Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections July 2004/Candidate statements: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 25:
==[[User:172|172]]==
I'd like to enter myself into the race. Members of the arbitration committee should see the bigger picture and better distinguish between users mucking up Wikipedia with inane rubbish and users dedicated to writing a serious, quality encyclopedia. As an active user since December 2002 (ranked #60 on the most recent list of [[Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits|list of most active Wikipedians by number of edits on all namespaces]]), administrator since May 2003, and author of a few featured articles, my user history certainly demonstrates committment to making this into a viable encyclopedia and fighting for scholarly standards on Wikipedia.
As of now, arbitration seems to focus too much on personality instead of the merit of the edits. This is what I want to change. As an arbitrator, I'd favor focusing on the accuracy and constructiveness of the edits in question-- as opposed to the personalities-- to the greatest extent possible ''within the framework of the established norms, rules and procedures of the committee''. Wikipedia is no longer the small community it once was, but rather an increasingly complex and cumbersome, occasionally haphazard organization of thousands of users, with some users finding themselves in many different niches; unfortunately, trolls seem to understand this better than some sitting members of the arbitration committee. Too often trolls gain considerable sympathy by playing "victim." (I note in particular what happened to Wik, who used to be one of Wikipedia's best contributors until he was driven off by trolls and vandals.) I worry that the systems in place to resolve disputes, like the arbitration, are perhaps actually exacerbating them. [[User:172|172]] 13:26, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
| |||