ArbCom election

A look back: the 2004 ArbCom elections

Related articles
ArbCom election

A chat with the elected Arbitrators
6 February 2006

Jimbo Wales appoints 11 arbitrators, increases committee size
23 January 2006

Arbitration Committee elections continue; ArbCom member resigns
16 January 2006

ArbCom candidates (part two)
9 January 2006

ArbCom candidates
2 January 2006

Straw poll closes
19 December 2005

Jimbo starts new poll regarding election
5 December 2005

Last chance to run for ArbCom
28 November 2005

ArbCom voting process
14 November 2005

ArbCom duties and requirements
7 November 2005

A closer look: the calls for reform of the ArbCom
31 October 2005

A look back: the 2004 ArbCom elections
24 October 2005

Current ArbCom members
17 October 2005

Criticism of the ArbCom
10 October 2005

About the Arbitration process
3 October 2005

The history of the Arbitration Committee
26 September 2005

Introduction to a special series: A look at the upcoming Arbitration Committee elections
19 September 2005

More articles

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

It is not entirely correct about candidates. I also ran, but pulled out. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unless, of course, I am getting confused on which election I participated in... :( I'm sure someone will confirm/correct my badly failing memory! Ta bu shi da yu 06:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, I knew I did. See this edit where I withdrew. My memory ain't so bad after all! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The article didn't list all of the 30 somthing candidates who ran; it simply gave the seven winners. :-) Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 23:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, if you're referring to the number of candidates, I think that the official number should be the number of people that people could have voted for; i.e. because people could not vote for you, you weren't an official candidate. Thanks. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 23:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
S'cool... thought I'd just note it :-) Ta bu shi da yu 10:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


"However, other users disagreed. "This page allows users to voice their concern about the candidates," CheeseDreams said."

CheeseDreams was a terrible POV pusher, and was highly disruptive to Wikipedia. We had a pitched battle to counter her POV-pushing, and the main reason she said this was because she disliked me. I'd like to note that the ArbCom later banned her for some time from editing Wikipedia. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info and comments, but the article included CheeseDreams's opinion because it was relevant to the topic. The Wikipedia Signpost strives to include opinions from all parts of the Wikipedia community, and we will continue trying to represent the diverse Wiki-munity that this project encompasses. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 23:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's cool, but that comment was only made because of myself. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:07, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I love Wikipedia

I was reading this article and all of a sudden it hit me how much I love Wikipedia...all the elaborate customs, all the quirky people contributing their nerdy energies for the silliest reasons...I really love it. Not a meagre accomplishment for the writer to have inspired this reaction, methinks. Babajobu 08:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind words! They were appreciated. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | WS 23:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A bit of a backhanded compliment... :-) Ta bu shi da yu 10:05, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0