User:Elonka/ACE2022
 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
Disclaimer: This page expresses my personal opinions and observations only. I encourage all voters to do their own research on the candidates.
- Voting is now closed, and the results should be posted some time in December.
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 September 2022, an RfC took place concerning the format of the 2022 elections, at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2022/Candidates.
Candidates self-nominated from November 13 to 22, and the voting period ran from November 29 to December 12. For details on voting eligibility, see the 2022 election page.
For this 2022/2023 cycle, there are eight empty seats, for candidates who will be elected for either a one-or two-year term. For details on required percentage of support, check here.
My standards
[edit]This page that you are reading contains my (Elonka's) thoughts on the current crop of ArbCom candidates. My general standards for a candidate are:
- Admin access
- Integrity
- Experience with article-writing
- Time-available for the project
- Hands-on knowledge of the dispute resolution processes.
I am also a strong supporter of civility, as I believe that rude behavior on the project can drive away other editors, and I would hope that ArbCom would help support that view; however, I also understand that not everyone has the same feelings about civility, so I am willing to support arbitrator candidates for other reasons than just that one.
Past votes
[edit]To see my thoughts on previous elections, check the history of:
Candidates
[edit]- The self-nomination period for candidates ran from November 13-22, during which candidates post their statements on the candidates page. Voting ran from November 29th until December 12th.
- Barkeep49
- Support. Current arbitrator, good well-rounded editor.
- BoldLuis
- Oppose. Not an administrator. Should run for admin first, before ArbCom.
- CaptainEek
- Current arbitrator, running for re-election.
- GeneralNotability
- Undecided. Looks good so far, but I'd like to do more research before deciding.
- Guerillero
- Support. Has been an arbitrator in the past. Good well-rounded editor.
- L235
- Support. Current arbitrator, has been a clerk as well. Understands the job.
- Moneytrees
- Undecided
- Primefac
- Likely support. Has high-level (bureaucrat) access, trusted member of the community.
- Robert McClenon
- Oppose. Longtime editor, but still not an administrator after two tries. He has tried to run for ArbCom before, and my opinion remains the same: If he can't muster sufficient support to be an administrator, he shouldn't be an arbitrator. ArbCom case are already controversial enough.
- Sdrqaz
- Undecided.
- SilkTork
- Support. Has been an arbitrator in the past. Good article-writing experience, understands the job.
- Tamzin
- Undecided.
| These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |