User:Reaper Eternal/Election thoughts 2015
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
These are my thoughts on the various candidates. Note that, in order to try to promote the candidates I think are best suited for the job, I will only support at most nine candidates. The rest of the ones whom I would have supported will receive neutral votes. I shade the background of the table when I've reached my final decision on the candidate and am very unlikely to change my vote. I don't post everything I find on this page with a million links to encourage people to do their own research.
Skip to the results table if you just want my brief summary without the dross. :)
Crucial evidence
[edit]Level II desysop of Yngvadottir
[edit]For reversing an arbitration enforcement block out of process, Yngvadottir (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) is desysoped. They may only regain adminship after a successful RfA.
- Supporting: Courcelles, Thryduulf, Seraphimblade, Guerillero, Salvio giuliano, LFaraone
- Opposing: None
- Recusing: GorillaWarfare
- Inactive: AGK, Euryalus, Roger Davies, DeltaQuad
For the Arbitration Committee, Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:10, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
This appallingly-bad misuse of the "emergency desysop" procedures means that I cannot support any of these arbitrators in the future.
CCI
[edit]I can't support someone with an active CCI!
An arbitration case regarding Civility enforcement has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
- [Other editors' sanctions]
- Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
- All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
- ...
For the Arbitration Committee: Mlpearc (powwow) 02:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Results table
[edit]Being an engineer, I like tables. So here's one for your viewing pleasure!
| Candidate | Years of experience | Thoughts | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| AKS.9955 (talk · contribs) (nom) |  0
|
 Withdrawn
| |
| Callanecc (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
He generally does what he says in his nomination statement, and his experience on OTRS and AUSC is another plus. Overall, he's an admin who I believe will be a net positive on the arbitration committee. On the other hand, I have had issues with some of his administrative decisions where he appears to only look at one side of the argument. However, those cases are in the vast minority, and I trust that he will be more careful on ArbCom.
|
 Weak support
|
| Casliber (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) |  3
|
He has an excellent track record on the arbitration committee, is an excellent editor with numerous articles contributed, and performs excellently with the admin mop. Easy support here. | Strong support
|
| Drmies (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
Drmies is a very thoughtful administrator with years of experience. Seeing both him and Kudpung run makes me happy. Drmies is an excellent content editor and will make an excellent arbitrator. I wish he spent less time on ANI, though. | Strong support
|
| Gamaliel (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
He's generally unobtrusive and a good-quality editor, though he may spend a bit too much time on ANI, like Drmies. Last time, in 2013, I ruled him down to neutral due to an insufficient number of seats. I think this time he'll get my support. | Support
|
| GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 2
|
While I have regularly disagreed with her positions, GorillaWarfare is still a strong, level-headed arbitrator with two years of experience. Her tenure largely speaks for itself. I trust that she will recuse in the cases in which she is involved or has overly-strong points of view. Her strong opinions in feminism and other, related areas do not disqualify her; rather, as long as she is careful to keep her views from clouding her decisions, as I trust she will, I will support her.
Regarding the "un-recusal" mentioned by other commentators, I believe she knows now that it was an incredibly...shortsighted...move and that it will not be repeated. |
Support
|
| Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
Desysopped for violating WP:INVOLVED and WP:WHEEL by civility-blocking an editor |
 Oppose
|
| Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
He's an excellent content editor, but this was just too much. I'm sorry, but that is not acceptable for an arbitrator. Similar uncooperativeness recently, so this isn't a one-time communication problem. | Oppose
|
| Keilana (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
Keilana is an admin and functionary with a level head on her shoulders. She's an excellent editor who will make an excellent arbitrator. I've had the pleasure of working with her on the functionaries team. | Strong support
|
| Kelapstick (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
He seems generally thoughtful, and has done some decent content work. His OTRS work also appears to be good (from what little I can see), and, in my interactions with him, I have largely had a good impression. Overall, he seems to be the type of person who I could envision working out on ArbCom. | Support
|
| Kevin Gorman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
Hell no. This admin does his best to generate drama and uses his toolkit and time trying to get his "enemies" and those he sees as allies of his "enemies" banned. He is more interested in politics than improving the encyclopedia, which is exactly the worst trait for an arbitrator. His tendency to inflame situations and generate drama make him the worst candidate by far. He will be a tremendous detriment to the arbitration committee and to his fellow arbitrators if he gets elected. | Hell no
|
| Kirill Lokshin (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 4
|
This admin is an experienced former arbitrator with terms going back to 2007. I think he will provide a strong amount of institutional memory, so to speak, to the upcoming ArbCom given his long tenure. He makes some strong points in his nomination statement, particularly regarding the lack of timely decision-making. His point regarding delegation of some tasks to either other experienced editors or the community at large is also strong. I certainly don't remember any issues with his arbitration terms, though I was not around for most of them. He also has done some good work on featured articles. On the other hand, he returns from his break with a chip on his shoulder. I find his running now to also be dubious in nature, since it appears that he is running with an explicit agenda against another editor, which I absolutely cannot support. His conduct in the current arbitration case has been generally poor. I cannot support him given these irreconcilable deviations from the expected behavior of an arbitrator. |
Strong oppose
|
| Kudpung (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
I have had the pleasure of many positive interactions with Kudpung. He is a very experienced administrator with a thoughtful demeanor. His temperament is exactly the type I want to see on ArbCom. Easy support. | Strong support
|
| LFaraone (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 2
|
This admin is an experienced current arbitaror and a good checkuser. Supported the appallingly-bad Level II desysop of Yngvadottir. | Oppose
|
| MarkBernstein (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
This seems, at first glance, to be a slightly pointy nomination. However, he makes a lot of good points regarding the excess bureaucracy around ArbCom. |
 Neutral
|
| Mahensingha (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
Way too little experience. EDIT: Now blocked for forum shopping for one-sided sanctions and edit warring. I'm sorry, but just no. | Strong oppose
|
| NE Ent (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
He's one of the administrators' noticeboard for incidents regulars, which is a negative in and of itself. Additionally, his contributions there appear to be generally not very helpful in terms of finding a solution to the problem. For this reason, I will have to oppose. | Oppose
|
| Opabinia regalis (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
Ophabinia is an admin with a level head on her shoulders. She's an excellent editor who will make an excellent arbitrator. I have nothing negative to make me think twice about supporting her. | Strong support
|
| Rich Farmbrough (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
A former admin, who may or may not have been unfairly desysopped. In any event, he was far too divisive and tended to have poor communication regarding his bots. Arbitrators need very good people skills. I would like to make this statement, however: He's an excellent editor and I would probably support him for adminship again. However, I can't support him to be one of Wikipedia's main dispute resolution "experts". | Oppose
|
| Salvidrim! (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 0
|
Withdrawn
| |
| Samtar (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
Withdrawn
| |
| Thryduulf (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) | 1
|
This admin is a currently-sitting arbitrator with a year of experience. Opposing per Level II desysop of Yngvadottir. | Oppose
|
| Timtrent (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
This candidate has, sadly, withdrawn. He would have been an excellent arbitrator, but real life comes before website administration. |
Withdrawn
|
| Wildthing61476 (talk · contribs) (nom) | 0
|
This user does not have enough experience in my opinion. | Oppose
|