 | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
It's election season once again on Wikipedia, and that means it's time for the 2021 edition of my ArbCom voting guide. As I said last year, I have no idea if anyone will read or care about this, but I was going to end up making something like this anyway, so I might as well put it here on the off-chance that it’s useful to other voters.
Note: if you want to see symbols next to the support/oppose/neutral text in this table, may I recommend the Vote Symbols userscript?
All my ArbCom voting guides: 2022 • 2021 • 2020 • 2019
11 candidates running for 8 seats:
| Candidate | Vote | Other comments |
|---|---|---|
| Worm That Turned (talk · contribs) | Support | WTT has been one of the most trusted users on Wikipedia for a while now, and for good reason. He makes positive contributions in many areas of Wikipedia governance, from cratting to ArbCom. Easy support. |
| Beeblebrox (talk · contribs) | Support | Current arb with no major issues. His activity on a prominent Wikipedia hate site that I will not name here is a yellow flag, but his comments on that site on the Eostrix thread were constructive and insightful, all be it brief. Props as well for being the first arb to join the conversation on WT:ACN about the block. |
| Banedon (talk · contribs) | Oppose | In general, I only support ArbCom candidates who are currently admins, because I feel that being an arbitrator requires a certain level of both experience and community trust that only current admins have. This user’s highest rank is extended confirmed, so I feel that they are not quite ready to be an arb yet. Furthermore, their decision to call out one of the other candidates by name in their opening statement ("Unlike Worm That Turned, I am idealistic") raises questions about their temperament. Also a bit surprising to see someone with no userpage (not even a redirect) running. No talkpage archives. |
| Wugapodes (talk · contribs) | Support | Recent admin but has done good work so far in their short admin career. |
| Donald Albury (talk · contribs) | Support | Committed to content creation — unlike many admins, Donald still has a majority of mainspace edits every month. |
| Opabinia regalis (talk · contribs) | Support | Has been elected to ArbCom twice before during my time here and I don't recall any issues with her then. Didn't really edit at all in 2020 but has made a good number of edits this year with the vast majority of them in mainspace. |
| Cabayi (talk · contribs) | Support | Recent admin. Current SPI clerk, which is a good area of expertise for someone who wants to serve on ArbCom. Their statement emphasized ArbCom's role in holding the WMF to account, which is an issue important to me. The one yellow flag is their low mainspace edit percentage as of late. |
| Guerillero (talk · contribs) | Oppose | Not active enough of an editor to give me confidence that they will be an active arbitrator — made 20 or fewer edits in every month from April to October 2021. |
| Izno (talk · contribs) | Support | Edited the most this year out of all the candidates I examined, so I have confidence that they will be active on the Committee. I am also intrigued by their interest in "devolving to the community some of the policy controls that ArbCom has put in place and which it has reserved to itself". |
| Thryduulf (talk · contribs) | Neutral | Has almost 10× more edits to Wikipedia:Department of Fun/Word Association (their most-edited Wikipedia-space page) than to WP:ANI, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Not sure if I really agree with their positions expressed on WP:FRAMBAN though (Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram/Archive 4, ⌘F and search for his name). |
| Enterprisey (talk · contribs) | Support | Recent admin. Not doing that much in mainspace but I see them a lot on the more technical side of Wikipedia, and I think it'll be good to have someone with expertise in that area on the Committee. |