Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Lifebaka: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
KojiDude (talk | contribs)
4,928 edits
Larno Man (talk | contribs)
1,138 edits
Line 34: Line 34:
# I nominated you for RFA and stick by my nomination there. [[User:Davewild|Davewild]] ([[User talk:Davewild|talk]]) 19:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
# I nominated you for RFA and stick by my nomination there. [[User:Davewild|Davewild]] ([[User talk:Davewild|talk]]) 19:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Positive and thoughtful in decision making. -- [[User:Suntag|Suntag]] [[User talk:Suntag|<b><big><font color="#FF8C00">☼</font></big></b>]] 21:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
#'''Support''' - Positive and thoughtful in decision making. -- [[User:Suntag|Suntag]] [[User talk:Suntag|<b><big><font color="#FF8C00">☼</font></big></b>]] 21:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
# '''Support''' ---[[User:Larno Man|Larno]] ([[User talk:Larno Man|talk]]) 02:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


==Oppose==
==Oppose==

Revision as of 02:14, 2 December 2008

lifebaka

Looking over the other candidates these past two weeks, I haven't seen all that much diversity in them. Pretty much all the strong candidates have lots of involvement at ANI, RFA, other arbitration, etc. While there's nothing wrong with this, I'd like to supply at least some sort of alternative. So, here I am, metaphorically standing as a candidate (I do most of my editing seated, to be honest).
As far as arbitration itself goes, I'm a complete outsider. I've never participated in any case in any way. I do, however, learn fast (then again, so do we all; the learning curve for Wikipedia is pretty steep), so I should be fine in the long run. I assure voters that I wouldn't be running if I didn't feel I am capable of doing a good job on the Committee.
Most of the time I've been active on Wikipedia, both before and after becoming an admin earlier this year, has been spent around the various article deletion processes, at first AfD and then the CSD and DRV. I've worked at DRV for nearly a year now, and am active in editing the CSD policy page and the talk pages of all three. The skill set used in making the decisions for these processes is entirely different from those used at ANI and the like, which I believe would be a useful asset to ArbCom. I also hope it gives me a slightly different perspective than most of the other candidates.
My thoughts on what ArbCom should be doing are pretty much what everyone else says. It should be fast and responsive. Supposing that I am elected, I will do my best to be both, insofar as I am able. Beyond that, I'll try to cause as few drahmahz as possible.
Well, here goes nothing. I sign here, right? lifebaka++ 16:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Not a usual suspect, but in a good way. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Rschen7754 (T C) 00:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Dlabtot (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. iridescent 00:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oren0 (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. This user responds quickly to requests for help in a variety of areas (for example, he helped me solve a problem with {{DYKsuggestion}}, and I think his being an outsider will allow him to bring diversity to the committee. —Politizer talk/contribs 01:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. kurykh 01:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. PhilKnight (talk) 01:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. RockManQReview me 02:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Epbr123 (talk) 03:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. One of the very best! Ecoleetage (talk) 04:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. DRV disputes are very different than ArbComm disputes. I know his DRV work and support, but think this editor would be a stronger candidate if they spent some time working WP:AE or other dispute resolution fora first. GRBerry 04:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Realizing you're an outsider is great. Dispute resolution background is also nice to see, although you should take the first month or so to learn how to apply your skills to this position should you be elected. Mike H. Fierce! 04:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support What we need in arbcom. I also find myself agreeing with much of Lifebaka's views on BLPs. -- Ned Scott 07:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support While I disagree with some of Lifebaka's views on the precise role of arbcom and its position in the community, my general impression is very positive and my gut feeling is a good one. Answers could be slightly better worded at times, but they do get the point across in a nicely concise way. Brilliantine (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 09:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support, seems to have a good idea of what's going on and what needs to happen, doesn't seem likely to expand BLP or make policy. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Clue is important. Stifle (talk) 10:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 11:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 11:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. --PeaceNT (talk) 11:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support --CrohnieGalTalk 14:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support as we need fresh ideas. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 14:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Support ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 (talk) 20:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. I nominated you for RFA and stick by my nomination there. Davewild (talk) 19:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support - Positive and thoughtful in decision making. -- Suntag ☼ 21:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support ---Larno (talk) 02:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose, although nothing personal: I have chosen a group of seven editors that will make the best new additions to ArbCom, reflecting diversity in editing areas, users who will work well together, as well as some differing viewpoints.--Maxim(talk) 00:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Nufy8 (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Voyaging(talk) 00:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose, due to lack of experience. Further comments available at my ACE2008 notes page. --Elonka 01:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. krimpet✽ 01:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Caspian blue 01:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Steven Walling (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose Majorly talk 01:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Mr.Z-man 01:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. - NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 01:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. iMatthew 01:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. No No No. --Mixwell!Talk 02:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. ArbCom must be disbanded and replaced with a system which actually works. Sorry, I oppose. Bstone (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose. rootology (C)(T) 03:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose. (rationale) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Oppose. There's a lot of diversity in the candidates this year actually, and I'm concerned about your ability to evaluate editors if you've concluded otherwise. I don't really see any articulated vision whatsoever of how you'd be different. --JayHenry (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Nothing personal against this candidate, but there are more qualified candidates running. Master&Expert (Talk) 05:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Prodego talk 05:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Given current problems facing ArbCom, this is not the best time for an outsider (although I would in any other circumstances support a complete outsider, my other opposes re:lack of experience notwithstanding). Next year? // roux   editor review10:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. — neuro(talk) 10:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose See my reasons in User:Secret/ArbCom. Note if there isn't a comment on the candidate there, I was on vacation and couldn't edit the past weekend, will leave one today. Secret account 13:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Hopeless on BLP --Scott Mac (Doc) 14:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose Colchicum (talk) 15:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Crystal whacker (My 2008 ArbCom votes) 15:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. For this, which prompted a following-up comment from Lar. Acalamari 17:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. I agree with GRBerry's rationale, though it led him to support and me to oppose... :) Deletion policy is an important and sadly uncommon skill set, but it's not great preparation for the Committee, and you're just a little too much of an unknown quantity for me to support this year. Keep up the good work, and nothing personal. MastCell Talk 19:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Synergy 19:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Tiptoety talk 23:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Weak Oppose Not the time for a complete outsider; we need new faces, but proper experience is still required. GlassCobra 23:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Per GlassCobra (conveiniently right above me :D ).--Koji† 00:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Lifebaka&oldid=255336013"