Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004/Candidate statements/Endorsements: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Shorne (talk | contribs)
2,809 edits
→‎[[User:Blankfaze|blankfaze]]: withdrawing endorsement
Shorne (talk | contribs)
2,809 edits
Line 506: Line 506:


===[[User:Shorne|Shorne]]===
===[[User:Shorne|Shorne]]===
* Blankfaze
: I endorse Blankfaze in spite of his endorsement of Raul654, which shows amazingly poor judgement. [[User:Shorne|Shorne]] 05:14, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)


===[[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]]===
===[[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]]===

Revision as of 04:50, 25 November 2004

This page is for the listing of endorsements either by or for specific users.

NOTE: This page is NOT for listing criticisms, oppostion, and/or disendorsements of candidates. If you absolutely must do so, there is a page allocated for that purpose. However, users are strongly urged by Jimbo Wales (the founder of Wikipedia) as well as election organisers NOT to make disendorsements. Show your dissent with your vote.

(In all fairness, Jimbo's and the election organisers' statements were made after disendorsements had already been made. As such, many people making disendorsements may not have been aware of Jimbo's and the election organisers' sentiments. The election organisers discourage additional listings to the page and suggest that those who have already added material there may wish to remove their additions.)

Either way, criticisms, oppostion, and/or disendorsements posted on this page WILL BE REMOVED.

Endorsements listed by candidate

Sign under the name of the candidate or candidates you endorse. Your reasoning is welcome but not required.

172

  • Support, a hard working and impartial scholar. 12.75.139.231 20:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, impartial, would be a good member. Xtra 01:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, Has a good vision of where Wiki has to go as it expands from a group of talented personalities into an entity with its own emergent behavior. Gzuckier 16:56, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. Consistently reasonable and fair. Shorne 03:14, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, I think you're a good sysop 172--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 08:37, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • A scholar of quality who should be engaged as broadly as possible in the community. Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:34, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. 172 provided a carefully thought out reply to specific questions that were asked of him. He doesn't talk to potential voters solely in abstractions - he is willing to provide real, practical insights into how he would conduct himself as an Arbitrator. 172 is able to explain in detail how he would work with controversial editors when their cases were brought into arbitration. This candidate moves to the top of my list of endorsements. --DV 07:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Everyking 07:20, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Gzornenplatz 02:55, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Ambi

  • Support, industrious and clear-thinking user. 12.75.139.231 20:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Ambi has my endorsement because I believe her to be one of the current AC's wisest and fairest critics -- I know from my conversations with her that she has thought at length and with depth about the problems the AC has faced, and while I do not always agree with her conclusions, I respect greatly her openmindedness, her fairness, and her willingness to innovate. Jwrosenzweig 23:58, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:16, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Dysprosia 00:43, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Ambi is everything a wikipedian should be: level headed, hard working and willing to do the unglamorous organisational tasks. The strongest recomendation I can give is that if preferential voting is used for the election, I will be placing Ambi above myself on the ballot. Shane King 00:56, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Very much so. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 01:41, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, good user. func(talk) 19:50, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Strongly. Very sensible. Wolfman 02:16, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. I'm a new user, and she's one of the few Wikipedians I've found to be both impressive and capable of staying outside her own biases. Level-headedness is a must for this role, and Ambi's near cornered the market when it comes to Wikipedians. Insert various other echoes of ShaneKing's endorsement here. Shem 14:56, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Ambi has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 03:58, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Ambi has said that she has come to respect me despite significant ideological differences. I will more than return the compliment since I believe that Wikipedia must embrace not only divergent views, but also the people who see through people's opinions to the people themselves. Gladly support. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:39, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, very clear vision of what's wrong with the ArbCom and how to fix it. VeryVerily 10:05, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, has followed arbitration proceedings regularly and has provided useful feedback. Fred Bauder 20:03, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Mackensen (talk) 09:58, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - Xed 20:35, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

blankfaze

  • Strongly support. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:15, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • /me ezafknalbs - and supports. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Support. This user meets with my personal standards... oh, wait, I don't have any. ;-) func(talk) 19:53, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. Several points in favor of blankfaze: 1. A strong endorsement from Neutrality. 2. A promise for expedient rulings. (Justice delayed is justice denied.) 3. He is honest about his political viewpoints right on his user page. 4. Lastly, blankfaze is pro-serial comma (what more could you ask for? :). --DV 07:11, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 04:07, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:46, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Xed 19:32, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. [[User:Halibutt|[[User:Halibutt|User:Halibutt/sig]]]] 19:53, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Cecropia

You may have your say here. ;-) Cheers -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 09:25, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Support Ceropia has on occasions had to make judgement calls as a Bureaucrat. He always strikes me as fair and reasonable - qualities essential in an arbitrator. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:12, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • —No-One Jones (m) 20:19, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. 172 23:43, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Cecropia has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 04:15, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • We strongly disagree on a lot of ideological issues, but I've grown to respect Cecropia for his approach to these things, and he'll have my vote. Ambi 05:15, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly endorse. "Ceropia" is Greek and Latin for "fair minded and wise". :) Ceropia's personal integrity has never failed to impress and amaze me. func(talk) 20:39, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. --user:Ed Poor (talk) 19:57, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Charles Matthews

  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Endorse - after reading a lot from his edit history I believe he would be good arbitor. IMO also the fact he is spending more time on contributing excelent articles than on wikipolitics is an advantage. Arbitrators should have touch with the work and problems of Main namespace. --Wikimol 09:22, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:13, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:54, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - could do more to support WP:Bias though. And to reduce the bloated template - Xed 19:48, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

===Dante Alighieri=== (for the record, I'm not SEEKING endorsements, although I'm happy to accept them and answer any questions that people have --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:15, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC))

  • Few people know Dante. From what little I know of him, I feel he would make a good arbitrator. Therefore support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • SupportCheeseDreams 19:58, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Dante Alighieri has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 21:22, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

David Gerard

  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • William M. Connolley 23:43, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • David has long had my respect for his ability to describe and understand the various problems at Wikipedia -- his approach to conflicts is very reasonable, in my opinion, and I believe he strikes an excellent balance between assuming good faith (as so many seem to abandon these days) and allowing users to wreak havoc (which also seems prevalent). I believe his intelligence and his ability to collaborate would be of real help to the Arbitration Committee. Jwrosenzweig 00:09, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely, beyond the shadow of a doubt. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 22:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Shorne 03:20, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support very much. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 00:37, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strong support. i agree with everything William says above Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:15, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • David Gerard has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 04:43, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. I respect his fairness and judgement. -- Antaeus Feldspar 05:10, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely, unconditionally, support. It was a shame there wasn't an extra spot for him last time. Ambi 05:16, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:58, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, qualified, came in third last election. Fred Bauder 20:05, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Of course. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 03:30, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Mackensen (talk) 10:00, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. While I haven't worked directly with David here on Wikipedia (except to note that he has reverted a few of my edits ;), I have seen his work in a number of Usenet groups where he has shown intelligence & insight concerning many issues. I feel he would be an asset to the Arbitration Committee. -- llywrch 17:05, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

DG

Ed Poor

  • Intelligent, dedicated, fairminded, diffident (sometimes slightly maddeningly so), a natural choice for arbitrator. Easy endorsement. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:00, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, an obvious choice. Fred Bauder 11:24, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Ed would make an excellent arbitator. He has my full support. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 11:28, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Everyking

  • Endorse. I like the cut of his jib (matey). -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 07:01, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strong support. One of our best and most prolific editors. 172 07:32, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Hardworking editor who appreciates other hardworking editors. VeryVerily 10:07, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. Shorne 02:52, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. He deserves this. MattSal 02:18, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Fennec

Grunt

  • Grunt has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 04:50, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Hephaestos

Improv

James F.

  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • James F. is, in my opinion, a model arbitrator -- sensible, careful, rational, and hard-working. I wholeheartedly endorse his campaign for reelection: Jimmy chose well when he asked James F. to serve on the initial AC, and I believe the choice is no less clear now. Jwrosenzweig 00:00, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support! Has many times proved his worth to the arbcom. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Very much so. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 01:42, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Mackensen (talk) 17:41, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Endorse. func(talk) 00:41, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. If Shorne calls him corrupt, he must be a paragon of virtue. :-) Stan 05:23, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Thanks for that helpful and informed comment. Shorne 05:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Wikimol 09:58, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Very strong support. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:25, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • James F. has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 04:56, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, has good record as an arbitrator. Fred Bauder 20:07, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

jguk

  • Support. Shorne 03:39, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Johnleemk

  1. Support --Mrfixter 14:10, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  2. Support also--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 08:38, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  3. John may not be as notable as some of the other candidates, but I've come across him several times and he has always come across as a sensible person. I don't know him well enough to actually endorse him, but i do want to wish him the best of luck. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:44, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lir

<3 (this is Angie) ;)--64.12.116.138 09:19, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Mirv

Neutrality

  • Support 12.75.139.231 20:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support-- Neutrality's contributions to many discussions show him to be unbiased, wise, and cool as a cucumber. Ashibaka tlk 23:31, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Very much so. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. 172 03:49, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Mackensen (talk) 17:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Endorse. func(talk) 00:42, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Shorne 04:11, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Neutrality has been a positive influence wherever I have seen him contribute (I appreciate his contributions to Asian-related articles), and his user page is both honest and utilitarian, and shows he is here to get something done. --DV 07:11, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Stan 05:29, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Neutrality has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 05:10, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

PedanticallySpeaking

Plato

Raul654

  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:01, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • While Raul and I do not always agree on matters of policy, I have seen in these last few months that he is a dedicated and intelligent arbitrator, who works well in pushing for consensus, and whose commitment to keeping this site an excellent and reliable resource is firm. I am pleased he is running for reelection, and believe the community would do well to reaffirm the trust they indicated in his judgment in August. Jwrosenzweig 00:01, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:15, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • support Xtra 01:39, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support very much. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, despite the comments above opposition below. Mackensen (talk) 17:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely the most qualified and fitting user I know. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 22:21, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly support Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:46, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Raul has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 05:13, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Raul has impressed during his first term on the Committee. He's played an important role in getting it functioning, and though I've been a critic of much of the Committee, I've rarely found fault with his fair and reasoned decisions. He'll have my vote. Ambi 05:21, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support CheeseDreams 20:02, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, has good record as an arbitrator. Fred Bauder 20:08, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Very strong support - mav 22:32, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC) In the time Raul has been a part of the ArbCom he has proved to be one of the most active members. His ability to manage such a high level of involvement and still be in charge of the Featured article process, is simply amazing. He is a fair-minded and very hard working individual who certainly deserves to be re-elected as a member.
  • Support. --user:Ed Poor (talk) 20:03, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Sam Spade

  • I disagree with Sam on many issues (check our declared biases on our user pages!), but I know that he's willing to take the flak others throw time and time again and keep on going. He is a tireless contributor when others would have just given up, and a strict adherant to policy, which is essential for the AC. Shane King 01:02, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, and for those "voting" oppose... this isn't a vote. This is an "endorsements" page, so knock it off. func(talk) 19:56, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

sannse

  • Support - Very friendly person, even when nobody else much is friendly, she still is, will bring a new face of fairness, level-headness, and liberalness to the arbitration committe Chuck F 09:48, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • —No-One Jones (m) 21:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • I am a little reluctant to endorse sannse, purely because I have such great respect for her work with the Mediation Committee that I almost hate to see her leave it, even for so important a task as arbitration. But ultimately I feel compelled to endorse her, as I believe sannse's experience in moderating disputes and working with users to try and bring them together on issues would make her a particularly wise and inventive arbitrator -- we're constantly looking for new ways of resolving issues and applying fair remedies on the AC, and I think sannse's background suits her ideally to contribute in that way (in addition to her generally excellent judgment and keen sense of fairness). Jwrosenzweig 00:13, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Dysprosia 00:43, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support! -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Support very much. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:45, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strongly Endorse. An excellent wikipedian, very fair-minded. func(talk) 20:12, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. --Wikimol 09:55, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • My strongest possible endorsement.Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 18:18, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Sannse has earned my endorsement. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 05:15, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. El_C 17:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, excellent record as a mediator. Fred Bauder 20:09, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. --user:Ed Poor (talk) 20:01, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. llywrch 20:26, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ta bu shi da yu

  • Single-handedly broke my unopposed support record for adminship and still going strong. Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Strongly endorse... in fact, I think the ArbCom should be made up entirely of good-hearted Aussies. ;-) func(talk) 19:59, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Another one of the few level-headed Wikipedians I've seen around often since my arrival here. He's been a good admin (from what I've looked at), and a good person for this role. Shem 15:04, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 18:19, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - Xed 19:45, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Theresa knott

  • Strongly endorse. —No-One Jones (m) 22:27, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Theresa has shown remarkable resilience and good humor in the face of some of this site's worst trolls. I have seen in her both the patience necessary to deal with arbitration (an endeavor greatly requiring that virtue) and the soundness of judgment necessary to carry out reasonable remedies. Finally, someone who has dealt with trolls of many types is, I think, excellently qualified to be an arbitrator, both because she understands the pressures good users are often placed under, and because she understands the importance of rising above trolls rather than engaging in their tactics -- I believe this would help her craft responses to cases that both recognize the straits good users find themselves in and push these good users to avoid bad behavior despite said straits. I wholeheartedly endorse her for this position. Jwrosenzweig 23:49, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 23:58, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
  • Absolutely. Theresa seems to have patience above and beyond the call of duty, given what I've seen her put up with. Shane King 00:00, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
  • My strongest possible endorsement. When I think of the very best aspects of Wikipedia, there is one name that always rises to the top: Theresa Knott. I second everything that Jwrosenzweig just said, (and I am very angry with Jwrosenzweig for beating me to it ;-) ). func(talk) 00:01, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Definitely support. Theresa would make an excellent arbitrator. Johnleemk | Talk 04:53, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - Theresa has been a great force of good in the area of positive community development. She is fair and patient - two qualities that every ArbCom member should have. Note that the only person opposing so far has a case before the ArbCom right now. I very much look forward to working with Theresa on the ArbCom. --mav 23:20, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support very much. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 00:38, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - Superhuman patience in dealing with with the terminally exasperating. Stan 05:20, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support without reservation. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 08:05, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Theresa Knott has earned my endorsement. I believe she would be uniquely suited to the toner task. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 13:56, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support, has done a lot of the dirty work of enforcement, but has done it fairly. Fred Bauder 20:11, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Support. Even-handed, level-headed, and no-nonsense. Believes no one is above the rules. Plus a sense of humor. [1] What more could you want from arbcom? Wolfman 00:59, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Endorse for strong contributions, good personality. --Improv 04:37, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

VeryVerily

  • Support Very is pretty good user and quite capable of compromise--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 08:41, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Support - because I feel sorry for him - Xed 19:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yoshiah ap (Josiah)

(Please add names of further candidate/s)

Listing of individuals making endorsements

This is a list of users who have posted endorsements regarding the Arbitration Committee elections.

172

For the Arbitration Committee to play a constructive role in producing an encyclopedia, its members must understand just what is involved in writing a good article on Wikipedia; and its members must understand that there is a difference between serious editors and trolls sabotoging the work of serious editors. Too many of current members of the committee, along with a number of candidates currently running, view disputes from a prism up high from the IRC channel, mailing list, or the conflict resolution pages. They are not the colleagues of the active editors and writers but rather increasingly distant and unsympathetic authorities over us. However, to be an arbitrator as constructive and accessible as, say, Jwrosenzweig, one has to engage with the community not just from the top down but also from the bottom up. This is why I feel compelled to endorse the candidates aside from myself that have toiled the hardest to write quality articles and maintain their quality:

172 08:59, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ashibaka

Support-- Neutrality's contributions to many discussions show him to be unbiased, wise, and cool as a cucumber.

Ashibaka tlk 23:31, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

blankfaze

what blankfaze has to say:

I'd just like to say that I think most everyone running, save for a handful of obviously unqualified nogoodniks, is worthy and qualified and I wish all such candidates the best of luck. As such, I see no need or ability to endorse certain candidates moreso than others – with two exceptions. I was going to attempt to endorse one candidate who I felt was hands-down the best man running; but such could not be done. Both David Gerard and Raul654 came to mind. Hence, I endorse both of them and would like to vouch that they are both men of honour, neutrality, and levelheadedness:

  • David Gerard
  • Raul654

BLANKFAZE | (что??) 22:26, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cecropia

I have endorsed a number of editors who I know and respect. I don't want to enumerate them here as I may have missed someone worthy by foolish oversight or because I simply don't know them well enough. I have confidence that the community will elect the most appropriate candidates.

Frankly, since I am running myself, I am not comfortable with endorsing others lest it seem a quid pro quo or a solicitation of the same. However, since the endorsements are being widely done, I would feel bad to have others think I didn't care enough the worthies assembled here to express an opinion. Having said that, let me reiterate that I do not mean to downgrade those I haven't endorsed, and I will refrain from making negative endorsements. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:44, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

David Vasquez

Here are the candidates that I either endorse or oppose for election to the Arbitration Committee:

Strongly support. 172 provided a carefully thought out reply to specific questions that were asked of him. He doesn't talk to potential voters solely in abstractions - he is willing to provide real, practical insights into how he would conduct himself as an Arbitrator. 172 is able to explain in detail how he would work with controversial editors when their cases were brought into arbitration. This candidate moves to the top of my list of endorsements. --DV 06:59, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Strongly support. Several points in favor of blankfaze: 1. A strong endorsement from Neutrality. 2. A promise for expedient rulings. (Justice delayed is justice denied.) 3. He is honest about his political viewpoints right on his user page. 4. Lastly, blankfaze is pro-serial comma (what more could you ask for? :). --DV 14:43, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support. Neutrality has been a positive influence wherever I have seen him contribute (I appreciate his contributions to Asian-related articles), and his user page is both honest and utilitarian, and shows he is here to get something done. --DV 14:23, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Dysprosia

Arbcom candidate endorsements:

FeloniousMonk

Yea, verily.--FeloniousMonk 19:43, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Fred Bauder

I endorse User:Ambi, User:Ed Poor, User:Jdforrester, User:Raul654, User:sannse and User:Theresa knott.

El_C

I am more than happy to elaborate on each and every one of my endorsements and/or lack thereof. Note that some may be forthcoming. El_C 20:47, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • Strong Support:

Grunt

Arbitration election endorsements:

Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
/me ezafknalbs - and supports. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
lol. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 22:17, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Few people know Dante. From what little I know of him, I feel he would make a good arbitrator. Therefore support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
-- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Good ol' FireFennec. :) -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Support! Has many times proved his worth to the arbcom. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
-- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Support! -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Single-handedly broke my unopposed support record for adminship and still going strong. Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 01:37, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)
Support. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 23:58, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Gzuckier

Arbitration election endorsements:

Support, Has a good vision of where Wiki has to go as it expands from a group of talented personalities into an entity with its own emergent behavior. Gzuckier 16:56, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Johnleemk

From my interactions with these users (and those they have had with others that I had chance to observe) I have seen nothing but good, and I just have this nice feeling inside about them being arbitrators, considering their grasp of policy. This is not to say that I don't think other candidates are great; I just feel these would make the best arbitrators among all the candidates. Ta bu shi da yu, sannse, Neutrality and Mirv were pretty close, though, but I feel I haven't seen enough of them to be sure they'd make good arbitrators:

  • Ambi
  • David Gerard
  • Raul654
  • Shane King
  • Theresa knott
Definitely support. Theresa would make an excellent arbitrator.
Johnleemk | Talk 04:53, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Johnleemk | Talk 18:05, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Mackensen

Mackensen (talk) 17:41, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support. Mackensen (talk) 17:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support. Mackensen (talk) 17:44, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Maveric149

Disclaimer: I am a current member of the Arbitration Committee, a Steward, and Wikimedia CFO, but my endorsements are not related to those official capacities. I'm only speaking for myself.

My endorsements so for the 2004 Arbitration Committee Elections. I'm still working on developing reasoning for these choices and researching the other candidates to see if I can endorse any of them as well. If you thought I would definitely support you, but your name isn’t here yet, then I probably just have not had time to add it yet. --mav

Raul654 (statement)

  • In the time Raul has been a part of the ArbCom he has proved to be one of the most active members. His ability to manage such a high level of involvement and still be in charge of the Featured article process, is simply amazing. He is a fair-minded and very hard working individual who certainly deserves to be re-elected as a member.

Theresa knott (statement)

  • Theresa has been a great force of good in the area of positive community development. She is fair and patient - two qualities that every ArbCom member should have. Note that the only person opposing so far has a case before the ArbCom right now. I very much look forward to working with Theresa on the ArbCom.

Jdforrester (statement)

Ambi (statement)

Dante Alighieri (statement)


David Gerard (statement)

Neutrality

  • Endorsements:
    • Ambi
    • Blankfaze
    • Grunt
    • Mirv
    • Raul654
  • Other people who would be good Arbitrators
    • 172
    • Cecropia
    • David Gerard
    • Fennec
    • Hephaestos
    • James F.
    • Johnleemk
    • Sannse (I prefer sannse on the MedCom)
    • Theresa knott
    • Everyking

Quadell

In my opinion, an arbitor is just a wiki-job, like tagging images or greeting newcomers. Not everyone is well suited to every job. There are some great editors I did not endorse. My endorsees are easy to find above; they're the ones sporting the QuaintQuadellQuality Seals of Approval.

For an arbitor, the requirements for my endorsement are:

  1. to have proven they can admit when they're wrong.
  2. to have shown restraint in situations where they could have made a snarky comments but didn't
  3. to treat everyone – even trolls – with respect.

(Not all users, or even all admins, should fill those requirements; I think some people are much more fun because they don't. But arbitors should not necessarily be fun people.)

[[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]]

Endorsements:

Very much so. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 01:41, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Very much so. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 01:42, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Very much so. [[User:Rdsmith4|User:Rdsmith4/sig]] 01:42, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Very much so. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support very much. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:46, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support very much. — Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 01:45, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sam

I have some confidence in the wisdom and neutrality of these users:

  • Charles Matthews
  • David Gerard
  • Shane King

Sam [Spade] 11:06, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Shem

Endorsements:

Strongly support. I'm a new user, and she's one of the few Wikipedians I've found to be both impressive and capable of staying outside her own biases. Level-headedness is a must for this role, and Ambi's near cornered the market when it comes to Wikipedians. Insert various other echoes of ShaneKing's endorsement here. Shem 15:04, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support. Another one of the few level-headed Wikipedians I've seen around often since my arrival here. A good admin, and a good person for this role. Shem 15:04, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Shorne

Ta bu shi da yu

Endorsements:

Support. Excellent user. I highly recommend her! (this is probably going to knock off my vote, but I don't care if she gets in. She might be young, but she acts pretty maturely.) - Ta bu shi da yu 13:26, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Support. I think he'd make an excellent arbitrator. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:32, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Strongly support. Does a fantastic job. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:32, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Tannin

I'll be away during the period of the AC elections and unable to vote, so I'm recording my wishes here, in the hope that this will be counted as my vote. There are many good candidates standing, and I'm sure that most of them would do a good job if given the task. However, there are several that seem to me to be particularly outstanding contributors, and especially worthy of the positions. They are, in order:

  1. Theresa knott
  2. Hephaestos
  3. Mirv
  4. Neutrality
  5. David Gerard
  6. 172

I don't know if this will be accepted as a formal vote or not, but it's the best that I can do under the circumstances. Tannin 08:09, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikimol

Endorsements

  • Charles Matthews - after reading a lot from his edit history I believe he would be good arbitor. IMO also the fact he is spending more time on contributing excelent articles than on wikipolitics is an advantage. Arbitrators should have touch with the work and problems of Main namespace.
I simply endorse, because allready doing good work in Wikipedia comittees and similar structures.

William M. Connolley

Endorse:

William M. Connolley 21:26, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Xtra

Endorsements:

Support, impartial, would be a good member. Xtra 01:11, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
support Xtra 01:39, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2004/Candidate_statements/Endorsements&oldid=7837063"