Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Candidate statements/AGK: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:15, 18 November 2009

AGK

Additional elements of my candidature are at User:AGK/Platform.

Wikipedia is the largest encyclopedia in history, and a collaborative project of unrivalled vastness. I am proud to be a part of its community of users, both as an editor (my encyclopedic contributions are indexed here) and also as an administrator (details). In my five years as a contributor, I have also served as a mediator (for 2.5 years) and as an arbitration clerk (for over one and a half years).

In each of these capacities, I have served diligently, and have always tried to act with common sense, in the interests of the encyclopedia, and with fairness to our contributors. Whereas I believe I could bring the experience I have gained in these roles to the arbitration process, I volunteer for a two-year term on the committee.

I offer only three things:

First, to give my time and energies to opening an arbitration case, establishing the facts, identifying the problems, and dealing with them. My approach to arbitration would be a "problem, meet solution" one; nothing fancy, and no waffle.
Second, to be impartial when arbitrating. Problems must be evaluated without the hindrance of preconceptions. I would ignore anything that (and anybody who) threatened to undermine that goal, and recuse where I could not do so.
Third, to be fair when arbitrating. Fair to the parties to the case: that they may present all relevant material, so that the facts are presented truthfully, and may challenge falsities. Fair to the community: that they may see exactly what this bunch of people whom they elected are doing, and why they are doing so. And fair to our readers: that the encyclopedia entries that they use are well-written, neutral, verifiable, and built on reliable secondary sources.

Important to me is good communication, a responsible approach to building a compilation of knowledge (especially where living persons are concerned), and open decision-making. Otherwise, I have the same values as I do as a regular editor and average bloke. I recognise that the influence of one of fifteen is limited.

I accept that the office of arbitrator is a difficult one, and that underestimating its workload would be unwise. My candidacy is one built on realism, and I don't profess to have a magic wand to wave over the project to make it right. I just promise to be a sensible arbitrator, and to be one who will respect the community and its members.

Questions would be more than welcome.

Arbitration Committee Election 2009 candidate: AGK

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 :I offer only three things:
 :* First, to give my time and energies to opening an arbitration case, establishing the facts, identifying the problems, and dealing with them. My approach to arbitration would be a "problem, meet solution" one; nothing fancy, and no waffle.
-:* Second, to be impartial when arbitrating. Problems must be evaluated without the hinderance of preconceptions. I would ignore anything that (and anybody who) threatened to undermine that goal, and recuse where I could not do so.
+:* Second, to be impartial when arbitrating. Problems must be evaluated without the hindrance of preconceptions. I would ignore anything that (and anybody who) threatened to undermine that goal, and recuse where I could not do so.
 :* Third, to be fair when arbitrating. Fair to the parties to the case: that they may present all relevant material, so that the facts are presented truthfully, and may challenge falsities. Fair to the community: that they may see exactly what this bunch of people whom they elected are doing, and why they are doing so. And fair to our readers: that the encyclopedia entries that they use are well-written, neutral, verifiable, and built on reliable secondary sources.