Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Redwolf24: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Question from Snowspinner: the other side of the coin |
→Question from Snowspinner: remove stuttering "a" |
||
Line 39:
The problem as I see it is that, if elected, you could be artitrating detailed, technical edit disputes amongst experts in their field. You would do this without any knowledge of how the article-editing process works, or of how disputes editing articles usually get resolved. Without that it's easy to perceive very small issues as big, or to miss the whole point of the dispute entirely. Your age means a lack of life experience, which just helps. The older you get the more arguments you see, your impression changes as you see some things dealt with better than others. Your perspective changes from the immediate to the longer term - which is important, as most editors going to ArbCom now are good editors making far more constructive edits to Wikipedia than your edit history shows you have ever done. The other problem your lack of article edits gives is that we cannot see how you would deal with a dispute yourself so have no real idea of how you'd react in given cases, [[User:Jguk|jguk]] 06:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
:The other side of the coin regarding the qualifications of some of our young candidates is that the kind of 15-year-olds that spend their free time involving themselves in
==Request from Dragons flight==
| |||