Content deleted Content added
Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk | contribs) |
Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
{{/row|C=GiacomoReturned|R=None|E=40093 (total)|S=2004-11-08|T=Yeah, he's a drama magnet and sometimes comes across as self-impressed. But he would provide a much needed alternative voice within the committee. Giano will tell you right out what he thinks. Even when disagreeing I seriously doubt he'll lie to me, which is more than I can say for several of the current Arbitrators. Anyway if it turns out badly he's only one of 18.|V=+}} |
{{/row|C=GiacomoReturned|R=None|E=40093 (total)|S=2004-11-08|T=Yeah, he's a drama magnet and sometimes comes across as self-impressed. But he would provide a much needed alternative voice within the committee. Giano will tell you right out what he thinks. Even when disagreeing I seriously doubt he'll lie to me, which is more than I can say for several of the current Arbitrators. Anyway if it turns out badly he's only one of 18.|V=+}} |
||
{{/row|C=Harej|R=A|E=15497|S=2004-11-26|T=Seems like a decent enough fellow but the near-total lack of content work is a deal breaker. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=100&tagfilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Harej&namespace=0&tagfilter=&year=&month=-1 Only about 100 article edits in the past year, the vast majority being non-substantive stuff like moves.] Sorry.|V=-}} |
{{/row|C=Harej|R=A|E=15497|S=2004-11-26|T=Seems like a decent enough fellow but the near-total lack of content work is a deal breaker. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=100&tagfilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Harej&namespace=0&tagfilter=&year=&month=-1 Only about 100 article edits in the past year, the vast majority being non-substantive stuff like moves.] Sorry.|V=-}} |
||
{{/row|C=Iridescent|R=A|E=156163|S=2006-02-15|T=Leaning support, sort of. Maybe. Despite my overall favorable impression something... doesn't quite seem right. But I'm not sure what. Will need to check further; perhaps it was something he said at Wikipedia Review? There's [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27646&pid=207380&mode=threaded&show=&st=0&#entry207380 this] and [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27646&pid=207380&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry207380 this] for a start.|V= |
{{/row|C=Iridescent|R=A|E=156163|S=2006-02-15|T=Leaning support, sort of. Maybe. Despite my overall favorable impression something... doesn't quite seem right. But I'm not sure what. Will need to check further; perhaps it was something he said at Wikipedia Review? There's [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27646&pid=207380&mode=threaded&show=&st=0&#entry207380 this] and [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=27646&pid=207380&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry207380 this] for a start. In the end one of his (her) <s>meatpuppets</s> principled supporters acquiesced to my conditions[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIridescent&action=historysubmit&diff=400002040&oldid=399991485] so he (she) gets my vote. |V=+}} |
||
{{/row|C=Jclemens|R=A|E=26102|S=2006-08-24|T=Some are supporting because he has a science background. I have nothing against scientists, but that's not what it takes to be a good arbitrator. Atrocious, almost frightening responses to several of the standard and one-off questions (e.g., "private correspondence" and "outing" show a casual disregard for the fact that there are real people behind the usernames). If elected there's no way he could be trusted with confidential information, which is one of the responsibilities of Arbcom.|V=--}} |
{{/row|C=Jclemens|R=A|E=26102|S=2006-08-24|T=Some are supporting because he has a science background. I have nothing against scientists, but that's not what it takes to be a good arbitrator. Atrocious, almost frightening responses to several of the standard and one-off questions (e.g., "private correspondence" and "outing" show a casual disregard for the fact that there are real people behind the usernames). If elected there's no way he could be trusted with confidential information, which is one of the responsibilities of Arbcom.|V=--}} |
||
{{/row|C=John_Vandenberg|R=A,(ex)Arb,C,O|E=47969|S=2004-09-05|T=Returning former arb. Defaulting to Oppose.|V=-}} |
{{/row|C=John_Vandenberg|R=A,(ex)Arb,C,O|E=47969|S=2004-09-05|T=Returning former arb. Defaulting to Oppose.|V=-}} |
Revision as of 01:27, 2 December 2010
Preface
As others have noted there are not enough good (or even acceptable) candidates to fill all the vacant slots. So this election promises an exciting and drama-filled aftermath.
Below I direct how you must vote. A brief explanation of priorities:
- Returning arbitrators: My default position for current or past arbitrators seeking re-election is Oppose. The committee benefits from fresh perspectives. While this is my default position it is not a strict rule.
- Criteria: The trend toward professional Wikipoliticians who contribute little of substance is a bad sign. Candidates who do not have significant records of content creation (not necessarily Featured Articles or Good Articles) have no business making decisions that affect those who do.
- Comments, questions, and complaints: If you want to comment on any of my evaluations by all means go ahead and do so on this page's Talk. In particular, if you're a candidate and want to clarify or dispute something feel free to say your bit. If I don't respond please don't take it as a lack of interest -- sometimes I'll simply let a rebuttal stand. The recommendations below are apt to shift around as I take others' views into account.
"Abstain" means either that I haven't yet looked closely at this candidate, or that I haven't yet determined whether to support, oppose, or abstain. I'm undecided which.
Currently running
User | Statement and Questions | Comments | Vote |
---|---|---|---|
Casliber • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Former arb but had the integrity to resign when he felt circumstances called for it. | Support
|
Chase_me_ladies,_I'm_the_Cavalry • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Pending. | Abstain
|
David_Fuchs • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Leaning support; more to follow. | Abstain
|
Elen_of_the_Roads • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Not insane. Will probably support unless I find something of concern. | Abstain
|
FT2 • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Returning former arb; default to Oppose. Despite his less-than-stellar record as an arb his ideas for devolving certain activities now handled by Arbcom has a lot to recommend it. The incoming committee would benefit focusing more on deciding cases and less on other matters. | Oppose
|
Georgewilliamherbert • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Often seen around WP:ANI and similar locations. Perhaps too often? Anybody with a fascination for nuclear weapons can't be all bad. Needs a closer look. | Abstain
|
GiacomoReturned • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Yeah, he's a drama magnet and sometimes comes across as self-impressed. But he would provide a much needed alternative voice within the committee. Giano will tell you right out what he thinks. Even when disagreeing I seriously doubt he'll lie to me, which is more than I can say for several of the current Arbitrators. Anyway if it turns out badly he's only one of 18. | Support
|
Harej • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Seems like a decent enough fellow but the near-total lack of content work is a deal breaker. Only about 100 article edits in the past year, the vast majority being non-substantive stuff like moves. Sorry. | Oppose
|
Iridescent • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Leaning support, sort of. Maybe. Despite my overall favorable impression something... doesn't quite seem right. But I'm not sure what. Will need to check further; perhaps it was something he said at Wikipedia Review? There's this and this for a start. In the end one of his (her) |
Support
|
Jclemens • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Some are supporting because he has a science background. I have nothing against scientists, but that's not what it takes to be a good arbitrator. Atrocious, almost frightening responses to several of the standard and one-off questions (e.g., "private correspondence" and "outing" show a casual disregard for the fact that there are real people behind the usernames). If elected there's no way he could be trusted with confidential information, which is one of the responsibilities of Arbcom. | Strong Oppose
|
John_Vandenberg • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Returning former arb. Defaulting to Oppose. | Oppose
|
Loosmark • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Overtaken by events. | Oppose
|
Newyorkbrad • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
A very tough call. Fair minded, but the more I think about it the less favorable my evaluation. He has a reputation for wordiness but there's a more disturbing pattern than mere verbosity: is it just me, or does his logorrhea begin going off the scales whenever he's challenged? | Abstain
|
Off2riorob • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Impetuous. Serious concerns over judgment and partiality. | Oppose
|
PhilKnight • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Undecided for now. Answers to questions are weak. | Abstain
|
Sandstein • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
My experience is that he is rigid and a poor communicator. I'm concerned that he'd veer off into an attitude of "kill them all; |
Oppose
|
Shell_Kinney • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
One of the better arbs in the current group, though the dustup with User:SandyGeorgia did not cast her in a good light. Her actions in the Rlevse brouhaha reinforced the common perception of a Blue Wall around the committee. I think she's a decent person but ultimately there's not enough to sway me from my default position for current and returning members. | Oppose
|
SirFozzie • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Default to Oppose, though I would Oppose anyway on the merits. My rationale from way back in 2008 still applies. | Strong Oppose
|
Stephen_Bain • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
Returning former arb; defaulting to Oppose. His prior performance was so slipshod that I would Oppose even if it wasn't the default. A mostly-inactive editor returning to run for Arbcom sets off alarm bells. | Oppose
|
Xeno • talk • contribs • logs • block log • editcount • rights |
Statement Questions |
My personal interactions with him have been pleasant, though of course that doesn't necessarily mean he's Arbcom material. Will need to look more closely. | Abstain |