 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
December 2014 Update: The results of the election were announced on December 17. Congratulations and sympathies to the new arbs!
Disclaimer: This page expresses my personal opinions and observations only. I encourage all voters to do their own research on the candidates.
Overview edit
For those who aren't sure what this is about: The Arbitration Committee is part of the Wikipedia dispute resolution process. In fact, ArbCom is pretty much the last stop. For a general real world analogy, ArbCom is sort of like the Supreme Court of Wikipedia. The arbitrators don't make decisions on article content, but they do issue rulings on complex disputes relating to user conduct, and they have considerable authority within the wiki-culture. Members of the committee are usually elected for two-year terms (sometimes one or three), with a new batch elected each year.
In August/September 2014, an RfC took place concerning the format of the 2014 elections, at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014. As a result of the RfC, this election is being run slightly differently from past years, in that there is not a batch of general questions for the candidates to answer, though individual questions can still be asked.
The self-nomination period ran from November 9 to November 18, and the voting period ran from November 24 to December 7. Results will usually be posted 1–2 weeks after that (in 2013 they were posted on December 16). For details on voting eligibility, see the 2014 election page.
For this 2014/2015 cycle, 6 of the 15 arbitrators will remain on the committee from previous elections, with nine new arbitrators to be elected. The eight candidates who receive the most votes will serve two-year terms, and the ninth will serve a one-year term.
This page that you are reading, contains my (Elonka's) thoughts on the 2014 crop of ArbCom candidates. My general standards for a candidate are: admin access, integrity, experience with article-writing, time-available for the project, and hands-on knowledge of the dispute resolution processes.
To see my thoughts on previous elections, check the history of:
Candidates edit
- Candidates self-nominated from November 9–18, 2014. Voting ran from November 24 to December 7. Voting results were posted on December 17.
- Calidum (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
Oppose. Not an admin. Ran for ArbCom in 2011 as Hot Stop (talk · contribs) and came in last. 59 in support, 414 opposed.
- Courcelles (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
Support. Previous arbitrator, 2012–2013. One of the good ones, happy to have him back.
- DeltaQuad (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Admin, checkuser. Previously ran for ArbCom in 2011. At the time, I opposed because he had given up his admin bit before the election to "take a break from being an admin", then declared his arb candidacy as a non-admin, then asked for the bit back in the middle of the election. That was years ago though, so I have no trouble supporting this time around.
- DGG (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided
- Dougweller (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided
- Dusti (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Euryalus (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Undecided, leaning towards oppose. Seems fairly level-headed, and has spent a fair bit of time at ANI and AfD, but doesn't appear to have any experience with arbitration or mediation (that I can find). I would prefer a candidate who has more hands-on experience of the dispute-resolution processes. I would be more comfortable if Euralyus had offered a statement or two at Arb cases, even as an uninvolved observer, before jumping in and running for the Committee itself.
- Geni (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Ran for ArbCom before. I took another look this time but after reading Geni's answers to questions, I still would not be comfortable supporting Geni's candidacy.
- Guerillero (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Admin, oversighter. He ran for ArbCom twice before, I opposed both times due to concerns about time-available, and his weak answers to questions. This year he has been available more consistently, his answers are good, and he clearly has experience with the dispute resolution processes so I am comfortable supporting this time around.
- Isarra (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin
- Kraxler (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin
- Ks0stm (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Admin, oversighter, OTRS. I opposed his 2012 run, but supported the 2013 run, and am supporting again this year.
- Salvio giuliano (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Current arbitrator, running for re-election
- Stanistani (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin
- Technical 13 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks confirmed) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin
- Thryduulf (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Longterm admin, has extensive experience with dispute resolution, and good answers to question. No GAs or FAs, so not a perfect candidate, but definitely a good one.
- Wbm1058 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Oppose. Not an admin
- Yunshui (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questions
- Support. Admin, OTRS, seems to have a reasonable amount of experience with dispute resolution, and good answers to questions.
Withdrawn edit
Hahc21 (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questionsUndecided, leaning toward support. New admin since March 2014 (on his third run). As an Arb Clerk, has a good idea of what he's in for. I do see some concerns from other guide-writers, so I'm still researching, but my general inclination is to support.
PhilKnight (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questionsUndecided. Previous arbitrator, 2011–2012. I opposed him in his previous run.[1]
Secret (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks) • questionsAn administrator, at least for the nano-second. When I last checked in 2013 he had gone through 11 RfAs, though I haven't counted recently.
| | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |