Home • Search • Translate
Page extended-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Risker

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It’s created by people from all over the world, drawn to the opportunity to share their knowledge, skills and talent, without material benefit. From brilliant writers to wikignomes, with many in between, there is one common thread: we all have hopeful hearts. We see value and potential in freely sharing knowledge with the world, in a single, widely encompassing source.

The same thing that makes Wikipedia special is also its Achilles heel. Bringing together such a large group of people from different cultures, social skills and educational levels means there is plenty of room for normal human disagreements. Disputes are magnified and can quickly escalate as a result of the imperfection of written communication combined with strong feelings and divergent interpretations of policy, English usage, and intention. When behaviour violates our policies, we employ dispute resolution. These processes seem to have more good intention than good effect, because they often fail to change the behaviours or resolve the dispute.

Arbitration is intended to address editorial behavioural issues with the goal of removing roadblocks to the continued improvement of the encyclopedia, yet it tends to do this in a remarkably superficial way. Instead of drilling down to identify the root cause(s) of the problems, it is largely dependent on the commentary of interested parties and context-free “diffs” that give only snapshots of often complex situations. Transparency is not a priority. Well-considered commentary is drowned out by acrimonious hyperbole and self-serving rhetoric. Arbitrators frequently fail to identify the heart of the problem, and their decisions give the appearance of taking the path of least resistance rather than the path to resolution. All who are involved come away disillusioned and disheartened, regardless of the final decision. The process itself exacerbates the harm it seeks to halt.

My contribution, should I be appointed to the Arbitration Committee, will be to ask questions and expect—and give—straightforward responses; to prevent arbitration pages from becoming just another battleground; and to encourage editors uninvolved in the conflict to develop evidence that dispassionately illustrates the core issues instead of the peripheral distractions. We need to re-establish the Arbitration Committee as a place to resolve disputes in a collaborative and positive way without inflicting further harm on ourselves, our hopeful hearts. Because, at the end of the day, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.


Support

  1. Strong support. Cool Hand Luke 00:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  2. Strong support-- Maxim (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  3. Nufy8 ( talk) 00:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  4. Support. Antandrus (talk) 00:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  5. Only (Considered) Support Again, I shall be supporting only one candidate and, despite some other very worthy candidates, this is the one I feel is the best. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  6. Cla68 ( talk) 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  7. Black Kite 00:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  8. Support Captain panda 00:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  9. Sluzzelin talk 00:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  10. Privatemusings ( talk) 00:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  11. Durova Charge! 00:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  12. ~the editorofthewiki ( talk/ contribs/ editor review)~ 00:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  13. Support. -- Alecmconroy ( talk) 00:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    upgrade to Strong Support per my radical manifesto wherein I pledge to support those elected -- Alecmconroy ( talk) 23:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  14. – Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  15. Support - Shot info ( talk) 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  16. Rationale. Giggy ( talk) 00:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  17. ~  priyanath  talk 00:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  18. Very Strong Support Willking1979 ( talk) 00:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  19. Strong support SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  20. Mackensen (talk) 00:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  21. Support per User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes, and personal trust. Jehochman Talk 00:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  22. -- Kanonkas :  Talk  00:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  23. Support. Mathsci ( talk) 00:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  24. Support - smart, ethical candidate with good tracing records of dispute resolutions Alex Bakharev ( talk) 00:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  25. Support but only if you promise to keep up the amazing effort. :P Ottava Rima ( talk) 01:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  26. Most definitely. :) krimpet ✽ 01:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  27. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  28. iride scent 01:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  29. Strong support Experienced, trustworthy and chock-full of good old common sense. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 01:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  30. Steven Walling (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  31. Not always in agreement with Risker on various things, but agreeing with me on everything is only one characteristic of a great arbitrator. There are others, and Risker has them. Avruch T 01:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  32. Strong support Wise, fair, does not play people against each other, etc etc. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model) 01:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  33. Heimstern Läufer (talk) (why, you ask?) 01:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  34. See reasoning. east718 01:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  35. 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 me My work 01:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  36. PhilKnight ( talk) 01:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  37. -- Avi ( talk) 01:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  38. -- Koji † 02:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  39. iMatthew 02:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  40. Consistently impressive. Ceoil ( talk) 02:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  41. Strong strong support, great candidate and no fool. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk) 02:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  42. EconomicsGuy ( talk) 02:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  43. Graham 87 02:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  44. Support. -- Tenmei ( talk) 19:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  45. -- Euryalus ( talk) 02:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  46. ~ Riana ⁂ 02:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  47. Atmoz ( talk) 02:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  48. Good content editor with the encyclopedia's best interest at heart. Agne Cheese/ Wine 02:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  49. John Vandenberg ( chat) 02:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  50. L'Aquatique talk 02:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  51. Strong Support Yes, definitely. J.delanoy gabs adds 02:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  52. Daniel ( talk) 02:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  53. -- MPerel 02:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  54. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  55. Strong Support. rootology ( C)( T) 03:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  56. Support Will make an excellent Arb. GJC 03:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  57. Support Per content contributions and answers to User:MBisanz/ACE2008/Guide/Risker. Dabomb87 ( talk) 03:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  58. David Shankbone 03:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  59. Support. Smart, calming, incisive, really cares. All-around super.-- The Fat Man Who Never Came Back ( talk) 03:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  60. Support Have had a strong positive opinion of this editor since before they became an admin, and nothing I have seen from them has shaken my impression that they are intelligent, mature and capable, good people skills, and will manage well in the sort of difficult multi-faceted situations ArbCom has to deal with. Orderinchaos 03:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  61. Support. The fact that she was essentially drafted into running for ArbCom gives me confidence. ( full rationale) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  62. Risker has a lot of experience at ArbCom. She is level-headed and sensible and I believe she would make a great arbitrator. Master&Expert ( Talk) 04:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  63. Support Kingturtle ( talk) 05:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  64. – Outriggr  § 05:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  65. Support. Eusebeus ( talk) 06:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  66. Synchronism ( talk) 06:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  67. – Moondyne 07:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  68. Support Although I disagree with Risker on a lot of issues, I trust this user to be fair - and you can't ask for more than that in an arb. Brilliantine ( talk) 07:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  69. Support لenna vecia 08:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  70. Support: good brain, good editor and a safe pair of hands. Giano ( talk) 08:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  71. -- Scott MacDonald ( talk) 09:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  72. Support Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  73. Support Avenue ( talk) 10:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  74. Oldelpaso ( talk) 10:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  75. Support. - Clueful, insightful, intelligent. Yes please. // roux    editor review 10:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  76. Support, seems levelheaded and likely to come up with useful ideas, and doesn't seem likely to exceed ArbCom's scope or try to create policy. Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  77. Stifle ( talk) 10:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  78. — neuro (talk) 10:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  79. Support Nancy talk 10:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  80. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 11:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  81. Support Woody ( talk) 12:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  82. Support Verbal chat 12:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  83. Support 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 13:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  84. Support -- CrohnieGal Talk 13:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  85. Support. Regards, Huldra ( talk) 14:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  86. Very solid candidate. Moreschi ( talk) 15:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  87. Support ATren ( talk) 15:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  88. Support inclusivedisjunction ( talk) 15:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  89. Support PseudoOne ( talk) 15:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  90. RxS ( talk) 15:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  91. Support Scorpion 0422 15:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  92. Tex ( talk) 16:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  93. Strong Support -I have significant points of disagreement with her at present but I am confident that after she is elected, she'll come around just fine. But more importantly, Risker knows where her towel is. And then some. Thank goodness ArbCom in its infinite wisdom recently passed over making her a CU so the workload didn't scare her off. why my vote? blast me for it! ++ Lar: t/ c 16:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  94. Support. I trust Risker's judgement. Karanacs ( talk) 16:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  95. Support. Sceptre ( talk) 16:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  96. Support. From her honesty and high-class contributions over time, Risker is the perfect candidate, even though the Utopian rhetoric of her election statement makes me feel old and cynical. Bishonen | talk 17:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC). reply
  97. Support. She gets it. That's all. — Gavia immer ( talk) 17:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  98. Support. Alæxis ¿question? 17:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  99. -- Kbdank71 17:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  100. Thank you for answering my questions: good answers. Acalamari 17:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  101. Pcap ping 17:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  102. Strong support I opposed her RfA, don't know what I was thinking. She'll be the token hockey loving representative to the ArbCom. Enough for me. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  103. Support, Tim Vickers ( talk) 18:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  104. Strong support- Allegedly is female. We need more female arbs, so women can approach about problems with sexual predators on wiki etc. One is not enough as there would be cases where anyone is friends with someone and should recuse (speaking generally, not about any specific case.) Sticky Parkin 18:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  105. Support. AGK 18:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  106. Support. -- A Nobody My talk 18:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  107. support - Yay, Risker! -- Rocksanddirt ( talk) 18:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  108. Support Iain99 Balderdash and piffle 19:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  109. I have the sense we frequently don't agree about various issues, but I have to respect and support the mature and thoughtful attitude on display here. MastCell  Talk 19:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  110. PeterSymonds ( talk) 19:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  111. — Wknight94 ( talk) 19:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  112. Close decision. Davewild ( talk) 19:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  113. Syn ergy 19:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  114. If I could support only one candidate, Risker is who it would be. S.D.D.J. Jameson 20:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  115. Support on the balance, she will, I think, be a reasonable arbitrator. -- Regents Park ( bail out your boat) 20:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  116. Support Clearly a net benefit to the project. spryde | talk 20:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  117. Support MikeHobday ( talk) 20:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  118. Support -- Suntag ☼ 21:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  119. Support as I suckered her into her RfA, how could I not subject her to more torture...--- Balloonman PoppaBalloon 22:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  120. - Hit bull, win steak (Moo!) 22:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  121. Support -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 22:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  122. Support One of the soundest, calmest, most sensible contributors I've seen, and a real asset to the project. Kafka Liz ( talk) 22:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  123. Tiptoety talk 22:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  124. Support. Franamax ( talk) 22:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  125. Nousernamesleft ( talk) 22:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  126. Forgive me, I think you're a suitable candidate. Support, and may God have mercy on your soul. DS ( talk) 22:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  127. Support JPG-GR ( talk) 23:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  128. He handled wonderfully a BLP where I was implied. Very good judgement. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 23:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  129. Support ... Modernist ( talk) 23:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  130. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  131. Support Best of luck. Glass Cobra 23:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  132. Support - seems level-headed, with good answers to questions. Warofdreams talk 00:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  133. Support -- Nepaheshgar ( talk) 00:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    User is very qualified, but I might have chosen more than 7. I am glad he will get in without this vote. -- Nepaheshgar ( talk) 07:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Support Apparently I can vote for more than 7 and I am glad I am voting for the right candidate.-- Nepaheshgar ( talk) 07:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  134. Support Dr. e X treme 01:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  135. Support A ni Mate 01:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  136. Support --- Larno ( talk) 02:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  137. Alex fusco 5 02:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  138. -- Moni3 ( talk) 03:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  139. Support. Khoi khoi 03:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  140. Support Keeper ǀ 76 03:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  141. Support I was impressed with Risker's responses to the questions. Nrswanson ( talk) 03:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  142. Support. SlimVirgin talk| edits 04:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  143. ѕwirlвoy  ₪ 05:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  144. Support. Seems to have clue, and Arbcom needs more women. Clayoquot ( talk | contribs) 05:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  145. Support. Everyking ( talk) 06:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  146. Too smart to pass up. I wince at "education levels", "social skills" and "English usage" in the candidate statement because I get tired of seeing cultural "explanations" used as a mendacious cloak for blatant, counterproductive attacks and time-wasting. On the whole, though, Risker clearly has the purpose of the project in mind in her thinking. -- JayHenry ( talk) 06:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  147. Support as I think Risker would do well on ArbCom. I agree with many of the comments above as well. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 11:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  148. Support -- Joopercoopers ( talk) 12:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  149. Support Tikiwont ( talk) 13:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  150. Bucketsofg 14:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  151. Support Jayen 466 14:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  152. Support. Kablammo ( talk) 14:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  153. Mike R ( talk) 14:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  154. Support -- Aude ( talk) 15:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  155. support.-- Babakexorramdin ( talk) 16:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  156. Support. Novickas ( talk) 17:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  157. Support — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 18:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  158. qp10qp ( talk) 18:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  159. Support. LLDMart ( talk) 19:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  160. Support. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  161. Support for her stated commitment to ask questions and gather information, rather than relying on the flawed evidence system. I hope she follows through with this idea. Chick Bowen 21:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  162. Yes! ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  163. Support -- maclean 00:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  164. Support MOOOOOPS ( talk) 01:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  165. Support -- CreazySuit ( talk) 01:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  166. jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 01:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  167. — m acy 02:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  168. Support knowledgeable, clever. -- Raayen ( talk) 04:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  169. Support - of course! She's a super admin - I've seen her at work many, many time. Does a tough job with minimum drama - Alison ❤ 04:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  170. Lego Kontribs TalkM 05:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  171. - auburnpilot  talk 06:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  172. DrKiernan ( talk) 09:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  173. Support: Careful, considerate, diplomatic, and committed to the principles and policies of Wikipedia. Geogre ( talk) 10:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  174. Support: Natcong ( talk) 12:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  175. Strongest Possible Support Outstanding track,civil,impartial ,diplomatic and yet firm after careful consideration of track. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 13:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  176. Support. Clueful, level-headed and highly experienced - exactly what we need on the ArbCom. -- ChrisO ( talk) 18:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  177. Support - Tājik ( talk) 19:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  178. Support Yes! ~ Eliz 81 (C) 20:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  179. Support Tony Fox (arf!) 22:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  180. Support vi5in [talk] 23:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  181. jo, -- Jan eissfeldt ( talk) 00:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  182. Support. R. Baley ( talk) 02:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  183. Strong Support per comments by PMAnderson below. -- Jayron32. talk. contribs 04:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  184. Support The ability to remain neutral in disputes while remaining warm and courteous is quite important. Risker manages to embody this, in my view. Kylu ( talk) 05:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  185. Support: Law shoot! 06:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  186. Naerii, aka THE GROOVE 06:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  187. I certainly don't see why not. Grand master ka 06:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  188. Support -- Versa geek 07:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  189. Support -- Ivan Štambuk ( talk) 07:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  190. Support -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 07:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  191. Support -- Chapultepec ( talk) 08:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  192. Guettarda ( talk) 08:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  193. Support - answers to the questions look generally very good, and I'd be lying if I claimed not to be influenced by the number of names above mine on this list belonging to users I highly respect. Mild reservations, that I hope will be taken under advisement: i. I would much prefer that all arbitrators divulge their identities to the community; ii. I'm not sure Risker demonstrates a full appreciation of the dysfunction of Wikipedia's current governance model (though she hits some of the points); and iii. I'd encourage Risker to do some reading into the BLP problem (Wikipedia Review and User:Doc glasgow/The BLP problem are both excellent resources in this regard), as her answers in this regard are somewhat lacking. I've fully reviewed the opposers' rationales and do not find them persuasive. Sarcasticidealist ( talk) 09:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  194. Support dougweller ( talk) 14:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  195. A man in space ( talk) 14:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  196. Support Tony (talk) 16:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  197. Support. Baku87 ( talk) 17:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  198. Support Happy‑ melon 18:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  199. Support-- Tinu Cherian - 18:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  200. Support But please don't let Arbcom prevent you from producing/editing/helping create/maintain quality articles. Budding Journalist 18:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  201. I have been unable to support any candidate so far, due to either not knowing who they are (neutral, no vote), or knowing exactly who they are (oppose!) from their actions and constant entanglements in drama over the past year. I've seen your name quite a few times over the past year in several messy 'warzones', but I am putting my faith on you not becoming a drama queen like several of the other candidates and sitting arbs. Please don't make me regret this. SashaNein ( talk) 19:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  202. Support Slrubenstein | Talk 20:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  203. A voice of sanity. Support. Kosebamse ( talk) 21:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Support A very decent candidate. Please note this is a new account as the password on the old one ( User:Peter Damian) was lost. I have many 10's of thousands of edits on my old accounts so please accept this vote. Peter Damian II ( talk) 21:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    I'm sorry, your unblock terms do not allow you edit, or vote within this namespace.-- Tznkai ( talk) 03:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  204. Support. Solid, long-term, stable and decent Wikipedian. Guy ( Help!) 21:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  205. support William M. Connolley ( talk) 22:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  206. Support A first-class Wikipedian. Poltair ( talk) 22:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  207. Supporting both a good candidate, and to counteract the ridiculous opposes. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 23:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  208. TS 00:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  209. Wronkiew ( talk) 02:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  210. Support-- MONGO 02:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  211. Support for someone who sees more than "science" in their world view. Julia Rossi ( talk) 02:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  212. Crystal whacker ( My 2008 ArbCom votes) 04:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  213. Support -- Samir 05:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  214. Terence ( talk) 09:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  215. Support -- Hans Adler ( talk) 11:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  216. Support. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ( (⊕)) 13:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  217. Support JeremyMcCracken ( talk) ( contribs) 14:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  218. Support. One of the best candidate options. -- Hectorian ( talk) 14:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  219. Support N p holmes ( talk) 15:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  220. support JoshuaZ ( talk) 17:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  221. I wasn't too familiar with you in regards to arbcom matters, and as a result I actually read your answers to some of the questions, as well as looked through some of your DR participation. What I found is a user who makes a lot of sense and knows what they are bringing to the table. The second place standing almsot surprised me at first, but after reading up on you I find you deserving of it and my support. Wizardman 19:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  222. Support -- Cactus.man ✍ 20:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  223. Strong support: looks like a very thoughtful candidate. We need someone who is ready to take responsibility, but also give every issue a thoughtful analysis. Randomran ( talk) 23:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  224. Support. Was intrigued by Sandy Georgia's comments, but it was really something that touched me in the statement above that did it for me. Tiamut talk 00:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  225. Support Diderot's dreams ( talk) 04:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  226. Support.-- Kubigula ( talk) 05:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  227. Has the right attitude to me. Full rationale: User:Camaron/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  228. Support - AdjustShift ( talk) 16:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  229. Looks like a good person though at this point I'm not sure that an ArbCom is even a useful thing to have. Haukur ( talk) 17:12, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  230. Support - EdJohnston ( talk) 19:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  231. Support - Jd2718 ( talk) 19:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  232. Support - The very first candidate I've voted for. Nandesuka ( talk) 21:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  233. Support - Pointillist ( talk) 22:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  234. Support - Fainites barley scribs 23:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  235. Support - Littleolive oil ( olive ( talk) 00:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)) reply
  236. Support -- VS talk 01:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  237. Support -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 06:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  238. Support - Shyam ( T/ C) 09:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  239. Support-- Michael X the White ( talk) 15:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  240. Support-- Iamawesome 800 16:51, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  241. Support - Highly qualified candidate, no concerns. John Carter ( talk) 17:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  242. Support - Great, trustworthy editor. Giants2008 ( 17-14) 00:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  243. Support Most definitely.-- Xp54321 ( Hello! • Contribs) 01:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  244. Support Awadewit ( talk) 04:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  245. — Dark talk 06:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  246. Support talks to the little guy ;-) cojoco ( talk) 10:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  247. Support Knows clearly who ArbCom is, what it does, and what he will do should he be in it. Leujohn ( talk)
  248. Support Seems to know when to drop the hammer, and when to let the little things pass.-- Yachtsman1 ( talk) 20:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  249. Support - Strong Candidate. Risker did once imply she'd help me out with a copyedit that she never delivered - but that's hardly sufficient to sink an otherwise outstanding candidate. Wily D 21:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  250. Support Dark and stormy knight ( talk) 23:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  251. Support Gives every evidence of both being able to keep track of a towel and point others towards the linens closet. - Eldereft ( cont.) 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  252. Strong Support; I am very impressed by candidate's opening statement and my review of candidate's contributions. I belive that this candidate's big picture view is a guiding light that can assist in performance of arb duties, and can help provide needed leadership on the committee. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 00:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  253. Support Fangfufu ( talk) 02:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  254. Support — CactusWriter | needles 10:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  255. Support Per excellent answers. I believe she'll bring good things to the table. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  256. Johnbod ( talk) 20:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  257. Support One of the better candidates tgies ( talk) 05:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  258. Support — clue detected. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  259. Support ·Add§hore· Talk/ Cont 06:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  260. Support. Parishan ( talk) 07:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Support. -- Aynabend ( talk) 09:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 ( talk) 21:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  261. Alun ( talk) 14:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  262. Support Gazi moff 14:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  263. Support Thought I already had. Clearly not. — Cyclonenim ( talk · contribs · email) 15:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  264. Support Although I am reluctant to put Risker on the receiving end of my vitriol when the Arbcom makes bad decisions, I expect these occasions will become less likely with her on board. Amerique dialectics 17:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  265. Support Hús ö nd 22:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  266. Support per Fred Bauder and Elonka. Skinwalker ( talk) 23:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  267. Support Just what we need on the committee - a strong, intelligent, assertive woman. :) Sarah 00:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  268. Support A reasonable and level-headed candidate. Certainly wouldn't hurt to get another woman on the committee either. Rje ( talk) 02:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  269. Support Amalthea 03:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  270. Support-- Dacy69 ( talk) 16:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  271. Support-- Vintagekits ( talk) 16:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  272. Support, not only on basis of good statement, but the fact that some folks I respect also favor the candidate. Having had no interactions myself w/ the editor, that seems like a fair metric. -- Jim Butler ( t) 17:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  273. Support --- The Myotis ( talk) 21:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  274. Support Bikasuishin ( talk) 10:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  275. I took a number of factors into consideration - to specify a few: no concerns on timeliness, keen willingness to learn, and outstanding answers to my questions (although they fell a little short in Questions 1a and 2). At the conclusion of my analysis, I ranked this candidate somewhere in the top 3. Support. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 10:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  276. Support as overall very impressive, good analysis on civility, slight caution that a neutrally-worded description of pseudoscience is liable to be unacceptable to its adherents unless it's weaselly enough to give credence to their claims. Answers to "what is it?" should really be verified from third party expert views rather than from proponents. dave souza, talk 13:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  277. Support -- Banjeboi 14:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  278. Support ( Quentin X ( talk) 16:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)) reply
  279. miranda 16:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  280. Support - Dureo ( talk) 22:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  281. Support For various reasons, in particular the opposes don't convince me and I liked your answer to my questions - you've clearly done your homework before standing. Ϣere Spiel Chequers 22:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  282. Eóin ( talk) 03:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  283. Support. Arbcom needs more clueful women. -- Kaaveh ( talk) 06:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  284. Support – Sadalmelik ☎ 12:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  285. Support she seems a decent candidate with a good view on BLP and okay views on need for privacy and discretion Nil Einne ( talk) 14:39, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  286. Support per SandyGeorgia. Kelly hi! 16:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  287. Support Switzpaw ( talk) 17:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  288. Support Ruslik ( talk) 19:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  289. support E104421 ( talk) 23:43, 13 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  290. Support. alanyst / talk/ 04:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  291. Support Ariel ♥ Gold 04:59, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  292. Support JavaTenor ( talk) 05:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  293. Support. — xaosflux Talk 05:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  294. Support Sarcasticidealist puts it as would I, only more concisely and persuasively. Bonus points, by the way, for objecting to the breadth of the the "footnoted quotes" ArbCom decision, which, for the reasons I set forth, amongst other places, here, reflects all that is wrong with the committee. Joe 06:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  295. Support, per Kelly Martin. Titoxd( ?!? - cool stuff) 08:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  296. Support -- Peter Andersen ( talk) 11:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  297. Support -- Imperator3733 ( talk) 17:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  298. Support Wkdewey ( talk) 19:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  299. Support Alexius Horatius 21:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  300. Support -- Stux ( talk) 22:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  301. Support. -- Alf melmac 23:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  302. Support ( rationale). the wub "?!" 23:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Rschen7754 ( T C) 00:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  2. Dlabtot ( talk) 00:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  3. Voyaging (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  4. Oppose. Further comments available at my ACE2008 notes page. -- El on ka 01:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  5. Oppose Majorly talk 01:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  6. Oppose Sumoeagle179 ( talk) 01:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  7. RockManQ Review me 02:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  8. ArbCom must be disbanded and replaced with a system which actually works. Sorry, I oppose. Bstone ( talk) 02:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  9. Have witnessed her inflaming conflict rather than resolving it. Epbr123 ( talk) 03:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  10. Not a reflection of your judgment nor activity; but you've only been an admin since May. I'd prefer the candidates be more experienced in this area before becoming arbitrators. Good luck, anyhow. Rjd0060 ( talk) 03:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  11. Not ready at all. Prodego talk 03:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  12. I don't really see anything groundbreaking or anything that shows how ArbCom needs to change from its current state. I can't support a candidate who even gives off the impression that they'll bring more of the same. Mike H. Fierce! 04:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  13. -- Caspian blue 05:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  14. Oppose. Cirt ( talk) 07:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  15. Rebecca ( talk) 09:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  16. -- Aqwis ( talk – contributions) 09:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  17. Sorry, I believe her judgement is clouded on too many issues - mostly involving civility and vested contributors. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 12:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  18. Oppose Colchicum ( talk) 15:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  19. Leatherstocking ( talk) 16:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Oppose ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote in this year's elections. You must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 ( talk) 21:48, 1 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  20. Oppose. Миша 13 22:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  21. Oppose. Has no clue about the purpose of Wikipedia, escalates conflicts. Guido den Broeder ( talk, visit) 23:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  22. Oppose — Sorry, but this candidate;s support and enabling of vested editors at the expense of those who have only been here a few years encourages conflict; also this candidate's refused to answer questions regarding a very recent instance of this. — Mattisse ( Talk) 01:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  23. Not really a fan of people who achieve so much in so little time, you became an admin just in May this year and though I'm opposing now, and if this doesn't pass, and you apply next year, I will certainly support..-- Comet styles 07:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  24. Gentgeen ( talk) 10:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  25. Oppose -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 14:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  26. Oppose Am uneasy about this candidate. At RfA that would probably earn a neutral. For this position, it's an oppose. Sorry. -- Dweller ( talk) 15:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  27. Michael Snow ( talk) 20:35, 3 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  28. Oppose Vocally supported by some of our worst editors, the sort ArbCom should restrain. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  29. Oppose - Nothing personal, merely not one of the four I selected to support this year. jc37 10:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  30. Kusma ( talk) 12:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  31. Oppose - wikipedia needs an unabashedly scientific viewpoint. you failed to support this when given the opportunity. Mccready ( talk) 16:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  32. Oppose - either evidence is shown to the person it is being used against, or it is ignored. That should be non-negotiable in any project based on fairness. Cynical ( talk) 22:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  33. Oppose A decent person, however one who has a tendency to be dogmatic. As a result this individual fails to sufficiently investigate the issues and seems prone to arbitrary and arrogant actions. Haiduc ( talk) 11:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  34. Oppose Jon513 ( talk) 16:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  35. Oppose   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 17:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  36. Oppose Too likely to be reasonable. Kelly Martin 20:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  37. Per Ryan and Matisse. Sorry. — kur ykh 02:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  38. Oppose Mervyn Emrys ( talk) 15:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Sorry, you are not eligible to vote this year, you must have had 150 mainspace edits by November 1. ST47 ( talk) 19:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
    Vote reinstated - Lar's CU confirms Mervyn Emrys eligibility across alternate accounts.-- Tznkai ( talk) 06:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  39. Oppose Does not support enforcement of Wikipedia:Civility. Fred Talk 20:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  40. Strong Oppose, has shown the kind of partisan politicking that I hate to see in any administrator, muchless an ARBCom member. suggesting the images that show "bodies of [American soldiers" should be deleted from the project] without explaining how it's any different than the countless images of dead Germans, Bosnians and Jews that we host. Arguing that "any" image taken by Afghan militants should be deleted as "propaganda", removing a short .ogg video clip of a watch being taken off a body from [[w:Looting article because it showed an American soldier, when coming across a content dispute, simply deleting the freely-licensed image of three dead American soldiers and suggesting that the user who removed the image, breaking WP:3RR, should not be punished, after his/her attempt to simply remove it from the article was reverted. Not a good sign for an admin, even worse sign for ARBCom to have someone clearly "voice their opinion through the autonomous use of admin tools to silence opposition", deleting files they don't want listed on certain articles instead of using talk pages or user talk pages. Sherurcij ( speaker for the dead) 05:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  41. Oppose. My single interaction with that user, where he criticized an admin who warned an uncivil user, didn't leave the best impression on me.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  42. Oppose. Nothing wrong with you except running ahead of somebody I like better. S B H arris 02:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  43. Oppose. Caulde 14:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  44. SQL Query me! 20:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
  45. -- lucasbfr talk 21:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Risker&oldid=1221636597"

Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE