Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Jayjg

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006 | Vote

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ghirlandajo (talk | contribs) at 23:27, 9 January 2006 (→Oppose). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jayjg

I'm Jayjg. I joined Wikipedia on June 15, 2004, was made an administrator on September 13, 2004, and in July of 2005 Jimmy Wales appointed me to the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee. I'm a pretty active Wikipedia editor, having made over 30,000 edits.

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.

I have found the Arbitration process itself quite interesting, but extremely time consuming; reading through the evidence on a single case can take many hours. I've been actively involved in almost all cases started after my appointment to the committee; in addition to regular involvement in votes on whether to accept or reject case, and regular contributions to the Arbitration Committee mail-list, I've also worked on the Skyring, Alfrem, Gabrielsimon, Ed Poor, AI, Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek, Rktect, Rainbowwarrior1977, DotSix, Keetowah, Onefortyone, BigDaddy777, Everyking 3, Regarding The Bogdanov Affair, jguk 2, Louis Epstein, REX, Polygamy, Stevertigo, Lightbringer, Maoririder, Rex071404 4, Silverback, and Ultramarine cases. In the future I'd like to get even more involved in trying to build the workshop pages, which is where the decisions are crafted by the arbitrators, the involved parties, and any other member of the community who wants to make suggestions.

Questions

Support

  1. Support. David | explanation | Talk 00:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. Mo0[talk] 00:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. Antandrus (talk) 00:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Zach (Smack Back) Fair use policy 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Sean|Black 00:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Guettarda 00:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Michael Snow 00:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Ancheta Wis 00:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong Support. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. —Kirill Lokshin 00:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support without reservations. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 00:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --Jaranda wat's sup 00:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Babajobu 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support. --GraemeL (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Cryptic (talk) 00:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Strong support. Knowing that Jayjg was my likely replacement made me feel much happier about resigning. Ambi 00:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. Has proven to be an outstanding editor, conflict-resolver and member of ArbCom. Will, I am sure, continue to be as good at all three. Batmanand 00:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. Evil Eye 00:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support ➥the Epopt 00:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Strong Support. Carbonite | Talk 00:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Nunh-huh 00:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support - Mackensen (talk) 00:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support, SqueakBox 00:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. KHM03 01:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Zargulon 09:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 01:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support--Duk 01:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. cookiecaper (talk / contribs) 01:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support--ragesoss 01:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support --Wgfinley 02:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support per Batmanand. Kit 02:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support -- Arwel (talk) 02:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support - An editor that I'd like to carry around in my pocket - Wikipedical (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Account too new (created December 28, 2005 [1]). — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 03:26, Jan. 9, 2006
  35. --Ryan Delaney talk 03:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Fred Bauder 03:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support ←Hob 03:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Calton | Talk 03:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Strong support 172 04:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. --Viriditas 04:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. Rhobite 04:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support. Bishonen | talk 04:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  44. — Dan | talk 04:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. uh-huh Grutness...wha? 04:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support freestylefrappe 04:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Jonathunder 05:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support incumbent with laudable record. HGB 05:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support ←Humus sapiens←ну? 05:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Bobet 05:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support GabrielF 05:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support ObsidianOrder 05:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support SoLando (Talk) 05:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support – ClockworkSoul 05:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Yid613 06:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support — Catherine\talk 06:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Willardo 06:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support.  Grue  06:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support. --Angr (tɔk) 06:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support. · Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 06:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support wholeheartedly (not that he appears to need it :-). —LeFlyman 06:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support - class act. --- Charles Stewart 07:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support, sound judgment in my experience. --MCB 07:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 07:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support--MONGO 07:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support. utcursch | talk 07:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support. siafu 08:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Strong Support, my absolute first choice, dedicated, stays cool, level-headed, excellent record as arbitrator. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 08:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support. Level-headed, stays cool. — mark ✎ 08:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support. —Quarl (talk) 2006-01-09 08:57Z
  70. Support - Banes 09:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support, I personally like Jay, think he's a great editor. Has very strong views, so I'm taking a punt here, but I reckon he'd be very good at the role! Might be worthwhile if he recuses himself from articles relating to the Arab Israeli conflict though: he's too good an author to stop editing them just because he's a member of ArbCom! - Ta bu shi da yu 10:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support--Urthogie 10:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support - Szvest 10:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;[reply]
  74. Support. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 11:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support. Demiurge 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support --Nick Boalch ?!? 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support, has proved himself. Dan100 (Talk) 11:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Support. --RobertG ♬ talk 11:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support. Yoninah 11:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support (on balance) --kingboyk 12:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support Xtra 12:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support Sarah Ewart 12:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support. I am responsible for Jayjg's initial adminship nomination and still feel he enforces NPOV and NOR like no other in the articles that most sorely demand this. Being involved in controversy is his badge of honour, as many admins, myself not excluded, shirk away from the deafening sounds of axes being ground. As an administrator he has been exemplary. JFW | T@lk 13:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Support -- Michael Slone (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Support sanity! Tomertalk 13:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support - --Leifern 14:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  87. support novacatz 14:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Support. There are few more deserving. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support Always fair and reasonable, even on issues that arouse passions.--CTSWyneken 14:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support Reasonable, thoughtful, and believes in policies. Jakew 16:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Support Cberlet 16:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Support Sebastian Kessel Talk 16:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Support I tend to view Jayjg as the model of a Wikipedian. If I needed one single person I could trust to correctly resolve any difficulty on Wikipedia, other than Jimbo Wales, it would be Jayjg. We probably would not always agree on everything, but I am convinced he holds the principles of the project as more important than his own perspective. Jdavidb (talk • contribs) 16:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Support I share Jdavidb's reason. Jayjg is a very knowledgable editor committed to the creation of a quality encyclopedia. He is equally committed to our principles and policies. Indeed, he is among the most fair-minded and principled people I know here. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support Trusted. --JWSchmidt 17:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  96. Harrumph! -- MicahMN | μ 17:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  97. Support Fair, and hard working. IZAK 18:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  98. Support. Kaisershatner 18:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  99. Support DTC 18:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  100. Support --Doc ask? 19:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  101. Support --metta, The Sunborn 19:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  102. Support Patient, knowledgable, civil. --Goodoldpolonius2 20:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  103. BDAbramson T 20:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  104. Support Junes 21:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  105. Support -- Polaris999 21:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  106. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 22:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  107. Support Proven good judgment. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 22:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  108. Support --Pjacobi 22:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  109. Support --EMS | Talk 22:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  110. Support --Daniel11 22:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  111. Support Fair, trusted, talented tightrope walker. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose, questions. See my voting rationale. Talrias (t | e | c) 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Everyking 00:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Haukur 00:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. – ugen64 00:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Ben 00:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Owen× ☎ 00:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Weak oppose based on questions. JYolkowski // talk 01:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose didn't answer on several questions --Angelo 01:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. WhiteNight T | @ | C 01:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. TacoDeposit 01:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Strong Oppose --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong Oppose abuses admin powers Dabljuh 02:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Oppose. -- Dlyons493 Talk 02:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Oppose karmafist 02:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Oppose. Divisive. Grace Note 02:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Oppose - Edit wars, uses rollback in edit wars. --Phroziac . o º O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 02:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Oppose Xoloz 03:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Oppose, problems with edit warring. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 04:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 03:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Account created in November: too new to vote. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. —Charles P. (Mirv) 04:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Oppose -- SaikiriRemixed? 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Oppose. android79 05:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Oppose, known POV warrior. Sam Spade 06:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Oppose --Wetman 07:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Oppose--cj | talk 07:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Oppose. --Daniel 07:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Oppose - involved in too many disputes --Danny Yee 07:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Oppose - most of his edits relate to Israel/Arab topics with which he has a strong POV. Not necessarily a bad thing on its own, but not Arb material. —Ashley Y 07:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Oppose. Another excellent admin who I regretfully oppose as being too controversial. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Oppose. --Kefalonia 09:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Oppose. -- Rama 09:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Oppose. As Ashley. Axon (talk|contribs) 10:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Oppose as above. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Oppose -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 12:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Oppose -- Lots of POV-pushing on anything related to Israel or Jews. David.Monniaux 12:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Weak oppose per rollback/edit warring issues. POV not a problem to me. —Nightstallion (?) 12:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Oppose. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 12:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Oppose Davidpdx 12:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Oppose pretty much for the same reasons I rejected Fred Bauder, and James F. time on arbcom should be term limited. I feel that the longer you remain on arbcom, the less neutral you can remain.  ALKIVAR™ 12:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Oppose, too controversial. Radiant_>|< 13:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Oppose Unbehagen 15:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Oppose POV pusher. Robert McClenon 15:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Oppose as per Ashley Y. -- Kjkolb 15:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Oppose PoV warrior. Proto t c 16:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Weak oppose due to edit warring. If admins should be held to higher standards, this holds ever so much more for arbcom members. dab (ᛏ) 17:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Weak oppose due to given answers. Scoo 17:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Oppose I do not disagree with any of the reasons already listed above. Unfocused 20:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Oppose. Uses powers in content disputes. POV warrior. - Xed 20:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Oppose - SoM 21:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Oppose--MichaelSirks 21:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Oppose. A POV warrior who has flagrantly abused admin, and arbcom powers. --HK 22:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Splashtalk 22:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Oppose. Divisive. Avriette 23:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Ghirla | talk 23:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_January_2006/Vote/Jayjg&oldid=34545574"