Login
Login

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Vote/John Reaves

{{Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Election status}}

{{Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Candidate statements/John Reaves}}

Other comments

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place for this, but I'd like to make a statement. The incident from the village pump being cited is truly regrettable and I understand any votes based on it. I'd just like to say that I would never use such strong language or act that rashly in arbitration. I intend to further review my choices of words and the tone of my conversations in all aspects of Wikipedia. Thanks, John Reaves 05:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

:Quote from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Candidate_statements/John_Reaves/Questions_for_the_candidate#Question_from_Icestorm815 answer pages] concerning the village pump issue- "I didn't "lose my cool", I was frustrated by the user's failure to assume good faith and replied using would I would consider "emphatic" or "intense" language, it's nothing I would retract." (Bold added for emphasis) My question to you is has your viewpoint changed? Icestorm815 (talk)

::Yes. Sometimes you have to step back and consider things from an outside perspective (which I failed to do in this instance). John Reaves 06:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Support

  1. Kurykh 00:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Cla68 00:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Mike H. Celebrating three years of being hotter than Paris 02:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. My many interactions with John over the last year or so have been largely positive, and, contrary to opinions expressed below, I believe he would make an excellent arbitrator. AmiDaniel (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29&diff=prev&oldid=173243721 Yes]. Dihydrogen Monoxide ♫ 03:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. krimpet⟲ 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Mercury 03:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  9. -- Cobi(t|c|b|cn) 03:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  10. Spebi 04:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  11. Although only a lack of negative evidence. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 05:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  12. bah..not good enough opposes....he is Controversial..but good enough to make an excellent arbitrator..Good Luck...--Cometstyles 11:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  13. I looked up your contribs, and see no reason to oppose. -- lucasbfr talk 13:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  14. Addhoc 14:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  15. : Orderinchaos 15:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Abstaining following some of the diffs cited by oppose voters - not willing to join them however. Orderinchaos 20:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  16. Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 16:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  17. If not this time, next. Right material, not at the right time but I support the candidate nonetheless as they will gain the necessary experience in time. GDonato (talk) 16:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  18. Spartaz Humbug! 18:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  19. Smokizzy (talk) 20:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  20. Support - you seem like my kind of guy. :) Let's make sure the focus is on writing an encyclopaedia, not on creating an ecosystem of wikilawyers and process wonks. -- Schneelocke 21:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  21. I've found John Reaves to be a good user. Acalamari 23:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  22. WjBscribe 23:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  23. EconomistBR 01:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  24. Jon Harald Søby 19:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  25. :Support! *MindstormsKid* 19:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  26. ::User had fewer than 150 mainspace edits as of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&contribs=user&target=MindstormsKid&namespace=0 1 November 2007], and thus lacks suffrage. ZZ Claims ~ Evidence 20:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  27. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  28. Support Xdenizen (talk) 23:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  29. Dekimasuよ! 08:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  30. Support Not a career wiki-politician. Ravenhurst (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  31. Tony Sidaway 18:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC) By and large I'm supporting candidates whose heads seem to have been screwed on tight. John is not an exception.
  32. Support What a novel idea -- focus on writing an encyclopedia instead of politic and drama. Raymond Arritt (talk) 22:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  33. Support good work. Luqman Skye (talk) 07:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  34. the wub "?!" 13:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  35. -- Ned Scott 07:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  36. Support JERRY talk contribs 00:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  37. Support Has some strong points. Mrs.EasterBunny (talk) 17:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  38. --Aqwis (talk – contributions) 22:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  39. Supportdeeceevoice (talk) 23:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  40. Support Sarah 23:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  41. Support Well, it's late, but you deserve this vote anyway.-BlueAmethyst .:*:. (talk) 23:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose per your poor communication [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29&diff=prev&oldid=173243721 here] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HIYO&diff=prev&oldid=173630784 here]. Icestorm815 00:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Not enough experience for arbcom in my opinion This is a Secret account 00:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 00:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Nishkid64 (talk) 00:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. No way, since he called me a "jackass" (link above). I don't even trust this user as an admin, let alone a member of the ArbCom. - Rjd0060 00:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. No way, per Icestorm815's diffs, although I do know you to be a polite person at other times. Qst 00:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Nufy8 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. east.718 at 00:32, December 3, 2007
  9. no.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 00:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  10. Per links above. Number 3 support: "As long as he's not drunk, he makes the right calls" is funny, but not exactly a ringing endorsement either. Travb (talk) 00:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  11. – Gurch (talk) 00:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  12. Prodego talk 00:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  13. spryde | talk 01:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  14. 15px Oppose -- Avi 01:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  15. 15px Oppose Due to constant immaturity and incivility towards users, as well as incompetence of certain policies. NO! Miranda 01:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  16. Coredesat 01:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  17. 15px Alexfusco5 02:09, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  18. Too new. Zocky | picture popups 02:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  19. Oppose (my fuller vote explanations) -- Jd2718 02:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  20. Rebecca 02:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  21. Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 02:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  22. Húsönd 03:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  23. Oppose -Dureo 03:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  24. Not yet. — xaosflux Talk 05:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  25. —Mira 05:21, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  26. JayHenry 07:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  27. I rather agree with the candidate on some policy issues, but I am not all that sure that his understanding of that which ArbCom ought to do isn't much more capacious than mine. Joe 07:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  28. Crockspot 08:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  29. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 08:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  30. Uncomfortable some of attitude I've seen. Shem(talk) 09:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  31. Perhaps not this time. Stifle (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  32. 15px KTC 12:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  33. Splash - tk 13:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  34. Oppose Xoloz 13:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  35. 15px Oppose Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 16:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  36. Ral315 — (Voting) 16:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  37. non-support --Rocksanddirt 18:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  38. Davewild 18:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  39. Oppose Ripberger 20:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  40. Oppose Shot info 23:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  41. Oppose Did not reply to request to provide examples for good work. — Sebastian 00:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  42. Oppose Nothing personal. Atropos 05:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  43. - Zeibura (Talk) 21:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  44. Michael Snow (talk) 23:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  45. Oppose. Viriditas 03:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  46. Weakly opposing all but the 10 candidates I'd explicitly like to see on Arbcom to double the power of my vote. --MPerel 04:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  47. Mailer Diablo (talk) 14:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  48. Oppose [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/William_Pietri&diff=127797970&oldid=127779956 Have some problems with civility]. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 14:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  49. Oppose.Sweetfirsttouch (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  50. Oppose per lack of knowledge about NPOV/SPOV issue. Skinwalker (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  51. Oppose over his lack of support for community control of ArbCom policy. Paul Beardsell (talk) 21:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  52. Oppose - The arbcom is evil, so any candidate who chooses to participate in it in any manner shows poor judgment. Gentgeen (talk) 03:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  53. Oppose John Vandenberg (talk) 05:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  54. Oppose Nothing personal also. Bruxism (talk) 06:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  55. Oppose Not familiar enough with issues surrounding many arbitrations. ScienceApologist (talk) 16:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  56. Terence (talk) 16:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  57. Oppose BorgQueen (talk) 02:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  58. Oppose, per diffs above. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 08:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  59. Oppose —Angr If you've written a quality article... 16:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
  60. Oppose - per the above. Too many concerns. Carcharoth (talk) 13:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  61. Oppose - appears to be on right track, learning from experience and willing to admit mistakes, but need to see a longer record of this. Warofdreams talk 18:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  62. Weak oppose, sorry, so many good candidates, but next time, less drama. Bearian (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  63. Mike R (talk) 19:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
  64. GRBerry 20:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  65. Oppose per Warofdreams KissL 15:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  66. wbfergus Talk 21:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
  67. Oppose Dislike more of the statement than what I like about it. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
  68. Oppose I was going to refrain from kicking this one while he's down, until [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:R.D.H._%28Ghost_In_The_Machine%29&diff=177958026&oldid=177955482 This lil exchange]. Please quit while you're behind and make room for the REAL candidates, who stand for something and have something to say.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 21:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
  69. Maxim(talk) 00:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  70. Oppose as per notes by R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine). Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  71. Oppose. Gen. von Klinkerhoffen (talk) 01:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  72. Oppose. I dislike the candidates concerns about wikilawyering -- which is a term I have seen used when people want to disregard established standards. At the same time, I see nothing particularly postive. --18:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  73. Oppose. --JWSchmidt (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  74. Oppose Alex Pankratov (talk) 21:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)