User:Elonka/ACE2015


 * The results of this year's election have been posted. Congrats 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
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 2015, an RfC took place concerning the format of the 2015 elections, at Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015.

Candidates self-nominated from November 8 to November 17, and the voting period ran from November 23 to December 6. results were posted on December 9th. For details on voting eligibility, see the 2015 election page.

For this 2015/2016 cycle, seven of the 15 arbitrators remained on the committee from previous elections, with eight new arbitrators elected to 2-year terms, and one to a 1-year term. ArbitrationCommitteeChartRecent

This page that you are reading, contained my (Elonka's) thoughts on the 2015 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. 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.

To see my thoughts on previous elections, check the history of:
 * User:Elonka/ACE2008
 * User:Elonka/ACE2009
 * User:Elonka/ACE2010
 * User:Elonka/ACE2011
 * User:Elonka/ACE2012
 * User:Elonka/ACE2013
 * User:Elonka/ACE2014

Candidates

 * ''Candidates self-nominated from November 8–17, 2015. Voting took place from November 23 to December 6. Results were posted on December 9.


 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Support. Already pretty thoroughly vetted by the community. Administrator, arbitration clerk, checkuser, oversight access, audit subcommittee, why not add arbitrator to the list? Callanecc has plenty of dispute resolution experience. My only quibble would be that I'd like to see more edits related to content creation (such as having a GA or FA under his belt) than to administrative matters, just because it would make for a more well-rounded viewpoint on the main purpose of the project. He's got plenty of AFCs though, so the GA/FA issue aside, I have no trouble supporting.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * Undecided. Previous arbitrator, though I have opposed both of his previous runs, in 2008 and 2010. I have had concerns about Casliber's judgment and impartiality in the past, for example, in 2010, when he himself was a candidate, Casliber took issue with one of my statements about another candidate, and felt he had the right to come in and edit my voter guide. I will think very carefully about his candidacy this time around.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Support. Experienced administrator, lots of understanding of the dispute resolution processes, and with article-writing, having created three FAs.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Support. Ran for arbitrator before in 2013, unsuccessfully, coming in with 53% support. I have supported Gamaliel's candidacy in the past, as a longtime Wikipedian, with a strong stance on civility, and lots of experience with dispute resolution.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Support. Current arbitrator, running for re-election.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * Oppose. Was an administrator at one time, but was admonished by ArbCom in 2011, as well as found to be acting as an involved admin in places he should have steered clear of. Then, in 2012, he was formally desysopped by ArbCom. I agree with Hawkeye in some matters, but I just don't think he would be well suited for ArbCom.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * Oppose. Not an admin
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Weak support, Has administrator and oversight access. Ran for arbitrator before, unsuccessfully, coming in with 55% support. At the time, I was neutral on her candidacy, because I liked some aspects of her ability to be on ArbCom, but was also concerned with her weak view on civility. I have not found any firm reason to oppose though, so will likely support
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ Support. Admin, and has oversight access. He withdrew from his first run at adminship in 2009 when there were concerns about potential copyvio issues, but then his second run in 2013 (nominated by Drmies) was successful. Has good content contributions. Not the highest profile editor on the project, but that can be a good thing. He does a lot of good admin work on the project, such as Checkuser, Oversight, AfDs, and page protection. One concern I have is that he's just not active on any of the Arbitration-related parts of the project. I only saw one small case comment offered in 2014, but nothing else in the last few years. So I'm a little worried that he might not entirely understand what he's getting into. That said, I can't see any other strong reason to oppose, so will support.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Weak oppose</b>. Is an administrator, but has not been particularly active on the project, so I am concerned if he would have enough time available for ArbCom. I also have concerns that he was admonished by ArbCom for acting inappropriately as an administrator last year.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ <b style="color: green;">Support</b>. Previous arbitrator, so knows what he's in for, but it is a concern that he hasn't been particularly active lately. Normally anytime I would see Kirill's name on the ballot it would be a slamdunk "Support", but currently there is enough controversy around him that I feel I need to take a deeper look before deciding. I have reviewed the circumstances leading to Kirill's sudden AE block of . I have reviewed the unblock by (which I strongly disagree with) and the subsequent desysopping of Yngvadottir (which I strongly agree with -- you just don't go and unilaterally undo an AE action, you have to go through process). I have reviewed the ongoing case at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration_enforcement_2, including the initial statements, the evidence, and (since the case is not closed yet), the ongoing discussions at the Proposed Decision page. Overall, I think Kirill might have been a bit overly aggressive with a one-month block on Eric Corbett for relatively minor transgressions of Eric Corbett's topic ban, especially with no prior warning from Kirill to Corbett. Then again, multiple other blocks by other administrators had not had any effect in moderating Corbett's behavior, and the block was a justifiable AE action. Indeed, reading Eric Corbett's block log almost looks like a "Who's Who" of arbitrators past, present, and potential: Worm That Turned, Keilana, GorillaWarfare, Callanecc, Drmies, etc.  Bottom line: Though Kirill's block of Eric Corbett was controversial, many things around Eric Corbett have been controversial for a long time, so I don't see this as a sufficient reason to oppose Kirill's candidacy. Kirill's relative inactivity is a concern, but I think having him back on ArbCom will be a net positive, so I will (again) support.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ <b style="color: green;">Support</b>. Experienced administrator, understands the dispute resolution processes, levelheaded. No FAs, but does claim some GAs. Should make a good arb.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ <b style="color: green;">Support</b>. Current arbitrator, running for re-election
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Oppose</b>. Not an admin
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Oppose</b>. Not an admin
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Oppose</b>. Not an admin
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ <b style="color: green;">Support</b>. Administrator, experience with content-creation (4 FA noms). I was a little concerned that she was first made an administrator in 2006, but then left the project in 2007, and was gone for so long that she had to re-run for adminship earlier this year. She does have good experience with dispute resolution though, so will support.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Oppose</b>. Was an administrator before, but was de-sysopped by ArbCom in 2012, after an entire case devoted just to him.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * ✅ <b style="color: green;">Support</b>. Current arbitrator, running for re-election.
 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * <b style="color: red;">Oppose</b>. Not an admin

Withdrawn

 * 1)  • statement • questions
 * 2)  • statement • questions
 * 3)  • statement • questions
 * 4)  • statement • questions