| Guapovia, t,c e | statement | Hardly any answers to questions, was this a late entrant? 66 edits. Oppose. Maybe 2 years from now? |
| Ilyanep, t,c e | statement | Very IMPRESSED with this candidate. However the answer about how to handle an editor that has lots of content but can't conform to style was wrong. Very mature for 14ish but needs more seasoning I think. Also time is a concern. Maybe next year. Oppose. |
| Improv, t,c e | statement | Great answers, mostly in agreement, but he's on the wrong side of the attack template issue. Edit count low. Maybe next year. Reluctantly oppose. |
| Ingoolemo, t,c e | statement | Answers a bit shaky, could stand more clear explication, hard to tell where this editor stands. Lots of edits. Maybe next year. Neutral |
| James F., t,c F. e | statement | Big issue is I think he acted incorrectly in Kelly's recent RfAr. The Forking comment was thinly veiled profanity. |
| Jayjg, t,c e | statement | Big issue is I think he acted incorrectly in Kelly's recent RfAr but at least he rejected for better reasons. Neutral |
| Jpgordon, t,c e | statement | Good edit count at over 8000. article count relatively low but good spectrum of project, talk, etc… has experience with other communities which is a plus. Doesn't suffer fools gladly, apparently which may or may not be a plus. With some reservations, support. |
| Jtkiefer, t,c e | statement | Edit count is goodI have had some experiences with this editor as an admin. I think he gets defensive too easily. (see the failed request for bureacratship). I think asking age in general terms is reasonable to ask of a candidate. Good answer on inexperienced user arbitration case. Seems to use I cannot remember as a way out of sticky questions/situations. Reluctantly oppose. Perhaps with more seasoning. |
| Karmafist, t,c e | statement | Ah, Karmafist. What a puzzle. Here is someone that seems to be right about a lot of what the problems are... that has been around for a long long time, or so it seems (but has only 10K edits) MUCH of that is in the project and talk space, less than 20% is articlespace (who's talking… I am barely 25%) His statements/questions page is one of the longest there. Users fearing blockage for asking questions... probably not a good sign. Right about the problems. Wrong about the answers, I fear. I would love to support this candidate, the ideas are radical and maybe a shakeup is needed, but... too risky. |
| Kelly Martin, t,c Martin e | statement | |
| Kim Bruning, t,c Bruning e | statement | Have a good feeling although Kim is quite busy which may be an issue. Favour. Didn't like that Kim got all P.O.ed about the voting process though, that was a turnoff. A lot of people were trying very hard to do the right thing. Hopefully Kim will mellow. on balance support with misgivings. |
| Kingturtle, t,c e | statement | A HS teacher and rock and roll ukelele player! That almost sold me right there but some sponginess in question answers. I DID like the anonymiser suggestion but I see no way that could actually be implemented without a great deal of new code. Seems a nice guy but I agree with User:Tom Harrison we need his talents more elsewhere. Reluctant oppose. |
| Kitch, t,c e | statement | 3806 edits. A bit cocky about knowledge of things. User arb is an interesting approach. But perhaps not a serious candidate, got hardly any questions. Perhaps next year? Weak oppose. |
| KyleHamilton, t,c e | statement | Oppose, too new |
| LawAndOrder, t,c e | statement | Oppose, too new |
| LuckyLuke, t,c e | statement | Oppose, too new |
| Luigi30, t,c e | statement | 2000 edits. Respectable but not shedfuls. Good mix but could stand more article.Very weak answers thoiugh. Oppose. Maybe next year? |
| Mackensen, t,c e | statement | 6700 edits but not all questions answered. Agree with code of conduct stance I think. Late to the party means almost overlooked. Support. |
| Magicalsaumy, t,c e | statement | Way too late to the party. 381 edits? Way too few Maybe next time? Oppose. |
| Mailer diablo, t,c diablo e | statement | Too late to the game, not enough questions answered. Mangled his ID entry so that it's confusing and can't find edit counts easily (has 12k, good mix)... Maybe next year. Oppose. |
| Maywither, t,c e | statement | Says:I am Maywither. I am the most amazing and awesome Wikipedian ever. Place me on the committee and I will not make you sad.… um, I'm more awsomerer, d00d!. Points for style, points for flippancy but ArbComm needs somewhat more serious-iosity, I think. Oppose. Maybe next year when more experienced and still funny?. Support for WP:BJAODN though, per Thryduulf |
| Merovingian, t,c e | statement | Favour. Good level head and good answers, good experience for someone so young. Good edits. |
| Mikkalai, t,c e | statement | Withdrawn. |
| Mindspillage, t,c e | statement | Neutral, Big issue is I think she acted incorrectly in Kelly's recent RfAr by recusing but it's understandable. Like approach in general so it's a reluctant neutral… changed mind, of the current Arbs, she's one of the best. Support… also per User:Lawyer2b, Wiki (and the world) needs more hot libertarian chics. |
| Morven, t,c e | statement | UNIX and Trains geek, C J Cherryh fan, lots of edits, but most importantly good solid viewpoints, right view about boxen, 'not the typical Wikipedia 'policy wonk' and a pragmatic/realistic approach to what we are doing here. Enthusastic Support |
| Nandesuka, t,c e | statement | Was on the other side of the webcomic debate, and I was convinced was not giving arguments enough credence, and being a bit snippy/flippant, not good for an arbitrator, but recent actions show heart is in right place. Good question answers. Concerned about the 'should be banned' remark. Heartened by this diff [2] despite Charles Stewart arguing it's evidence *against*. As if!... Nandesuka is spot on about the seriousness of wheel warring (Good question, Aaron!), and in agreeing with Fred Bauder, who said 'Not only is it a problem in itself, but the dispute over it is a problem with a vote on Templates for deletion to keep, followed by its deletion by those opposed to it.' so Support, somewhat nervously, hope my hunch is right. |
| Netoholic, t,c e | statement | A bit abrasive and prone to rash action but seems to have the best interests of the encyclopedia at heart. But his proposals are somewhat off the wall and he was hostile to some of the questions. Probably would have a hard time carrying out the duties, and the ban is somewhat troublesome. Oppose |
| NSLE, t,c e | statement | 4K edits, strong newcomer, 3 months to admin is a good sign.Wish more questions were answered. Neutral since not enough info available to decide (can always copy 'these are questions for everyone' and answer them ) Good general approach. Maybe next year? |
| Phroziac, t,c e | statement | 3.5K edits, strong newcomer. Wishywashy on running. Would prefer more answers. (can always copy others questions and answer them). Concerned about editbox stance but like general approach to everything else. Maybe next year? |
| PZFUN, t,c e | statement | 6.5K edits, been around since mid 2004, so old hand. Non US, non english as first language, good perspective on arbcom. Willing to state POV and why it won't matter. not sure I agree that because this is Jimbos sandbox that makes him a fascist.... However since PZFUN is Danish, and did not voice strong support for LEGO, have to oppose. KIDDING! Support. |
| Quaque, t,c e | statement | 1.5K edits, a bit light. Only here since Nov. Never answered many questions. Probably too inexperienced. No need to pile on though, Quague isn't going to make it. Neutral to oppose (if necessary) Maybe next year? |
| Ral315, t,c e | statement | 9.5k edits since late 2004… 15 year old college sophomore. Impressive but will Ral have time? Support more use of temporary injunctions. Lots of other good answers. With regret, I think this editor needs more seasoning (although mediation experience is goodness) and would be spreading self too thin. Oppose for now, Maybe next year? |
| Redwolf24, t,c e | statement | Withdrawn. |
| RomaC, t,c e | statement | 73 edits, not a serious candidate. Oppose |
| Ronline, t,c e | statement | Has been around a while, late 2004 joiner, 3500 edits. Answers and position somewhat vague. Perhaps next year. Good that he's non english user, we need global perspective. Neutral to oppose but no need to pile on probably won't make it. |
| Rowlan, t,c e | statement | 304 edits, probaby not a serious candidate. Oppose but no need to pile on, probably won't make it. |
| Sam Korn, t,c Korn' e | statement | 7.8K edits since late 2004. Good answer to the Improv question… excessive userbox deletion is divisive and we are here to build an encyclopedia. Esprit de corps helps that. Absolutely CRITICAL that we know how he feels about men in pink, though… Support anyway. |
| Sam Spade, t,c Spade e | statement | 30K edits, major old hand and valuable contributor to articlespace… Oppose. Seems to act rashly. Seems to be familiar with the workings of ArbComm from the wrong side of the telescope. Should have let the Alabamaboy questions go instead of blowing up. |
| Silverback, t,c e | statement | 5.5K edits since late 2004, seasoned. Impressed that he would have sanctioned himself. Can't fault him for not giving detailed answers. But pithyness may be better. May have been in a fair number of edit wars and etc… not sure I support. Maybe with more seasoning? not sure community supports either. Neutral tending to oppose but no need to pile on, not going to make it. |
| SimonP, t,c e | statement | 90K edits! Wow. Since 2001. Amazing history. Something good needs to happen in December 2005 but I'm not sure being elected is it. Seems to evade answering questions, not a good trait in US Supreme Court candidates and not a good trait for ArbComm either. Reluctantly oppose. (although I'm in the minority. I may be missing something) |
| Skyscrap27, t,c e | statement | 88 edits under this name (although has some under others). Probably not a serious candidate. Oppose but no need to pile on, not going to make it. |
| Snowspinner, t,c e | statement | Oppose. Wheel warrior, Can't go around deleting things or getting into wheel wars over and over and over. Has left me wiht the impression that he believes that users that oppose him are clueless. Some may be but alienating large swaths of users will interfere with the ability to get the encyclopedia built. WP:IAR is all well and good but process often actually works and often actually is the way to get things done. The ends do not justify the means. |
| Svartalf, t,c e | statement | 285 edits… Probably not a serious candidate....No need to pile on though, not going to make it. |
| SVera1NY, t,c e | statement | 210 edits… Probably not a serious candidate....No need to pile on though, not going to make it. |
| Terenceong1992, t,c e | statement | Withdrawn. |
| Tony Sidaway, t,c Sidaway e | statement | |
| Trilemma, t,c e | statement | 690 edits since mid/late 2005. Probably not serious. Oppose but no need to pile on, not going to make it. |
| Tznkai, t,c e | statement | 3K since mid 2005. Admin I think. Have been impressed with what I saw elsewhere. Good answer on the code of conduct. Opposes POV statements by users which I disagree with. A bit long winded, arbitration is a long and involved process as it is… too terse is not good but pithy is good. (I should talk about longwinded!). The improv answer shows thoughtfulness and good positioning of ArbComm. Some issues with some statements and blocks though. On balance: Support. Probably not going to make it though. |
| Ultraexactzz, t,c e | statement | 52 edits since 12/22/2005. Not a serious candidate. Style points for the 'I live in Ohio.' remark though Oppose but no need to pile on, not going to make it. Maybe next year with more experience? |
Thanks for reading this far, hope it was of some help to you…. Your mileage may vary… think for yourself! Comments welcomed but please remember WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Thanks!