Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/Nihonjoe: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Watermint (talk | contribs)
1,341 edits
Saintjust (talk | contribs)
1,157 edits
Line 48: Line 48:
#—[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] | [[User talk:Viriditas|Talk]] 01:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
#—[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] | [[User talk:Viriditas|Talk]] 01:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
# [[User:Watermint|Watermint]] 03:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
# [[User:Watermint|Watermint]] 03:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
# Rather biased and abusive in his use of admin power on articles that he edits himself. [[User:Saintjust|Saintjust]] 05:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:34, 5 December 2006

Statement

My main reason for running is that I enjoy trying to help people work things out, and I want to help keep Wikipedia an open and fair place to which to contribute. I've had an official account here since 2005, though I used Wikipedia (and did some minor editing) fairly regularly for about a year before that. I've been generally easy to work with and I'm a generally balanced, civil, and respectful editor. I've worked on a wide range of articles, though my main focus has been articles somehow related to WikiProject Japan, which I set up in March of this year to help organize the work on that part of the encyclopedia. While I have made some mistakes along the way, I believe I have learned from them, and am a better person for the experience. By becoming a member of the Arbitration Committee, I hope to continue being balanced and improving the Wikipedia project as a whole. Working on Wikipedia has been one of the most enjoyable things I have ever done (for the most part), and I look forward to helping to make the project even better in the years to come. Thanks for your time.

Questions

Support

  1. - crz crztalk 00:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Delirium 01:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. pschemp | talk 02:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support: in my experience, intelligent and level-headed - Che Nuevara 03:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. I don't always agree with him, but he makes well-reasoned points in a courteous way. He has the professional demeanor necessary for this job. Dekimasu 03:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Warofdreams talk 04:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. THB 05:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Nufy8 06:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. A cursory review of the candidate's history several days hither led me to think that, though reasonable and cordial, he was perhaps insufficiently acquainted with policy and practice to serve as an arbitrator; the answers to the questions, though, demonstrate exceeding competence and logical thinking, each of which portends only good things. Joe 07:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, could be a surprising candidate. — CharlotteWebb 08:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Rather strong support. Seems to understand that policy is important and even more: that there's a spirit behind it that's even more important. Aditionally not being Anglo can be an advantage, specially in issues related to ethnocentric bias. --Sugaar 11:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I should note that I am, in fact, Anglo. Just wanted to make sure you weren't casting your support under false pretenses. (^_^) ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support.--MariusM 12:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support --CComMack (t–c) 22:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 23:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-05 02:11Z
  18. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 02:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Jaranda wat's sup 00:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Awolf002 01:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. KPbIC 03:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Rebecca 03:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Terence Ong 04:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. semper fi — Moe 05:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. A very good editor, but seems to stick to relatively noncontroversial corners of Wikipedia (mostly WikiProject Japan) and thus does not seem to have much experience with dispute resolution. --Hyperbole 06:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been involved in (or handled) several large and sometimes nasty disputes involving macrons (which included an RfM), Japan-Korea relations (the biggest discussion being on the Dokdo talk page (scattered from Archive 3-6)), and other related topics. Some of them involved the pages in question being protected due to edit/move wars, especially the Japan-Korea relations topics which seemed to attract a large number of possible SPA editors and accounts created by friends of those involved. Some of the accounts involved were blocked indefinitely for sock/meat puppetry. There's plenty of controversy surrounding Japan due to its militaristic and imperialistic actions during the Taishō and Shōwa eras. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Can't vote for someone who I've never seen on WP:ANI, WP:VPP, or any other public board. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. – Chacor 09:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Van helsing 10:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. cj | talk 10:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Strong oppose. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 12:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Shyam (T/C) 13:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose (based on answers to my questions) missed my whole point of two months and no edits Anomo 14:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. SuperMachine 19:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Gurch 23:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Michael Snow 23:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Ral315 (talk) (my votes) 00:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. —Viriditas | Talk 01:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Watermint 03:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Rather biased and abusive in his use of admin power on articles that he edits himself. Saintjust 05:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2006/Vote/Nihonjoe&oldid=92165249"