Arbitration series

Arbitration Committee elections: Elections open

This week, the Signpost covers the opening of the Arbitration Committee elections.

The December 2007 elections to the Arbitration Committee started on Monday, and will run for two weeks, ending on Sunday, 16 December. It is anticipated that Jimbo Wales will make his selections soon afterward, and the newly elected Arbitrators will take their positions on 1 January, 2008.

Newyorkbrad and FT2 lead the elections by far, with 99% and 95% support, respectively. Newyorkbrad also has set a record with 338 supporters, surpassing Can't sleep, who amassed 303 support and 100 oppose votes in an unsuccessful bid last year. In third is Rebecca, a former arbitrator, with 80% support. Deskana currently has 79% support, followed by FayssalF with 78% support, and Sam Blacketer in sixth with 77%.

Trailing further back, in seventh, is Thebainer, with 69%. Meanwhile, of the five arbitrators whose terms expire this year, only one, Raul654, is standing for re-election. He currently stands at 66.1%, ranking eighth.

Perhaps the vote with the most fluctuation was that of Giano II, who ranked at 71% after the first hour of voting, but declined over the next day; at press time, Giano had 57% support, ranking in 11th. His vote has generated the second-most interest behind Newyorkbrad's, with 178 supporters and 132 opposers.

If one thing can be gleaned from the results so far, it's clear that users are generally dissatisfied with the slate of candidates this year. Last year, of 31 candidates who did not withdraw from the elections, seven (23%) gathered at least 83% (5-to-1) support. This year, of 28 candidates, only two (7.1%) gathered at least 83% support.

Six candidates have withdrawn since the beginning of the election: Danny, Mercury, Monsieurdl, Phil Sandifer, Pilotguy, and Stifle. Additionally, two candidates, ^demon and LordHarris, withdrew in the last week, but before the elections started.

Regularly updated statistics from the elections can be found at User:Gurch/Reports/ArbComElections and User:Mathbot/ArbCom Election December 2007.

Candidates in the December 2007 Arbitration Committee elections were interviewed last week for an election guide; this guide is still available. The election guide is intended to be a brief overview of each candidate's beliefs and experiences. More detailed information about each candidate may be gleaned from their user pages, as well as their responses to questions from other users.

Due to size, the guide has been split up alphabetically, though a page transcluding all sections is available below:

ArbCom candidate profiles:    A-F  |  G-M  |  N-R  |  S-Z  |  All  |  (Withdrawn)




Also this week:
  • Gardner interview
  • Arbitration series
  • License compatibility
  • Staffing features
  • Software issues
  • WikiWorld
  • News and notes
  • In the news
  • WikiProject report
  • Features and admins
  • Technology report
  • Arbitration report

  • Signpost archives

    + Add a comment

    Discuss this story

    Wrong word?

    "Newyorkbrad and FT2 lead the elections by far, with 99% and 95% support, repeatedly."

    I think you mean "respectively" there, not "repeatedly" - I hope you won't mind me being bold and changing it. I'm not sure if that's something that's frowned upon for Signpost articles, but if it is, I apologise. :) -- Schneelocke 11:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    This is what happens when I write at 3 in the morning :) Please feel free to make any grammatical changes. The only thing we frown upon are major edits/updates, because then many people don't read the updated version (because they only read once a week, and usually shortly after we publish). Ral315 21:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Eh?

    Why no mention of Ryan Postlethwaite? EVula // talk // // 03:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm considering tackling the effects of the Durova case on ArbCom in full, but if I do so, I want to do so a couple days in advance, so I can have it POV-checked. I don't have a particularly strong opinion on the case, or on the ArbCom candidacies of some of its contributors, but since it's such a charged issue, I'd rather not put myself in a position where bias is presumed. Case in point: I wrote something a bit more substantial for Giano, but noted that it didn't fit well with the article, and would have received charges of bias from at least one side. That's why I stuck to mainly a statistical analysis for this one. Ral315 (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]





           

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