User:Gerda Arendt/ACE 2015
Appearance
![]() | These guides represent the thoughts of their authors. All individually written voter guides are eligible for inclusion. |
![]() | |
Shout for joy [a] |
---|
If you simply want to know how to vote go by User:Bishzilla/Vote ACE 2015.
If you want an analysis of the candidates, go by Boing! said Zebedee and Worm That Turned. (added:) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
If you want to know what I go for, or just compare what the candidates answered, stay here. For background - not needed but if you like - see User:Gerda Arendt/Vote ACE 2013 and User:Gerda Arendt/ACE 2014. Both questions depart from a specific situation but look for something more general, about the candidates view on fairness and visions. (Moar on my talk, look for "vision".)
- Arbitration findings and the wishes of principal editors govern the use of infoboxes in articles. If you want to win my "neutral" please say how you would close the discussion at Talk:Joseph (opera)#Restore infobox? [c]
- An editor has been blocked for a month in the name of arbitration enforcement for having said that he creates half of his featured content with women. I find it kafkaesque and remember the opening of The Metamorphosis for an analogy. If you want to win my "support", please - on top of #1 - suggest improvements to get from arbitration enforcement ("not a fun place") to arbitration supervision, where such a thing would not happen. I offered some thoughts, wishing to see Floquenbeam's "no foul, play on" more often, or Yunshui's "The edit was unproblematic and actually made Wikipedia better."
Answers
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ I added an infobox to the cantata Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen, BWV 51 (which was shown on the Main page on Thanksgiving Day, DYK), on 4 September 2013 which was questioned (Already a dead letter?), reverted although no restriction was in place yet, and followed by the warning (mentioned in question 2) that AE "is not a fun place" (Please stop adding infoboxes to articles in contravention of your Arbcom restriction), followed by an ANI discussion. - Kafkaesque.
- ^ Template taken from User:Worm That Turned/ACE2015
- ^ When I asked the question, there was one oppose against the infobox and four supports, but the question was about the reasoning, not the numbers. The debatable statement "Arbitration findings and the wishes of principal editors govern the use of infoboxes in articles." was not questioned by any candidate.