Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/AntonioMartin

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006 | Candidate statements
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by -Ril- (talk | contribs) at 02:15, 5 January 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

First of all, happy new year to all voters. I have been working here for three years and three months. While I know that along doesn't mean I could be an arbitrator, I promise if I am honored with such position I will do my best to maintain discrepances according to wikipedia principles, and to keep expanding wikipedia into the website I think it will be, in other words, the website of the 00's. Furthermore, I will keep pursuing unity among writers. Antonio New year, new resolutions Martin 12:37, 1 January, 2006 (UTC)

Questions from -Ril-

Do you hold any strong political or religious opinions (e.g. concerning George Bush, Islam, or on which end you should break a boiled egg)? If so, would you recuse yourself from cases centred on these?
I have strong political views, like anyone else. As far as Religious views, I don't. My neighbor practices Islam and I'm a Christian and we are very good friends. If the occasion shall arise where I neeed to intervene in a case of Democrat vs. Republican, I would study the case and solve the dispute by asking them to help peace prevail. After all, we see enough war as it is anyways, and everyone has a "side" of the story, whether it be right or wrong. Also, remind people that Wikipedia is a vehicle to learn, not to create disputes. Antonio Mr. McCartney Martin.


How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?
If another arbitrator contests my decision, I would talk directly to the arbitrator. Arguing with other arbitrators would not be a solution, it shows a bad example of dispute-settlers. A middle point can always be reached with diplomacy. Antonio Dancing Chair Martin.
Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?
No. Every request is worthy of a look precisely because of our responsability to be fair to each side. Antonio World Boxing Council Martin
In the case against Yuber, it was decided by the arbitration committee that it is the duty of arbitrators to investigate, and rule on the behaviour of not only one party involved, but all of them. Do you support this decision?
Definitely. Fairness at Wikipedia is based upon investigation. If someone is constantly attempting to disrupt our job as information spreaders, then we need to talk to the person who does that and if the person is non-responsive to talk, then we need to proceed accordingly. Antonio NBA Junkie Martin

--Victim of signature fascism 17:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Another question

What are your views of the proposed Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Code of Conduct and User Bill of Rights?
I believe both the code of conduct and the bill of rights exemplify what wikipedia stands for, fairness and non-fauvoritism for all. I think they are perfect for our website. Arbitrators shall not take sides in an argument, unless one side is exceedenly offensive to the other. That is very simple. I think the rules and guidelines are very good and useful for us and future generations of wikipedians.

Antonio The Latin American Bridge Martin 

--HK 16:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from User:-Ril-

The following questions are for each candidate, and do not specifically target you

Do you hold any strong political or religious opinions (e.g. concerning George Bush, Islam, or on which end you should break a boiled egg)? If so, would you recuse yourself from cases centred on these?

How willing are you to contest the decisions of other arbitrators rather than just "go with the flow"?

Do you view all requests to re-address cases, particularly requests made by those most penalised, as being automatically without merit?

In the case against Yuber, it was decided by the arbitration committee that it is the duty of arbitrators to investigate, and rule on the behaviour of not only one party involved, but all of them. Do you support this decision?

Do you believe that regardless of Jimbo Wales' own views on the matter, the community should be able to strip arbitrators of their position under certain circumstances, and if so, what circumstances?

As a corollory:Do you believe, regardless of Jimbo Wales' view on the matter, that a large number of signatories (e.g. 150 requesting censure against 50 supporting the arbitrator) to an RFC against an arbitrator is enough that the arbitrator should be judged as having been rejected by the community in light of their actions, and consequently for them to be forcibly stripped of their post?

wikipedia has a policy of NPOV. Excepting straw men, have you ever introduced a substantial opinion or fact that contradicts your own political or religious viewpoint into an article on a topic of which you have strong opinions, and if you have, how frequently do you do so compared to your other substatial edits to articles?

--Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 02:15, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_January_2006/Candidate_statements/AntonioMartin&oldid=33920081"