Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/Z.Spy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Z.Spy

This candidate has withdrawn from the race; please do not vote. This page is kept primarily for historical reasons. Thank you!

I am running for Arbitration comittee because I am a responsible contributor who reverts Vandalism, assists new editors, and Makes sure that Wikipedia is a clean, accurate Encyclopedia. I no longer state political opinons in Talk Pages.

Questions

Support

  1. Support. --Kefalonia 09:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose, lack of experience. See my voting rationale. Talrias (t | e | c) 00:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. Too new. Ambi 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  3. Michael Snow 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. Mo0[talk] 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose inexperience. David | explanation | Talk 00:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose, lack of experience. --Interiot 00:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  7. Zach (Smack Back) Fair use policy 00:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  8. Cryptic (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose. Madame Sosostris 00:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose. Crunch 03:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose. Antandrus (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose - Inexperience - Mackensen (talk) 00:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  13. —Kirill Lokshin 00:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  14. Oppose. --GraemeL (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  15. --Jaranda wat's sup 01:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  16. Oppose — Omegatron 01:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  17. Oppose. Inexperience, and statement reads more like a Request for Adminship. Batmanand 01:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  18. Oppose for lack of experience --Angelo 02:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  19. Oppose --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    Oppose - inexperience - Wikipedical (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    Account too new (created December 28, 2005 [1]). — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 03:29, Jan. 9, 2006
  20. Oppose, experience —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  21. Reluctantly oppose as amount of experience really does matter in this kind of role. Jonathunder 02:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  22. Oppose. Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 03:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  23. Oppose Too new. Good luck with future contributions. 172 03:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  24. Oppose. SlimVirgin (talk) 04:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  25. Bobet 04:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  26. Oppose. Too inexperienced. Paul August ☎ 04:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  27. Oppose. (finally, the last candidate)--ragesoss 04:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose. Need to demonstrate a lot more knowledge about WP before taking on such a big role. novacatz 04:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  29. Oppose. Agree with novacatz. 青い(Aoi) 05:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  30. Oppose. Nothing personal; inexperience. --Muchness 05:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  31. Oppose--cj | talk 06:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  32. Oppose. android79 06:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  33. Oppose. Inexperience issues for this vote. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  34. Oppose. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 07:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  35. Oppose. -- Michalis Famelis 10:13, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  36. Oppose: Too little is known about Z.spy's ideas about the arbcom's direction, plus inexperience. --It's-is-not-a-genitive 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  37. Oppose. --RobertG ♬ talk 11:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  38. —Nightstallion (?) 12:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  39. Oppose Meekohi 13:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  40. Oppose sorry but I must oppose.  ALKIVAR™ 13:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  41. Another sparkly oppose vote, per inexperience as cited by everyone else. Tomertalk 14:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  42. — Dunc|☺ 14:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  43. Oppose.  Grue  14:22, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  44. Oppose, xp. Radiant_>|< 14:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  45. Oppose. --Viriditas 15:05, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  46. Oppose, lack of experience. the wub "?!" RFR - a good idea? 17:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  47. Oppose. Please stay a responsible editor, but that alone is not enough to be a good candidate for ArbComm.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 17:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  48. Oppose, xp --kingboyk 19:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  49. Oppose. —Quarl (talk) 2006-01-09 21:32Z
  50. Oppose - needs experience. Awolf002 22:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  51. Oppose - Inexperienced. --EMS | Talk 22:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  52. Oppose Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  53. Splashtalk 23:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  54. Oppose. Too new to be familiar enough with policy, etc. Hermione1980 23:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  55. Oppose Andrew_pmk | Talk 02:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  56. older≠wiser 03:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)