Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Coren

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008‎ | Vote

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Larno Man (talk | contribs) at 02:12, 2 December 2008 (→‎Support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Coren

Hello!
I've been a Wikipedian since 2003. While my contribution to the encyclopedia contents have always been modest, I've done everything I can to help protect and support the work of our invaluable contributors by fighting vandals, checking copyvios, and gnomish work. As an administrator, I've gained a reputation of being a "hardliner", who has little patience for gamers, those who destroy the hard work of others, or corrupt our encyclopedia to make a point or a political statement. Accordingly, I am one who tends to act decisively to protect and defend, mindful of the legal traps that lie around biographies, editor privacy, and copyright compliance.
I've been a clerk since January, able to observe ArbCom's successes and failings up close, and I feel the current Committee is too soft collectively to be effective as it must: an injection of fresh "hardline" blood may be just what it needs to tackle the increasingly difficult issues that face it. Being willing to sit on ArbCom may require a little idealistic insanity, but Wikipedia is worth the pain.
I am seeking the mandate to bring a some energy and "down-to-earth-ness" to the Committee, and to help tackle what I feel should be its priorities:
  • More awareness of a growing issue that is poisoning the very essence of collaborative editing that makes Wikipedia possible: real-world factions that vie for control over articles, turning them into polemical battlegrounds where surface civility is used to cover bias, tendentiousness and even harassment. ArbCom needs to take a strong stance against that sort of "polite disruption" and those who use our rules of civility as weapons, recognize that long-term warriors are toxic, not vested, and investigate beyond surface behavior issues.
  • Less timidity in addressing issues related to contents (POV warring, tag teams, academic dishonesty). While it is appropriate that the Committee never rules on contents, it should be more active at curtailing content disputes. Academic integrity should become a priority; unlike "simple" incivility, the damage caused by editors misquoting, plagiarizing and editorializing destroys the credibility of our encyclopedia.
  • Increased transparency in the arbitration process, the Arbitrators must explain their decisions in better detail beyond a simple "aye/nay" and expose their reasoning and justification. It is important that the community understands why the Committee rules as it does, not just receive seemingly arbitrary edicts from "on high".
Thank you for your consideration.

Support

  1. Support. Rschen7754 (T C) 00:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Nufy8 (talk) 00:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Black Kite 00:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. DurovaCharge! 00:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Dlabtot (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Scott MacDonald (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. Further comments available at my ACE2008 notes page. --Elonka 00:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --PeaceNT (talk) 00:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. PhilKnight (talk) 01:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Avruch T 01:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. kurykh 01:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Protonk (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. See reasoning. east718 01:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support Sumoeagle179 (talk) 01:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. I had made a list of people who I would be find with (though not necessarily in top 7) on ArbCom and this candidate was one of those people. - NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 01:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Pcap ping 01:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. iMatthew 01:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. RockManQReview me 02:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Atmoz (talk) 02:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. ~ Riana ⁂ 02:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. L'Aquatique[talk] 02:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. John Reaves 02:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. ҉ I support him. --Mixwell!Talk 02:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --Koji† 02:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Daniel (talk) 02:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. rootology (C)(T) 02:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support John254 03:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support. Tony Fox (arf!) 03:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Rjd0060 (talk) 03:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Weak support (only in that I more strongly support other candidates) - Would be a net positive if elected, low drama factor and cool head and mature outlook in conflict situations. Orderinchaos 03:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support. (rationale) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support, never had any problem with him as a collaborator and I have always been impressed by his admin work. Daniel Case (talk) 05:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. A good candidate to ascend to the post. Mike H. Fierce! 05:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Synchronism (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. While I don't always agree with him, I think he will do a good job. I have not seen anything which makes me doubt this. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. Cirt (talk) 07:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. — Athaenara ✉ 07:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support. Rockpocket 08:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. - Has large doses of WP:CLUE. // roux   editor review09:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. Not necessarily familiar with him, but impressed by his ideas here. Rebecca (talk) 09:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Yes, why not. Stifle (talk) 10:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  44. — neuro(talk) 10:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 11:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support as part of a ticket. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Sure --B (talk) 13:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Per my reasons at User:MBisanz/ACE2008 MBisanz talk 13:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. Jehochman Talk 13:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support PseudoOne (talk) 15:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Leatherstocking (talk) 16:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support: not a big fan of the Kmweber unblock, but after talking to him, I'm impressed by his sense of ethics. Good show. Sceptre (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support, Tim Vickers (talk) 18:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support, strongly. Completely the right attitude. AGK 18:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Seen good things from Coren. Acalamari 19:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Synergy 20:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support--Taprobanus (talk) 20:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support ϢereSpielChequers 22:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  60. No pressing concerns, and would rather have this user than some others. GlassCobra 23:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support - lots of relevant experience, seems very competent. Warofdreams talk 23:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support --Nepaheshgar (talk) 00:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support This guy's actually got some clue... ST47 (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support ---Larno (talk) 02:12, 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) 00:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose. Talks tough, which is fine, but record suggest the user aspires to be the consummate insider, overly involved in wikipolitics/drama for its own sake; does not relate to content creators; far too many similarities to the busybody-admin model that has served so many users so poorly.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Voyaging(talk) 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose Majorly talk 00:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. per His Fatness Steven Walling (talk) 00:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. krimpet✽ 00:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose this was a tough one. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose - too much of a enforcer mentality. I did a CU Sfacets once, which came back on opposite sides of the world, but Coren said it was him anyway. YellowMonkey (click here to choose Australia's next top model) 01:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Sfacets said that he frequently traveled between Australia and Europe. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not within 3-4 hours. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Sorry. That checkuser was appalling. --Mixwell!Talk 02:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. EconomicsGuy (talk) 02:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Because I feel that his wikignome work, while an asset to the project, is no substitute for article work in terms of how to hand disputes. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    L'Aquatique[talk] 02:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC) I AM AN IDIOT! Forgot that when you EC it shows the whole page.... L'Aquatique[talk][reply]
  12. ArbCom must be disbanded and replaced with a system which actually works. Sorry, I oppose. Bstone (talk) 02:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Heimstern Läufer (talk) (why, you ask?) 02:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Supports 'strengthening' (read: making more complex) BLP, which is an overly bureaucratic mess of 'special authority'. Prodego talk 03:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. A tad too prone for drama for my tastes. Master&Expert (Talk) 04:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. —Locke Cole • t • c 05:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose per Prodego, BLP needs simplification and reining in, not let further out of control. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Brilliantine (talk) 09:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Mailer Diablo 10:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Ronnotel (talk) 10:59, 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 12:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose --CrohnieGalTalk 13:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose. Viriditas (talk) 13:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose Far too prone to drama. Arbcom is a soap opera that needs to be cancelled and reworked into an actual committee, rather than renewed for another season with brand new cast members. SashaNein (talk) 14:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. — CharlotteWebb 14:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Oppose Colchicum (talk) 15:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Moreschi (talk) 15:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Oppose Verbal chat 15:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. ~ priyanath talk 16:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Oppose ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 17:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Oppose JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 17:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Davewild (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Oppose. --A NobodyMy talk 19:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Oppose.Biophys (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Oppose. Among other minor issues, not having his own archives properly linked until recently is a signal of insufficient attention to detail and caring about others that is required of an arbitrator. Franamax (talk) 22:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Oppose--Caspian blue 01:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Alexfusco5 02:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Coren&oldid=255335794"