User:Reaper Eternal/Election thoughts


These are my thoughts on the various candidates. Note that, in order to try to promote the candidates I think are best suited for the job, I will only support at most eight candidates. The rest of the ones whom I would have supported will receive neutral votes. I shade the background of the table when I've reached my final decision on the candidate and am very unlikely to change my vote. I don't post everything I find on this page to encourage people to do their own research.

Candidate Years of
experience 		Thoughts Verdict Pass? Wrap-up
Beeblebrox (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Beeblebrox is generally a good admin, but his dispute resolution abilities don't seem to be that great. Neutral ☒N Beeblebrox didn't pass.
Carcharoth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Two This is another of the old arbitrators returning for another two years. He did a good job then, and there is no reason to expect that he won't now. Ruled down to neutral due to a lack of space on ArbCom. Neutral checkY Carcharoth should add some stability and experience to ArbCom given his previous two years.
Coren (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Three He was an excellent arbitrator before and seems to be relatively low-drama. I just wish he had a little more audited content to his credit.... Support checkY Like Carcharoth, Coren will likely tend to keep remedies and decisions sensible. It's also nice to have an active checkuser on ArbCom. Very sensible.
Count Iblis (talk · contribs) (nom) None Politicizing ArbCom with "parties"...? No, thank you. Strong oppose ☒N Count Iblis didn't pass.
David Fuchs (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Two Decent arbitrator with a focus on content. Seems generally good, although I did disagree with some of his decisions on ArbCom. Ruled down to neutral since there are only eight open slots. Neutral checkY David Fuchs should hopefully add the perspective of a content contributor to ArbCom in addition to his two years of experience.
Elen of the Roads (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Two Good arbitrator with good dispute resolution skills, which is something we really need. Leaking arbcom-l? Ouch. Oppose ☒N Elen of the Roads didn't pass.
Guerillero (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Good arbcom clerk. Tends to be rather terse, although not obnoxious. Good answers to the questions. Told me he could never support me on my RFA—must oppose him! Mwahahahaha!! Support ☒N Guerillero didn't pass.
Jc37 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Wasn't he the one strongly opposed to FAs? He clarified that he wasn't that person. Still opposing because he doesn't appear to understand the policies on ArbCom-related topics like wheel warring. Oppose ☒N Jc37 didn't pass.
Jclemens (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Two He was far too harsh as an arbitrator. Furthermore, this is just too much—it indicates, perhaps incorrectly, that Jclemens will do anything for power. I cannot support anybody who appears to be power-hungry. Strong oppose ☒N Jclemens didn't pass.
Keilana (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Good editor, admin, SPI clerk, and MedCom member. As with David Fuchs, not enough slots on ArbCom to sit him. Maybe next year? Neutral ☒N Keilana didn't pass.
Ks0stm (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None User talk:Joefromrandb says it all. We don't need arbitrators baiting other editors—while the administrative action was correct, the way the two trolled each other afterwards was ridiculous. He has mentioned that it won't occur again on my talk page, but that still doesn't give me much to go on with respect to his attitude toward others. Beyond that major incident, I can't really see too much either exceptionally positive or negative. Weak oppose ☒N Ks0stm didn't pass.
Kww (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None He seems to have a decent head on his shoulders, is a decent admin, and answered the questions relatively well. He doesn't seem to get phased too easily. Opposing due to his stance on WP:BLP. "They never did desysop Scott Macdonald, despite the fact that he had wheel-warred and blocked another administrator during the course of his wheel-warring. As I said in my statement, I believe that Arbcom tends to miss the point of everything brought before it." Oppose ☒N Kww didn't pass.
Newyorkbrad (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) Five Strong support is obvious here. Excellent arbitrator who tries to cool things down at ArbCom. Strong support checkY Newyorkbrad is the most experienced of the incoming arbitrators. He will add experience and keep remedies within the realm of reason. Very sensible.
NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Good admin, good arbitration clerk, and largely a good editor. He decently answered the questions. I really don't see any negatives here. Support checkY NuclearWarfare will add his experience as a fresh arbitrator and as an arbitration clerk. I've found him to be very sensible.
Pgallert (talk · contribs) (nom) None Answers to questions and overall conduct imply a good arbitrator. Laughably, he may be our first non-admin arbitrator, but that is just an observation rather than a negative. Indeed, it could even be a positive due to the new opinions injected. Upon further review, he seems to be a decent enough chap. I wonder how long he will be on the committee before running an RFA...? Support ☒N Pgallert didn't pass.
RegentsPark (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None RegentsPark has never struck me as well as many of the other candidates here. Given that and a relative lack of DR and arbitration experience, I have to go neutral. Neutral ☒N RegentsPark didn't pass.
Richwales (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Apparently his definition of supporting the pillar of civility is to try to comment in a way that avoids offending others and changing his "tone of voice" if others object. Seems generally decent beyond that, however. Lack of dispute resolution experience is also a negative. Neutral ☒N Richwales didn't pass.
Salvio giuliano (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Salvio is an excellent editor and admin. I have a fair bit of experience with him, and believe that he will be an excellent arbitrator. Also, I liked his statement. Support checkY Extremely sensible and likely to do the right thing regardless of what the others do, Salvio brings a more maverick-like position to ArbCom.
Timotheus Canens (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Timotheus Canens has done a lot of good work on arbitration enforcement, so I think he would make an excellent arbitrator. Support checkY Finally, we will have somebody who works in WP:AE on ArbCom. Hopefully, he will be an active checkuser.
Worm That Turned (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (nom) None Excellent work with mentoring and decent content contributed as well. Appears to fully understand discussions he gets involved in. Ruled down due to lack of DR and arbitration experience when compared to the other candidates. Ruled back up since a slot re-opened in my listing. Support checkY Worm That Turned is a lot like Newyorkbrad, only with less experience.
YOLO Swag (talk · contribs) (nom) None No...just no. A perusal of his talkpage history will show why. Strong oppose ☒N YOLO Swag didn't pass.