Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Coordination

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JSutherland (WMF) (talk | contribs) at 21:45, 2 December 2022 (→Voter eligibility list: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

2022 Arbitration Committee Elections

Status as of 07:05 (UTC), Tuesday, 19 November 2024 (Purge)

  • Thank you for participating in the 2022 Arbitration Committee Elections. The certified results have been posted.
  • You are invited to leave feedback on the election process.
Shortcut

Did I miss anything?

So I just finished my page creation spree. Did I miss anything? —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing any gaps right now. — xaosflux Talk 17:42, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To-Do List

We're ready to start gearing up for the production, if anyone would like to help build out the to-do list that would be nice. — xaosflux Talk 12:40, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll work on the voter lists. —CYBERPOWER (Trick or Treat) 17:45, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like Asartea has already requested scrutineers at meta:Stewards' noticeboard#Looking for Scrutineers. Mz7 (talk) 04:34, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did yes, and apparently totally forgot to drop a note here, I thought I did so. We have three volunteers already luckily enough, although I'm keeping it open for a bit in the hope of also picking up 1 or 2 reserves. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 16:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of delayed start to questions phase

In light of the decision at WP:ACERFC2022#Proposal 2: Start questions to candidates after nomination period ends, I have boldly added a new notice to the text that will be displayed at the top of every questions page. It displays until the end of the nomination period, after which the notice will automatically hide itself:

Please feel free to tweak the wording or the formatting if you feel it could be improved! Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 03:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The banner template/module may need to be updated for this additional "phase" as well. — xaosflux Talk 15:42, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Would that be Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Header? I notice that it currently states Community members are welcome to ask questions of the candidates. –FlyingAce✈hello 03:30, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@FlyingAce: Whoops, good catch. Removed that text. Mz7 (talk) 04:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

This is done. — xaosflux Talk 05:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi coords. I will be away during the nomination period due to a real life engagement, but will be back when the questions start. Would it be possible for one of you to post my statement on the first day for nominations? It can be found here. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 15:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Guerillero I loaded the input box to User talk:Guerillero/ACESandbox for you, could you complete it using that process - but do not transclude the entry to Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Candidates yet. Regarding the Applications are considered complete only when properly filled out and transcluded by the deadline. Deadlines will be strictly enforced regardless of technical problems that may occur. rule - will leave this up to ElectCom do deal with this extraordinary situation. I think it sounds fine, but they are the deciders. Electcom, can you comment here please? — xaosflux Talk 17:29, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Voter eligibility list

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Coordination/SecurePoll —CYBERPOWER (Message) 19:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

c.f. Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Coordination/SecurePoll/Sorted (warning 40K links on that page). — xaosflux Talk 01:01, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like 2 bots are in there, User:TaxonBot and User:C1MM-bot; they were not categorized (they are now assuming this will be rerun). — xaosflux Talk 01:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, in theory bots will be disallowed from voting anyway through SecurePoll's settings, even if they're in the list. Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These (and some others) are non-flagged bots, so they are "bots", but they are not bots. — xaosflux Talk 16:58, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, good point. Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 21:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyberpower678 can you do another generation run of both the electoralroll (which WMF will need for SecurePoll I think) and of the MMS list maker please? — xaosflux Talk 00:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can certainly update the list, but the list the WMF receives is directly emailed, after being generated, just prior to the start of the vote. —CYBERPOWER (Around) 00:19, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, just want to get one last check on them. — xaosflux Talk 00:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Xaosflux: List updated. Have fun. —CYBERPOWER (Around) 16:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scrutineers appointed

After discussing with my fellow electoral commissioners, we have appointed the following stewards to be the scrutineers for this election: Hasley, Martin Urbanec, Sotiale. I have sent an email to the Arbitration Committee asking them to grant temporary checkuser permissions to these stewards for the duration of the election. At this time, there is no fourth steward who has offered to serve as a reserve. Mz7 (talk) 20:52, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Format of Nominations

Are there instructions for how self-nominations should be formatted, or for a form that should be used for self-nominations? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:17, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon there is an entire set of forms, they will appear on Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Candidates once the nomination period opens. They are mostly the same as in prior years if you want to see what one looks like you can do so at WP:ACE2021/C. — xaosflux Talk 21:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WLN for QA?

I think we should have advertisement that the Q&A period is open on the WLN, @Mz7: I think you most recently worked on the modules related to that? — xaosflux Talk 00:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux:  Done [1]. Please feel free to tweak the wording if you feel it necessary. Mz7 (talk) 04:06, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mz7 Thank you! — xaosflux Talk 11:20, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate not answering questions

One of the candidates has not answered any of the questions put to them, and, in fact, has not edited here for 10 days. They've been informed on their talk page that they have questions pending. I went to e-mail them to request that they answer, but they apparently don't have a registered e-mail address. With voting due to begin in 2 days, my question to the co-ordinators is: is the failure to answer any questions grounds for being disqualified from being a candidate, and is that something that falls within the ambit of the co-ordinators? If not, who? Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly believe that no candidate should be disqualified unless they don't meet the qualifications established by community consensus in WP:ACERULES. The questions exist for the voters; let's let the voters decide whether this candidate should be elected based on the answers or absence thereof. (not a coordinator) Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 22:54, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken in general a candidate would only be disqualified if it was found that they did not actually meet the candidate qualifications, or have since violated them (e.g. by becoming banned, discovery of sock-puppetry). While the electoral commission has broad authority to solve "problems" with the election, I can't see the presence of an inactive candidate from preventing the election from proceeding normally. As the election style is individual-approval, votes of approval for any one candidate won't prevent votes of approval for any other candidate. If you want to propose a new rule that candidates that don't participate in q&a get disqualified, you may do so at next year's RFC (and maybe make a note about it here for reference). — xaosflux Talk 23:17, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is longstanding text at the top of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Questions which states: Candidates may refuse to answer any questions that they do not wish to, with the understanding, however, that not answering a question may be perceived negatively by the community. I understand this to mean that, similar to RfA, all questions here are technically optional, so choosing not to answer any question would not be valid grounds to disqualify a candidate from appearing on the ballot. Mz7 (talk) 23:22, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all for the responses. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly Busy

Hi, just wanted to let everyone know that I'm a little busy with some dissertation stuff right now. I still check in on the election pages a few times per day. But just in case anyone sees my activity plument I wanted to let y'all know everything is fine, I am reachable and keeping myself up to date with everything. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 06:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2022/Coordination&oldid=1125226084"