Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Aranda56: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:30, 24 December 2005

Latest revision as of 07:53, 5 January 2006

(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 15:

[[User:Titoxd|Tito]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:#008000;">xd</span>]]^{([[User_talk:Titoxd|?!?]] - [[User:Titoxd/Flcelloguy's Tool|help us]])} 06:30, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

#About 50% of my time

#Probaly AFD's and RFA's, also some sports pages.

#Not much, maybe I might leave some AFD's but that's not a really big loss as I'm less active there as in before.

===Questions from [[User:-Ril-|-Ril-]]===

;''Do you hold any strong political or religious opinions (e.g. concerning George Bush, Islam, or on which end you should break a boiled egg)? If so, would you recuse yourself from cases centred on these?''

;''How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?''

;''Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?''

;''In the case against Yuber, it was decided by the arbitration committee that it is the duty of arbitrators to investigate, and rule on the behaviour of not only one party involved, but all of them. Do you support this decision?''

--[[User:-Ril-|Victim of signature fascism]] 17:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

==Neutrality question and Censuring questions from -Ril-==

''(Being asked of all candidates)''

''Do you believe that regardless of Jimbo Wales' own views on the matter, the community should be able to strip arbitrators of their position under certain circumstances, and if so, what circumstances?''

''As a corollory:Do you believe, regardless of Jimbo Wales' view on the matter, that a large number of signatories (e.g. 150 requesting censure against 50 supporting the arbitrator) to an RFC against an arbitrator is enough that the arbitrator should be judged as having been rejected by the community in light of their actions, and consequently for them to be forcibly stripped of their post?''

''[[WP:NPOV|wikipedia has a policy of NPOV]]. Excepting straw men, have you ever introduced a '''substantial''' opinion or fact that '''contradicts''' your own political or religious viewpoint into an article on a topic of which you have strong opinions, and if you have, how frequently do you do so compared to your other substatial edits to articles?''

--[[User:-Ril-|Victim of signature fascism]] | [[User:-Ril-/Biblecruft|help remove biblecruft]] 02:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

==Recusal, Code of Conduct, Expansion==

I am asking these questions of all candidates:

1. Do you pledge to abide by the proposed recusal guidelines at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct#Recusal]]?

2. Are there any parts of [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct]] that you do not agree with? If so, please describe in detail how you would improve them.

3. Will you please pledge to support expanding the number of seats on the Arbitration Committee? If not, how would you propose alleviating the present arbitration backlog?

4. Have you voted over at [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Proposed modifications to rules]]? If not, why not? If so, please summarize your votes.

Thank you for your kind consideration of and answers to these questions. &mdash;[[User:Nrcprm2026|<i>James S.</i>]] 06:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)