Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Vote/Bishzilla

Note: You may have been redirected here from any of several other talk pages... this page serves as the talk for at least
 * Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Candidate statements/Bishzilla/Questions for the candidate
 * and possibly Arbitration Committee Elections December 2008/Candidate statements/Bishzilla

Questions from User:Everyking

 * Copied from question page, please continue discussion here instead. lifebaka++ 07:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Is this joke candidacy intended to ridicule or disrupt the election? Do you feel your candidacy is respectful of the community and the process? Will you drop out before the election is held, or are you actually going through with this? (Answer these questions in standard English or do not answer at all.) Everyking (talk) 23:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * User Everyking: Speak civilly or do not speak at all. Sincerely, Bishonen.
 * I added that part in italics because I figured you would otherwise respond to my question in Godzilla-speak. I suppose the questions themselves are a little harsh in phrasing, but I find stunts like this to be very frustrating, and I really wish you'd answer the questions. Everyking (talk) 05:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This page is not an appropriate place for you to give orders, whether in italics or not. As for your opinions, you have taken every opportunity to express them, for years, so you must know I'm aware of them. Question marks do not actual "questions" make. You are misusing this page, and Bishzilla does not choose to engage with your rhetoric. Bishonen. 19:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC).
 * The questions are directly relevant to the very nature of your candidacy. If you choose not to answer them, I feel that will reflect very badly on your candidacy. Apparently you are telling me I'm unwelcome here (where have I heard that before?), so I will post nothing further, but I will check back to see if you have answered. Everyking (talk) 07:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Apologies (and necessary groveling) to Bishzilla for stepping in here, but it is very much disrespectful to treat this candidacy as anything except serious. Simply because of a unique arrangement of accounts (socks, puppets, puppet-"masters", etc.) is no reason to believe it is a joke.  Further questions of this type are unnecessary at best, and blatant personal attacks at worst.  Everyking, your comments are of the latter sort.  lifebaka++ 03:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * These are valid questions to be asked, especially given the nature of this candidacy. Further, I think your characterization of these valid questions as "personal attacks" is a bit wide of the mark and does Everyking a disservice. ++Lar: t/c 04:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Jeez, folks, lighten up. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 05:55, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It certainly is disrespectful and bordering on a personal attack to characterize this candidacy as a joke, which the first question did, unless an "a" was omitted though typo, which is of course possible. It was also answered, in the very first question posed to 'Zilla, that this candidacy is not in fact a joke; whether or not you take her at her word is an entirely different issue, which will not be solved though simple--or complex--questions.  It is quite unnecessary to ask the question again, the answer will be the same.
 * After the first question, the tone of the other two is fairly neutral (though given the following comments it seems more hostile), and I am afraid that I took them slightly out of context. I apologize to Everyking for being harsh, though I advise changing the first question to read "Is this a" (change bolded) to help alleviate my concern.
 * In general, this comes down to place we believe humor has on Wikipedia. Of course this candidacy is humorous.  Of course everything needs to be taken with a small grain of salt.  But just because it isn't all serious doesn't mean it's all a joke.  What I believe we've got here is a humorous and serious candidacy, by a humorous and serious admin.  I don't believe there's anything wrong with that.  Hell, ArbCom, of all places, really needs it.  If you believe otherwise, the question page is not the best place to make such concerns known.  Cheers, everyone.  lifebaka++ 07:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Except to note that I don't think the questions were actually/completely answered in previous responses to other questions, I'll just note that I don't agree with you at all, and leave it at that. (...Obviously, though, I'm right and you're wrong because in general the preincrement operator is better than the postincrement operator... ) ++Lar: t/c 14:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Hear Ye, Hear Ye
While I appreciate the novelty of Mighty 'Zilla's speech patterns, can we not have some actual questions relating to the arbitration process or how Bishzilla will reform the arbitration committee? Being the manager of this campaign, I suppose I should make it clear that while Bishzilla does use DinoSpeak, the person behind this account also runs the account. Please familiarize yourself with both accounts so that you can see she can and will use proper English when it is needed. While jokes and funny words have their place, this IS a serious campaign. We would like to urge all users to ask serious questions so that Bishzilla can show that she is serious about reforming this arbitration committee. ( plus, the mighty 'Zilla is actually very intelligent and likes to show off when she gets the chance ) So, please, ask some REAL questions. Thank you. Tex (talk) 22:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe if the candidate acted like a serious candidate, they would get "real" questions. I dunno. Just a thought. I'll go back to my popcorn now.  Syn  ergy 02:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Real questions? 'Zilla is welcome to start answering the questions that have been asked of all candidates. There are plenty of good ones in there... the manner and nature of the answers to those will go a long way to show how serious this candidate actually is. ++Lar: t/c 12:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Lar. Perhaps Bishzilla is waiting a while before copying the "general questions" over to her question page.  Or perhaps she didn't know she was supposed to.  It is kind of confusing that a candidate has to move questions from some other page onto their own page before answering them.  Wouldn't it make more sense for someone who would like a candidate's opinion on something to actually ask the question instead of expecting the candidate to ask it of themselves? That's just me, though, I don't know what the mighty 'Zilla thinks.  Tex (talk) 15:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, just noticed this. It appears all "general questions" will be copied over on the 17th, so Zilla will not have to do it herself. Tex (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nod. However, plenty of candidates have already started answering them. ++Lar: t/c 18:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Lar: It was sarcasm. Based solely on the last sentence, of the first post under this header.  Syn  ergy 20:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The last sentence of the first post under this header is "Thank you." Why be sarcastic to that? ;^) Tex (talk) 20:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Second to last sentence. :D  Syn  ergy 21:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I was responding to Tex, actually. There are plenty of real questions for this real candidate to answer, if they really want to. They don't even have to look real hard either. Really. ++Lar: t/c 23:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah. Just wanted to see who you were really talking to. Danke.  Syn  ergy 19:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

A comment
Has anyone known Bishzilla to do or say a stupid thing? I'm not talking about speech pattern effects, or in-joke threats, or pantomine actions, but actually do something seriously wrong either as an editor, a commentator, or a sysop? If, say, someone was to consider this as the (plain English using) wiki-gnome account of the article editor account called Bishonen would there be this debate of whether it was a joke candidacy (although there may be a legitimate discussion over whether an alternative account of a high visibility editor should be permitted to run 'independently')? I would gently suggest that reviewers take note of quality of the responses, and not its language or even the direction - I think a lot of people are missing the point of 'Zilla entirely. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If 'zilla has NEVER done anything seriously wrong, she's a better man than me (or you), Gunga Din. ++Lar: t/c 00:05, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't say she hadn't, Bungdit Din, I was just asking if anyone knew of such an occurrence (there may be some little piles of radioactive ash that could answered but for their circumstances, but nevermind...). As Eluchil404 recognises below, there is substance behind the dino-talk that is being missed by many - not taking this candidacy seriously may result in a different reaction to the one 'Zilla commonly inspires during the voting phase. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:21, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree entirely. I think that many editors simply find the joke candidates unique personality funny and want to demonstrate our own sense of humour.  She has given perfectly serious and reasonable answers to the serious questions she has been asked (accounting for their being in Dino urspache).  The alternate account issue is a potentially serious one (though if the mighty 'zilla has seized power for herself, who are we to disagree) and the basis for my question.  The important issue ultimately is do we trust this user to be a fair and effective arbitor.  Being (or seeming to be) a more than hrair foot tall reptilian monster shouldn't be a bar to being on ArbCom if it isn't a bar to trust (but should be if it is).  Eluchil404 (talk) 05:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't even believe it's possible to be "serious and reasonable" while playing the role of a cartoon dinosaur character with a comedic idiolect. Everyking (talk) 06:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a joke, right?