Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Aytakin

Aytakin
Hello to everyone and a happy holidays!!! My name as you know is Aytakin and I have been using and editing at Wikipedia a long time. First without a username and then with my current username. During my time in Wikipedia, I have never been in a argument or a revert war. I always try to discuss everything out instead of attacking. I have always been a great arbitrator and mediator in my whole life and have settled many conflicts. Currently, I am studying law and philosophy on the side and I think these will definitly help me as an Arbitration Committee member. I will strive to: So you've seen the rest, now vote for the best, I am Aytakin  | Talk
 * 1) Decrease the tension created between wikipedians!
 * 2) Make peace in Wikipedia!
 * 3) And help make this the best encyclopedia there is!

Questions

Support

 * 1) Weak Support - Has the right background and intentions, and a well-organized user page.  All suggest that he may do OK in this job.  However, I am concerned on the experience issue too. --EMS | Talk 06:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. --Kefalonia 09:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Yid613 09:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yid613 likely does not have suffrage; his first edit was at 05:18, 21 November 2005 (UTC). (caveats) &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - peace and tension relief are good.--Ahwaz 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahwaz does not have suffrage; he had only 130 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). (caveats) &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Davidpdx 12:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Meekohi 13:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Tarret 20:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. -- HK  22:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Support, reluctantly. I approve but am slightly concerned about user's lack of experience. 青い(Aoi) 10:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Weak Support, Also concerned about user's lack of experience. The Jade Knight 19:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Weak Support "Never argued" has its points. Septentrionalis 19:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Support like response to Anarchism situation. Harrypotter 22:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) SupportAlex43223 04:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 10) SupportNokhodi 08:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 11) Support Itake 22:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 12) Weak Supportevrik 16:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC) This candidate would expand the diversity of the Committee.
 * 13) Support Slavik IVANOV 23:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 14) Weak Support Also concerned about lack of experience wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - &#91;&#91;User talk:Wrp103&#124;Talk]] 18:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Support wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - &#91;&#91;User talk:Wrp103&#124;Talk]] 18:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * wrp103 voted twice. Chick Bowen 00:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Emersoni 20:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Carptrash 05:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC) like the relaxed attitude
 * 3) Support Pacific Coast Highway |Leave a message ($.25) June 29, 2024

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose, lack of experience. See my voting rationale. Talrias (t | e | c) 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Zach (Smack Back) Fair use policy 00:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) --Jaranda wat's sup 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) &mdash;Kirill Lok s hin 00:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Michael Snow 00:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose. As per Talrias Batmanand 00:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose - Inexperience - Mackensen (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose, lack of experience.  --Interiot 00:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose. --GraemeL (talk) 00:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose. Madame Sosostris 00:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose inexperience. David | explanation | Talk 00:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose.--ragesoss 00:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 14) Cryptic (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 15) Oppose not experienced. --Angelo 00:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 16) – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 00:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 17) Oppose, inexperience. Carbonite | Talk 00:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 18) Oppose. Too new. Ambi 00:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 19) Oppose --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 01:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 20) Reluctant oppose because the amount of verifiable experience on Wikipedia is somewhat limited. Jonathunder 01:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 21) Oppose sorry --Doc ask? 01:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 22) Oppose. Inexperienced. --Viriditas 01:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - inexperience - Wikipedical (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Account too new (created December 28, 2005 ). &mdash; F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  03:08, Jan. 9, 2006
 * 1) older&ne;wiser 03:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose.Crunch 03:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose - Bobet 03:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose, per Freakofnurture. Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 03:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I read Freakofnurture's comment wrong, but the user is inexperienced. Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 03:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose for inexperience. Dave 03:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Too new. Good luck with future contributions. 172 03:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - it's an experience thing. - Stevecov 04:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Stevecov does not have suffrage; he had only 148 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 04:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Too inexperienced. Paul August &#9742; 04:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. SlimVirgin (talk) 04:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Tony the Marine 05:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Too new. &mdash; Catherine\talk 05:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Hamster Sandwich 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose fluffy bunny no-content candidate statement. Fifelfoo 05:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. android  79  05:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose. -- Scott ei&#960;  06:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose. xp  Grue   06:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose - Not enough substance in candidate statement. --Muchness 06:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose. siafu 06:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose. &middot; Katefan0(scribble)/ mrp 06:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose per Fifelfoo.--cj | talk 07:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 14) Oppose &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-09 07:34Z 
 * 15) Oppose. Inexperience. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 16) Oppose. Lupo 09:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 17) Oppose per Muchness --kingboyk 09:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 18) Oppose on inexperience. Sarah Ewart 10:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 19) Oppose, as Jonathunder. --It&#39;s-is-not-a-genitive 10:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 20) Oppose, Arbitrators require more experience. the wub "?!"  RFR - a good idea? 11:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 21) Too little XP. &mdash; Nightstallion (?) 11:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 22) Oppose as per Muchness. The campaigning tagline also irks me. Thryduulf 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 23) Strong Oppose - Sorry nothing personal, but you have nowhere near enough exp. --- Responses to Chazz's talk page. Signed by Chazz @ 12:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 24) Oppose sorry but I must oppose.  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 12:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 25) Oppose, lack of experience. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 12:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 26) Oppose - Your enthusiasm has been noted. Better luck next time. Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 13:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 27) Oppose, needs experience. Awolf002 14:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 28) Oppose. I do not see the "never been in an argument" part (as per candidate statement) as a strength; not for a potential arbitrator, anyway.&mdash;Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 14:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 29) Oppose The Literate Engineer 15:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 30) Oppose Not enough experience. Comics 17:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 31) Oppose, see Thryduulf's comment Masonpatriot 17:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 32) Oppose Jkelly 17:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 33) Oppose ack User:Ezhiki - show lack of experience. --Wikimol 18:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 34) Oppose Doesn't seem experienced, or very serious about the position. Jared 20:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 35) Oppose. Has been registered long enough, but hasn't been active long enough. H e rmione1980 21:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 36) Oppose. Insufficient experience. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 21:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 37) Splash talk 22:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 38) Oppose. Not having had an edit war is not a criterion. It would actually help. Avriette 22:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 39) Oppose. Experience. William M. Connolley 22:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC).
 * 40) Oppose. Insufficient demonstration of involvement and understanding of the task.--cjllw | TALK  23:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 41) Ajwebb (lack of) Experience Avalon 23:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 42) Oppose. I would like to see more evidence of work for the encyclopedia. --JWSchmidt 01:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 43) Oppose, lack of experience. -- SCZenz 01:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 44) Oppose - Vsmith 01:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 45) Oppose. Experience.  Velvetsmog 01:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 46) Oppose. Neutralitytalk 04:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 47) Raven4x4x 08:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 48) Oppose. Adrian Buehlmann 10:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 49) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 50) Oppose. Lack of experience. __earth 12:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 51) Oppose as above. enochlau (talk) 13:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 52) Oppose, insufficient experience -- Gurch 14:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 53) Oppose, lack of exerience. - Liberatore(T) 15:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 54) Oppose, lack of exerience.--Birgitte§β  ʈ  Talk  17:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 55) Lacks experience. JoaoRicardotalk 20:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 56) Oppose -- Krash 21:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 57) Oppose, lack of experience.  Prodego  talk 22:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 58) Oppose. (Note: Vote only reflects suitability of candidate to the role, and does not reflect overall contibutions or personally.) - Mailer Diablo 00:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 59) Oppose. Only 874 edits since last march. Though not to get editcountitis, there's also not a whole lot of info on his user talk page to tell me how he has resolved disputes in the past. Dr. Cash 01:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 60) Oppose Timrollpickering 01:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 61) Oppose KTC 03:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 62) Oppose--Masssiveego 07:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 63) Oppose Lack of experience. Majority of edits are on user's own page.  --Hurricane111 16:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 64) Oppose--Dr. B 17:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 65) Oppose--User said he's been editing for a long time without username, but can't verify and it's not the same anyway. Superm401 | Talk 02:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 66) Oppose Sunray 07:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 67) Oppose --Ignignot 16:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 68) Oppose – ABCDe ✉ 17:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 69) Oppose due to lack of experience. Bahn Mi 19:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 70) Oppose - lack of experience -- Francs2000 [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px| ]] 01:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 71) Oppose still new, but I'm sure there's a lot of potential for future elections. Deckiller 01:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 72) Oppose lack of experience. --Mononoke 10:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 73) Oppose arbitrators need to decisive, once they are involved a decision needs to be made Gnangarra 15:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 74) Oppose lack of experience in disputes. -- Marcika 18:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 75) Oppose. Preaky 05:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 76) --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose it would be nice if the canidate would answer question, but also, he lacks experince in disputes...CuBiXcRaYfIsH 06:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * CuBiXcRaYfIsH does not have suffrage; he registered at 22:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC). (caveats) &#8212;Cryptic (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Stood so late that candidate couldn't properly be investigated via hustings, perhaps deliberately. --Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 18:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per Talrias and Dr Cash. Youngamerican 14:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. --moof 20:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose  Bratsche talk 23:53, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Sorry. Detriment 00:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * User had less than 150 edits at the start of the election, so may not have suffrage. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 02:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Lack of experience, somewhat naive promises in candidate statement.  Guettarda 14:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose lack of experience. kaal 16:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) There's a difference between judging someone by the length of their path and just not having enough experience for the job. Ingoolemo talk 17:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose Tuohirulla 22:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose, despite admirable attitude; inexperienced. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose, immature demeanor - JustinWick 03:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, lack of experience.Nortonew 02:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Nortonew does not have suffrage; he had only 138 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). (caveats) &#8212;Cryptic (talk) 05:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Flcelloguy (A note? ) 01:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose RFA'a are not a place of bringinng people together, they often result in sanctions and difficult decisions. (Bjorn Tipling 06:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC))
 * 3) Oppose CDThieme 23:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)