User:Cool Hand Luke
|I'm awarding you this barn star as a gesture of appreciation for your contributions. Wikidudeman (talk) 14:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)|
|To both Cool Hand Luke and Kurykh, for stopping the Michael Moore stuff at WP:ANI from getting (too) out of hand. ANI shouldn't be the place to argue COI and external link policies. David Fuchs (talk) 13:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)|
|I'm much better at being a pain in the butt than in showing appreciation. And thanks for the unblock, too...[F]or civility and grace in bringing me your objections, reasoning and advice in a recent controversy. Even where I continued to disagree, I found your messages helped me to think about some issues and even eventually change my mind about some things. Your attitude exemplifies what "getting along with others", "assume good faith", and "keep cool" is all about. And it was inspiring. You set a great example. Thanks! Noroton 20:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)|
|For a notably frank and refreshing Userpage Wanderer57 21:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)|
|From a long-time observer of a certain case, for your coolness under fire and your fine statistical analysis. Dr. Extreme (talk) 22:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)|
|For presenting painstaking, brilliant and compelling statistical evidence in the Mantanmoreland case. SilkTork *What's YOUR point? 20:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)|
|For being an all around decent fellow and an excellent editor and admin. David Shankbone 00:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)|
|For placing the integrity of the ArbCom election process ahead of your own finish in it, when faced with a possible canvassing campaign against a fellow candidate. Thank you for upholding this site's highest ideals of honor and fair play. DurovaCharge! 05:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)|
Frank, a Salt Laker in exile.
Since January 1, 2009, I have been a member of English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, our dispute resolution mechanism of last resort. I was surprised and delighted by the results of the community elections. I hope to earn the trust that the community has shown me.
Feel free to email me about arbitration business.
I may assume that messages sent to me can be shared with the entire committee unless you make clear otherwise. I'll err on the side of caution, and I will ask for clarification if your intent is unclear.
Note: because of a campaign promise, I do not oversight or suppress edits myself. I only have access to the tool for reviewing the work of others, and I'm honestly not familiar with the standards for its use. If you have an edit that needs urgent oversight, please contact one of the other oversighters or their listserve, firstname.lastname@example.org.
My time on Wikipedia
I started editing February 7, 2004, and I've been an administrator since October 25, 2004.
I was not active on Wikipedia for about 18 months due to grave doubts about the merits of this project, which I still have. In that time, we made a lot of improvements: we now demand inline citations for controversial claims, we've slowed the creation of unwatched articles by requiring users to log in, we've de-sysoped problematic admins against their will, and we finally proved our devotion to policies like WP:OR and WP:V, which are the foundation for a respectable encyclopedia.
On the other hand, it seems that we've moved toward a kind of caste system with adminship. The ratio of users to admins has exploded, and admins seem to engender excessive respect and fear when entering content disputes. I think my fellow editors should know that adminship was actually not a big deal when I was handed the mop. I was promoted as a self-nominated candidate with 1055 edits and even made a personal attack on my nomination page.
I'm proud to say that I've never abused the tools or been blocked for any reason, but my contributions should be judged by their own merits, just like any other user's.
My early work
Most of my early articles were made before citations were fashionable. Indeed, once upon a time, even most featured articles had no inline cites at all. Therefore, forgive my often poorly-documented and highly biased work. Actually, don't forgive it, just fix it.
Like most editors, I work on subjects that interest me. I strive to edit neutrally, but people are sometimes oblivious of their own bias. To aid other editors, here are some of my tendencies:
- I started the LDS wikiproject. I'm a liberal Mormon fond of New Mormon History. That is, I love Mormon history, and I favor the naturalistic accounts of historians like D. Michael Quinn.
- Trained as a chemist, I think that a scientific point of view (derided as "SPOV") is WP:NPOV when discussing testable claims about our shared physical reality. There's nothing neutral about giving voodoo equal footing.
- I'm sympathetic toward the Chicago school of economics.
- I believe that copyright law in the United States isn't as bad as popularly imagined.
Useful chemistry links
Useful Mormonism links
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement
- List of articles about Mormonism
- Grampa Bill's General Authority PagesLink is outdated.
I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
|Dual licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike License version 2.0|
|I agree to dual-license my text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under Wikipedia's copyright terms and the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license version 2.0. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under the Creative Commons terms, please check the CC dual-license and Multi-licensing guides.|
|Multi-licensed into the public domain|
|I agree to multi-license my eligible text contributions, unless otherwise stated, under Wikipedia's copyright terms and into the public domain. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions in the public domain, please check the multi-licensing guide.|