This week, the community adapted guidelines to the Arbitration Committee elections after weeks of discussion. With tacit approval from Jimbo Wales, the elections will start in one week.

The election will run from 9 January until the end of 22 January, with the winners taking office on 1 February. During the two-week voting period, voters will use each candidate's subpage to either vote for or against the candidate. The subpages are currently used for statement and questions; once the voting begins, a requests for adminship-like vote will be added to each page. Anyone who created an account on or prior to 30 September, 2005 will be enfranchised. Also, in an effort to prevent antagonistic feelings created by the "disendorsements" used last year, voters are requested to keep all comments on the voting page as brief as possible.

After the closure of the election, anyone with more support votes than oppose votes will be eligible for the Arbitration Committee; Jimbo Wales will make the final appointments. However, Wales also noted that he had a "general intention to appoint candidates mostly in the order of the percentage of approval in the community." If there are more qualified candidates than open seats, then either the ArbCom will be expanded, or a pool of reserve Arbitrators will be created.

Wales also expressed his approval of the process tacitly by editing the elections page, indicating that he was aware of the community's decision and choices.

In addition, the elections page was also moved from Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005 to Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006 this week, indicating that the elections will be held in January instead of December 2005.

Finally, several more candidates joined the race this week: Ultraexactzz (statement), Ajwebb (statement), AntonioMartin (statement), and Kylehamilton (statement).

Because the Arbitration Committee elections currently has an abundance of candidates (41), the Wikipedia Signpost has compiled a short guide to all the candidates. Each candidate has links to the user page and talk page, along with the number of edits at press time, a link to Kate's Tool, the first edit date, the date when adminship was granted (if applicable), along with the link to the successful RfA and the vote tally, a quote from the candidate's statement, and any other pertinent information. We urge you not to consider only the statistics we provide here when voting; statistics can often be misleading and only offer one view of the candidate. In addition, comparisons of statistics between candidates on this page can be even more misleading – for example, earlier requests for adminships usually received fewer votes than they do today. In addition, several candidates (indicated with "Administrator since prior to 2003") were promoted before the start of the RfA page in July 2003; candidacies were announced on the mailing list back then.

Each of the candidate's quote is directly taken from the candidate's statement. No changes, including spelling or grammatical errors, have been made, except for formatting. In addition, some quotes may be from several parts of the candidate's statement; i.e. combinations of sentences from the statement. The "other" section gives information on the candidate that pertains to dispute resolution: mainly noting if the candidate is a current member of the Arbitration Committee or Mediation Committee or whether the candidate participated in last year's ArbCom elections.

In those elections, 34 candidates ran, and the vote was held using approval voting. The top seven candidates were chosen for the ArbCom.

User name: Ajwebb (talk)
Number of edits: 132 Kate's Tool
First edit date: October 9, 2005
Statement: "I am a relatively new user to Wikipedia, but I enjoy the community and feel that I would be a strong addition to the Arbitration Committee. I would follow all procedures accurately, professionally, and do my best to resolve the situation and work closely with other members of the Arbitration Committee."

User name: AntonioMartin (talk)
Number of edits: 17680 Kate's Tool
First edit date: September 16, 2002
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: "I promise if I am honored with such position I will do my best to maintain discrepances according to wikipedia principles, and to keep expanding wikipedia into the website I think it will be, in other words, the website of the 00's. Furthermore, I will keep pursuing unity among writers."

User name: Aranda56 (talk)
Number of edits: 6261 Kate's Tool
First edit date: August 20, 2005
Statement: "I felt recenly that the arb-com takes too long to make a decistion. If I get elected to the arb-com I would try to make desistions that are best for Wikipedia and to look at each case very closely in my own view."

User name: Blankfaze (talk)
Number of edits: 9236 Kate's Tool
First edit date: April 3, 2004
Administrator since July 6, 2004 (28/2/1)
Statement: "Too many people see the Arbitration process as a sort of Inquisition or prosecutorial body; perhaps we need to be reminded of its original purpose: to arbitrate, to settle, disputes. If elected I would take a solutions-oriented approach to arbitration. There are times when punitive measures must be taken, but it should not be the go-to solution. I offer myself up as a qualified, experienced, intelligent candidate for the Committee."
Other: Candidate in December 2004 ArbCom elections; received 95 approval votes (18 percent), coming in 19th of 34

User name: Charles Matthews (talk)
Number of edits: 52379 Kate's Tool
First edit date: February 25, 2002
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: "Wikipedia is working so well in general it is possible to talk about the ArbCom as a necessary evil, rather than use the language of crisis and panic about it. For me, it's mainly about the content. I'm concerned about systemic bias issues - the need for good peripheral vision, I'd say, in the whole approach."
Other: Ran in the December 2004 ArbCom elections; came in 14th (top 7 were selected) out of 34 candidates with 132 approval votes, or 25 percent of the total votes

User name: DG (talk)
Number of edits: 482 Kate's Tool
First edit date: September 20, 2004
Statement: "I intend to bring a (sorely needed) sense of humour and perspective to the proceedings of the committee. Perhaps then disputes could be handled more fairly and efficiently. Excessive seriousness and organisation can be counter-productive to any work. With work so important and serious as that of this committee, airs of seriousness or importance could be lethal!"
Other: Also ran in the December 2004 ArbCom elections; came in 32nd of 34 candidates with 31 approval votes, or six percent of the votes

User name: Dmcdevit (talk)
Number of edits: 8559 Kate's Tool
First edit date: December 2, 2004
Administrator since July 24, 2005 (38/1/1)
Statement: "I think the ability of ArbCom to enforce binding remedies more creative and productive than a standard block is a major part of its success. Solutions like revert or personal attack parole, probation, per article, or topic banning, and other more customized remedies allow users to continue to operate in the community and contribute to the community, while targetting the source of the problem. I would continue to encourage such targetted solutions and view banning as a last resort."

User name: Doktorbuk (talk)
Number of edits: 988 Kate's Tool
First edit date: August 4, 2005
Statement: "I feel my short time here has already taught me how necessary it is to have time, effort and determination; but also a sense of fairness and understanding. I feel able to help to listen to all sides, to understand the frustration and weed out the vandals."

User name: Edivorce (talk)
Number of edits: 25Kate's Tool
First edit date: December 10, 2005
Statement: "My approach to resolving content disputes would be 1)establish a clear record of the development the article 2)assist each party in the articulation of relief the requesting and basis for their request 3)apply wikipedia governing documents, guiding principals and established practices in making a determination. I have no axe to grind and can assure neutrality and impartiality."

User name: Everyking (talk)
Number of edits: 68945 Kate's Tool
First edit date: February 13, 2004
Administrator since May 10, 2004 (20/1/0)
Statement: "My views on the ArbCom are, in fact, mixed: on the one hand, I see it as a useful and positive means of final dispute resolution in the community, and probably the best form of that; in general I favor increased ArbCom involvement in resolving matters, an expanded scope for the committee and ideally an expanded size to go along with that. On the other hand, of course, I have frequently had very strong disagreements with the ArbCom over matters of individual rulings against users."
Other: Ran in December 2004 ArbCom elections; received 83 approval votes (16 percent), finishing 22nd of 34th

User name: Filiocht (talk)
Number of edits: 9870 Kate's Tool
First edit date: August 5, 2003
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: "I run on a simple platform. I would aim to follow the following basic principles: Equality of respect, Wikilove, assume good faith, Talking is better than blocking, [and] We're here to build an encyclopaedia, not a playground."

User name: Fred_Bauder (talk · contribs)
Number of edits: 9650 Kate's Tool
First edit date: February 28, 2002 (as Fredbauder (talk · contribs)
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: " I have innovated with respect to Wikipedia:Probation and creation of a /Workshop page for discussion of cases before things are firmed up for actual voting. The workshop page, if used by arbitrators, parties and others, offers a broadbased public venue for discussion of the details of arbitration cases and evidence"
Other: Appointed by Jimbo Wales, Fred Bauder has been a member of the Arbitration Committee ever since its inception.

User name: Ilyanep (talk)
Number of edits: 4613 Kate's Tool
First edit date: May 7, 2003
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: "I promise that if I am elected, I will try to help find a way to expedite cases while still allowing time for the arbitrators to compile, read, and decide on evidence, which I find very important. I also promise to stay on for my entire term, as I see myself as a person who finishes what he started. The ArbCom has also been accused of bias in the past. I commit myself to strict neutrality in all cases, and am able to see when I can not possibly be neutral, in which case I will recuse. I don't see that happenning too often, however."
Other: Bureaucrat since June 20, 2004 (15/0/0)

User name: Improv (talk)
Number of edits: 2313 Kate's Tool
First edit date: October 28, 2004 (December 3, 2002 as User:Pgunn)
Administrator since February 19, 2005 (45/2/1)
Statement: "I don't have a platform, and promise only to be fair as I see it and to put in the effort needed in a timely fashion to prevent delay. All I can say on policy is that I think banning has a place, but I don't think it's possible to say anything useful as to how it should be handled in general. I will also suggest improvements that I think will be productive."
Other: Candidate in December 2004 ArbCom elections; received 74 approval votes (14 percent), coming in 23 of 34. Member of Mediation Committee since January 2005.

User name: Ingoolemo (talk)
Number of edits: 9227 Kate's Tool
First edit date: May 27, 2004
Administrator since June 7, 2005 (18/0/0)
Statement: "For me, the most important of the five pillars is the one that states that we are an encyclopaedia. More than any other idea or policy, this is the one that will serve as my guiding principle if I am elected to the committee. To sort through all the possible ramifications of any ruling is a task that requires a thoughtful, reasonable, and humble ;) person such as myself."

User name: Jdforrester (talk)
Number of edits: 12571 Kate's Tool
First edit date: February 27, 2003
Administrator since prior to 2003
Statement: "I strongly believe that the Committee's real purpose is to prevent further damage to the project by taking measures as we see fit, not to mete out some form of 'justice' as punishment of those deemed to have done wrong. Where I have considered banning people, it is not because I think that they "deserve" it in some way, but more that I regretfully doubt that their continued presence is not damaging to the project. Of course, 'damage' is in the eye of the beholder, and so I hope that my decisions have reflected well the overall opinion of our Community."
Other: First appointed to the Arbitration Committee by Jimbo Wales at the beginning of the committee; failed re-election bid in December 2004 elections, coming in 11th of 34 with 155 approval votes (30 percent). Re-appointed by Wales to the committee in July 2005.

User name: Jayjg (talk)
Number of edits: 31720 Kate's Tool
First edit date: June 15, 2004
Administrator since September 13, 2004 (28/8/4)
Statement: "I believe the Arbitration Committee is an unfortunate, but necessary, last step in Wikipedia's dispute resolution process. In the past I've felt and raised concerns about the effectiveness of all of the formal dispute resolution mechanisms (including mediation, RfC, and RfAr). RfAr in particular has suffered from slowness (mostly related, I believe, to having far too many inactive members), and from decisions that tended to be too narrow to be effective (e.g. prescribing remedies on one specific article, when the issue is an editor's behaviour in general). I think it's important for Arbitrators to keep in mind that our primary and ultimate goal here is to create a great encyclopedia."
Other: Appointed to the Arbitration Committee by Jimbo Wales in July 2005.

User name: Jpgordon (talk)
Number of edits: 7850 Kate's Tool
First edit date: September 4, 2004
Administrator since November 26, 2004 (21/2/0)
Statement: "I think I can be very helpful as an arbitrator. I pride myself on being good at understanding both sides of a dispute; I also pride myself on being able to recognize when a dispute exists primarily because one of the disputants wants a dispute."

User name: Karmafist (talk)
Number of edits: 8327 Kate's Tool
First edit date: August 9, 2004
Administrator since October 11, 2005 (53/2/0)
Statement: "My running is basically a protest against the arbitration process as it is, not against any particular member of the arbcom itself since I deeply respect all of them i've [sic] talked to individually. My goal will be a drastic reform of the entire arbitration system. Although my hope is that this won't be the case, I would consider this entire election to be invalid if Jimbo Wales interfered in any way, unless he truly does look down upon other Wikipedians, thus destroying the idea that Wikipedia is Egalitarian, which I am beginning to believe is not the case."

User name: Kelly Martin (talk)
Number of edits: 7504 Kate's Tool
First edit date: December 27, 2004
Administrator since June 15, 2005 (72/1/0)
Statement: "I don't have a platform, other than a promise to handle each case fairly, with every decision intended to further our fundamental goal: to write an encyclopedia."
Other: Appointed to the Arbitration Committee by Jimbo Wales in October 2005.

User name: Kim Bruning (talk)
Number of edits: 5469 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 7, 2001
Administrator since August 4, 2004 (25/1/0)
Statement:"Most of my time this year was spent making sure that there was at least some dispute resolution available via the mediation cabal. This was conceived as a stopgap measure to provide mediation while the mediation committee was down (which it was for much of the year.)"

User name: Kylehamilton (talk)
Number of edits: 128 Kate's Tool
First edit date: October 3, 2004
Statement:"I am interested in the working on the arbitration committee because I have a good deal of experience in dealing with disputes and getting to a speedy resolution. I refined my ability by working with producers in the film industry and by working on set having to make quick decisions/resolutions on set."

User name: Luigi30 (talk)
Number of edits: 1952 Kate's Tool
First edit date: March 8, 2004
Administrator since December 9, 2005 (42/16/2)
Statement: "I think that Arbcom has become too slow and bloated in the last year. Cases are piling up and waiting months for a final verdict. People are being driven away by the inefficiency. If I am voted to Arbcom, I'd try to speed things along. I hate trolls, and like long walks on the beach. I am against banning except in extreme circumstances or for repeat offenders. I think that a first offense should not be banned for, only for problem users or extreme trolls."

User name: Maywither (talk)
Number of edits: 43 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 18, 2005
Statement:"I am the most amazing and awesome Wikipedian ever. Place me on the committee and I will not make you sad."

User name: Merovingian (talk)
Number of edits: 18047 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 9, 2003
Administrator since March 16, 2004 (18/0/0)
Statement:"I believe that I can help. During my time at Wikipedia, I have tried my very best to adhere to the projects tenets of honesty, good faith, and neutrality. All three are important features to be found in an arbitrator. If elected, I will maintain a high level of participation; the committee’s progress has been hindered by inactive members and resignations. I care about this project too much to give up. If elected, I will act with fairness to all involved parties, and conduct my work with the other arbitrators in the open. If elected, I will keep my personal views out of all cases, as I have tried to do when writing articles."
Other: Received 98 votes of approval (19%) in the December 2004 elections, coming in 18th of 34.

User name: Mindspillage (talk)
Number of edits: 7697 Kate's Tool
First edit date: June 22, 2004
Administrator since April 18, 2005 (41/0/0)
Statement: "I believe strongly in keeping a civil and productive atmosphere on Wikipedia, and not being overly bound by precedent in search of a proper outcome. I also believe in using no firmer a touch than is necessary to remedy a problem. There are certain issues I am firm on, including civility and respect as well as the proper use of admin powers. I also am a strong supporter of ignoring all rules, which makes me all the more disturbed when that guideline is abused for ends it wasn't meant for.
Other: Appointed by Jimbo Wales to the Arbitration Committee in October 2005.

User name: Morven (talk)
Number of edits: 10921 Kate's Tool
First edit date: February 17, 2003
Administrator since January 26, 2004 (14/0/0)
Statement: "My beliefs about Wikipedia are simple: we are here to create a free encyclopedia, and policy, procedure and process are simply tools to enable us to do that most easily. I believe in a light touch; we should have the minimum quantity of rules necessary to function, and the enforcement of them should bear in mind the intended outcome—creating that encyclopedia—rather than in their mechanical application."

User name: Netoholic (talk)
Number of edits: 14950 Kate's Tool
First edit date: June 28, 2004
Statement: "Unfortunately, the present "Arbitration" process has become increasingly legalistic and punitive - more like a criminal court. Re-establishing the proper focus is the compass by which I will measure my work as an Arbitrator."

User name: PZFUN (talk)
Number of edits: 6349 Kate's Tool
First edit date: June 15, 2004
Administrator since December 12, 2004 (9/1/1)
Statement: "I feel that more should be done to make sure that conflict is resolved before it arrives at the ArbCom. This would involve greater integration between the members of the Arbitration Committee and the various mediation groups on Wikipedia, as we can only work efficiently when we are working together. There are just too many editors, articles, and areas on Wikipedia in which arguments can develop. If elected, I intend to make sure that the Arbitration Committee becomes more culturally sensitive, is better able to interact with members whose first language is not English, is more active in promoting mediation before arbitration, and acts more promptly."

User name: Ral315 (talk)
Number of edits: 7126 Kate's Tool
First edit date: September 30, 2004
Administrator since September 10, 2005 (25/0/0)
Statement: "The Arbitration Committee serves an important purpose on Wikipedia: Settling disputes between users, and more often, doling out punishments to unruly users. Such a position needs a strong, unbiased user. I feel that I can fulfill these requirements. I do not plan to decide cases based on my personal beliefs, nor on any other user's personal beliefs. Cases should be decided on the merits of the case alone."
Other: Member of Mediation Committee since October 2005.

User name: Redwolf24 (talk)
Number of edits: 11445 Kate's Tool
First edit date: April 20, 2005
Administrator since July 23, 2005 (49/7/4)
Statement: "I myself would like to lend a helping hand to the endevours of the arbcom. Some of my positions? I hate trolls, yet at the same time I believe in criminal rights. I strongly believe in such organizations as WP:AMA. I'd check the RfAr page often, voting on every case I could manage. I see a lot of cases only get the attention of maybe four members. Do we want four people deciding things that can potentially affect the whole project?"
Other: Member of Mediation Committee since September 2005; acting chair since then.

User name: Ronline (talk)
Number of edits: 3206 Kate's Tool
First edit date: October 30, 2004
Administrator since December 2, 2005 (37/0/1)
Statement: "I'm candidating for the ArbCom because I believe in justice in Wikipedia and think I can bring about positive change as to the fairness of arbitration procedures. If I become an arbitrator, my most important consideration will be to look at both sides impartially and to guarantee that the rights of the accused are always upheld in the fairest way. I am a firm believed in dialogue, and I always aim to make sure that both sides understand very well what the dispute is about, since I believe that alienation and misunderstanding is the most significant and most dangerous root of conflict."

User name: Rowlan (talk)
Number of edits: 267 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 9, 2005
Statement: "One key issue to me is that of silly censorship. Yes, you may have been here longer than me, but this is an open community of people working for the same goal. Let's keep it this way. So grab a pitch fork and a torch and let's hit the streets together and burn whatever monsters there are that might be hampering the cause and progress of Wikipedia!"

User name: Sam Korn (talk)
Number of edits: 7581 Kate's Tool
First edit date: October 8, 2004
Administrator since April 24, 2005 (36/0/0)
Statement: "Points I believe would make me a good Arbitrator: 1)Complete and obsessive dedication to Wikipedia 2) A belief in reconciliation before confrontation and rehabilitation before sanctions 3) I am fair in always looking at both sides' faults 4) My strongest belief is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and this should be reflected in the Committee's decisions 5) I have been around well over a year now, and understand every policy – I have also served as a mediator recently; although I haven't done much work, I have acted as a mediator, and have learnt a lot from looking at others' cases and also from on-going arbitration cases 6) This is the key one: I consider myself absolutely approachable and always helpful in my dealings with others."
Other: Member of Mediation Committee since October 2005

User name: Sam Spade (talk)
Number of edits: 31573 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 4, 2003
Statement: "I oppose the ArbCom deciding based on its own precedent, and favor rather an interpretation of wikipedia:policy most effective in producing and sustaining an encyclopedia and its editorial staff. I will be especially severe with administrators who violate policy, misuse their status, and disgrace their office. I will be particularly leniant with new users who clearly mean well, and I am particularly inclined to allow experienced users to act as mentors in such cases."
Other: Received 92 approval votes (18%) in the December 2004 elections, coming in 20th of 34

User name: Silverback (talk)
Number of edits: 5744 Kate's Tool
First edit date: September 30, 2004
Statement: "Wikipedia does not need more rules, but it has become large enough, that it does need to be seen to enforce those that it has fairly, consistently and without prejudice. I am skilled at analyzing systems, arguments and evidence and at seeing both sides of issues. Too many people are taking disputes personally and not attempting to resolve issues in good faith and this culture is overburdening the arbcom. The arbcom can discourage this by making it clear that all allegations against any parties to a case will have allegations against them considered. This will discourage cases by those without clean hands. The arbcom also needs to clearly discuss the application of principles to the evidence in its decisions, instead of deciding cases on an ad hoc basis. Knowing how the evidence will be analyzed and the principles applied will establish new standards which should reduce frivolous cases."

User name: SimonP (talk)
Number of edits: 87718 Kate's Tool
First edit date: December 10, 2001
Administrator since December 21, 2003 (5/0/0)
Statement: "I currently have the distinction of being number one on the List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Sheer number of edits is a pretty meaningless statistic, but it does show that I have a fair amount of time to dedicate to the project. I follow Arbcom fairly closely, but have only participated directly in only a couple of cases. I feel that in almost all cases the committee does its job admirably, though its speed is, as has often been noted, is sometimes far slower than ideal."

User name: Snowspinner (talk)
Number of edits: 8522 Kate's Tool
First edit date: April 18, 2004
Administrator since July 31, 2004 (62/9/3)
Statement: "What we need are arbitrators who are willing and able to put in the commitment to the harder cases - to the ones that involve the well-meaning editors with a legitimate disagreement that need to be disentangled, not smashed with a banstick. Different circumstances require different kinds of arbitrators. And I promise to be one of those different kinds of arbitrators. If elected, I promise to review evidence carefully, and to look at situations with the larger Wikipedia community in mind. Like it or not, arbcom decisions are cited as justifications in policy debates now, and the arbcom needs to be careful about what it says in light of that."

User name: Tony Sidaway (talk)
Number of edits: 23452 Kate's Tool
First edit date: November 26, 2004
Administrator since March 11, 2005 (48/12/1)
Statement: "Abusive treatment of newcomers starves the community of new blood and unnecessarily expands the class of disaffected trolls and vandals. Edit warring and biting by administrators and other experienced editors should be taken seriously because it drives people away. I want to focus on this. The administrators should take the bulk of the load, but the Committee should act as a check on the administrators."

User name: Trilemma (talk)
Number of edits: 617 Kate's Tool
First edit date: August 3, 2005
Statement: "Arbitrators need to be dispassionate, dedicated and cogent, and I think my track record on wikipedia demonstrates these qualities. Upon election, I'd hope to help make the arbitration committee a more effecient operation, while maintaining precise and non biased decisions. I believe that severe action should always be a last resort relegated to the most egregious of circumstances and the wikipedia community should continue to foster a genial climate of respect and honesty. Most disputes can be resolved peacefully and civilly, and this is a testament to the strength of wikipedia."

User name: Ultraexactzz (talk)
Number of edits: 39 Kate's Tool
First edit date: December 22, 2005
Statement: "I am eager to provide a fresh perspective to the committee. I haven't been around that long, I don't have any biases to fall back onto. Nor do I have a preconcieved notion as to how the site (or the committee) should function. This may make me a sort of "odd man out", where a pseudo-outsider is brought into the committee to provide just that fresh perspective. My experience is with the encyclopedia; I believe it is the duty of each committee member to evaluate the merits of each case in terms of impacts to the Wikipedia project as a whole. We're here to improve the encyclopedia, and any decision must reflect that ultimate goal."