Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2016/Candidates/DeltaQuad
This is the talk page for discussing a candidate for election to the Arbitration Committee. | |||
---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
Re: Sarah777
@Sarah777: If you look, those four accounts were blocked by DeltaQuad as old accounts. Not entirely sure why (account security, maybe?) but it's not a block for any actual disruption. ~ Rob13Talk 20:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- OK - thanks. I wasn't sure why there were so many dead accounts - I thought duplicate accounts were verboten on Wiki. Sarah777 (talk) 20:37, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
question
How do you plan on dealing with people who have are transition from other wikia to english wikipedia with knowledge of how to utilize the site but are thought to be socks? BlackAmerican (talk) 12:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- @BlackAmerican: I see that you did voice a question on her "Questions for this candidate" page, therefore might this question (above) be better suited to be repositioned there, along with your other question, as well as deleted from here? It doesn't seem that it belongs in the "discussion" when it's in fact a question directly for her. (NB: I in no way am meaning to be rude; just trying to ensure that things are in their appropriate place, so as to minimize clutter and/or misplaced items) PolymathGirl (talk) 04:16, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
It's unfortunate that we must still deal with bias issues, whether gender or other. People will always harbor biases; however, when it comes to any type of public decision, there are always other factors to consider, which is how I determined that DeltaQuad would be an excellent choice in this capacity. We must learn to leave our biases at home and harbor them only in private, because in the public arena, only intelligence, wisdom, willingness to help others and perhaps achievements on some levels, only these factors will improve things, whether they be reference works, nations or global issues. Paine Ellsworth u/c 18:19, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Minority status is important
In an ongoing effort to combat the Gender bias on Wikipedia, there's something to be said for including women in all administrative groups/levels. Albeit I'm biased, however, considering furthermore that A. she's got experience since 2014, as well as B. her GLBT minority status and BPD mental health disclosure (from her User page), it seems that she's an important person to have on board if we're actually going to be serious about "countering systemic bias" (versus just "feel good" measures). Having that perspective, combined with her 2 years of experience, makes her a solid candidate.
This may be my first time ever participating in any sort of election here on Wikipedia, however I'm just "calling it as I see it," and reminding people that we can't just "well-wish"; that we have to take active measures to combat systemic biases, by consciously including oft-overlooked minorities. (the same could be said for Mkdw's statement about work on those minority task forces) PolymathGirl (talk) 04:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)