Hello to everyone and a happy holidays!!!
My name as you know is Aytakin and I have been using and editing at Wikipedia a long time. First without a username and then with my current username. During my time in Wikipedia, I have never been in a argument or a revert war. I always try to discuss everything out instead of attacking. I have always been a great arbitrator and mediator in my whole life and have settled many conflicts. Currently, I am studying law and philosophy on the side and I think these will definitly help me as an Arbitration Committee member.
I will strive to:

1. Decrease the tension created between wikipedians!
2. Make peace in Wikipedia!
3. And help make this the best encyclopedia there is!

So you've seen the rest, now vote for the best, I am Aytakin | Talk

Questions

1. Weak Support - Has the right background and intentions, and a well-organized user page. All suggest that he may do OK in this job. However, I am concerned on the experience issue too. -- EMS | Talk 06:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Support. -- Kefalonia 09:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

   Support Yid613 09:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

   • Yid613 likely does not have suffrage; his first edit was at 05:18, 21 November 2005 (UTC). ( caveats) — Cryptic (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

   Support - peace and tension relief are good.-- Ahwaz 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

   • Ahwaz does not have suffrage; he had only 130 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). ( caveats) — Cryptic (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

3. Support Davidpdx 12:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
4. Support Meekohi 13:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
5. Support Tarret 20:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Support. -- HK 22:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Support, reluctantly. I approve but am slightly concerned about user's lack of experience. 青い(Aoi) 10:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
8. Weak Support, Also concerned about user's lack of experience. The Jade Knight 19:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Weak Support "Never argued" has its points. Septentrionalis 19:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Support like response to Anarchism situation. Harrypotter 22:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
11. Support Alex43223 04:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
12. Support Nokhodi 08:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
13. Support Itake 22:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Weak Support evrik 16:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC) This candidate would expand the diversity of the Committee. reply
15. Support Slavik IVANOV 23:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC) reply
16. Weak Support Also concerned about lack of experience wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - [[User talk:Wrp103|Talk]] 18:26, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Weak Support wrp103 (Bill Pringle) - [[User talk:Wrp103|Talk]] 18:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    • wrp103 voted twice. Chick Bowen 00:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply

17. Support Emersoni 20:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Support Carptrash 05:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC) like the relaxed attitude reply
19. Support Pacific Coast Highway| ^{Leave a message ($.25)} 21:40, 26 June 2024 UTC [ refresh

1. Oppose, lack of experience. See my voting rationale. Talrias ( t | e | c) 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Zach ^{(Smack Back) Fair use policy} 00:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
3. -- Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 00:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
4. — Kirill Lok s hin 00:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
5. Michael Snow 00:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Oppose. As per Talrias Batmanand 00:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Oppose - Inexperience - Mackensen (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
8. Oppose, lack of experience. -- Interiot 00:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Oppose. -- GraemeL ^(talk) 00:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Oppose. Madame Sosostris 00:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
11. Oppose — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 00:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
12. Oppose inexperience. David | explanation | Talk 00:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
13. Oppose.-- ragesoss 00:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Cryptic (talk) 00:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
15. Oppose not experienced. -- Angelo 00:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
16. – Quadell ^{( talk) ( bounties)} 00:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
17. Oppose, inexperience. Carbonite | Talk 00:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Oppose. Too new. Ambi 00:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
19. Oppose -- Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
20. Reluctant oppose because the amount of verifiable experience on Wikipedia is somewhat limited. Jonathunder 01:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
21. Oppose sorry -- Doc ^ask? 01:50, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
22. Oppose. Inexperienced. -- Viriditas 01:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Oppose - inexperience - Wikipedical (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Account too new (created December 28, 2005 [1]). — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE ( TALK) 03:08, Jan. 9, 2006

23. older≠ wiser 03:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
24. Oppose. Crunch 03:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
25. Oppose - Bobet 03:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
26. Oppose, per Freakofnurture. Ian Manka ^{Questions? Talk to me!} 03:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    I read Freakofnurture's comment wrong, but the user is inexperienced. Ian Manka ^{Questions? Talk to me!} 03:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

27. Oppose for inexperience. Dave 03:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
28. Oppose. Too new. Good luck with future contributions. 172 03:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    Oppose - it's an experience thing. - Stevecov 04:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

    • Stevecov does not have suffrage; he had only 148 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). — Cryptic (talk) 04:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply

29. Oppose. Too inexperienced. Paul August ☎ 04:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
30. Oppose. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
31. Oppose Tony the Marine 05:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
32. Oppose Too new. — Catherine\ ^talk 05:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
33. Oppose Hamster Sandwich 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
34. Oppose fluffy bunny no-content candidate statement. Fifelfoo 05:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
35. Oppose. android 79 05:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
36. Oppose. -- Scott e^iπ 06:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
37. Oppose. xp  Grue  06:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
38. Oppose - Not enough substance in candidate statement. -- Muchness 06:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
39. Oppose. siafu 06:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
40. Oppose. · Katefan0 ^(scribble)/ mrp 06:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
41. Oppose per Fifelfoo.-- cj | talk 07:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
42. Oppose — Quarl ^{( talk)} 2006-01-09 07:34 Z
43. Oppose. Inexperience. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
44. Oppose. Lupo 09:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
45. Oppose per Muchness -- kingboyk 09:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
46. Oppose on inexperience. Sarah Ewart 10:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
47. Oppose, as Jonathunder. -- It's-is-not-a-genitive 10:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
48. Oppose, Arbitrators require more experience. the wub "?!" ^{RFR - a good idea?} 11:03, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
49. Too little XP. — Nightstallion (?) 11:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
50. Oppose as per Muchness. The campaigning tagline also irks me. Thryduulf 11:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
51. Strong Oppose - Sorry nothing personal, but you have nowhere near enough exp. --- Responses to Chazz's talk page. Signed by Chazz @ 12:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
52. Oppose sorry but I must oppose.   ALKIVAR ™ 12:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
53. Oppose, lack of experience. R adiant _>|< 12:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
54. Oppose - Your enthusiasm has been noted. Better luck next time. Ξxtreme Unction| _{yakkity yak} 13:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
55. Oppose, needs experience. Awolf002 14:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
56. Oppose. I do not see the "never been in an argument" part (as per candidate statement) as a strength; not for a potential arbitrator, anyway.— Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 14:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
57. Oppose The Literate Engineer 15:37, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
58. Oppose Not enough experience. Comics 17:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
59. Oppose, see Thryduulf's comment Masonpatriot 17:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
60. Oppose Jkelly 17:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
61. Oppose ack User:Ezhiki - show lack of experience. -- Wikimol 18:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
62. Oppose Doesn't seem experienced, or very serious about the position. Jared 20:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
63. Oppose. Has been registered long enough, but hasn't been active long enough. H e rmione 1980 21:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
64. Oppose. Insufficient experience. — Matthew Brown ( T: C) 21:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
65. Splash ^talk 22:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
66. Oppose. Not having had an edit war is not a criterion. It would actually help. Avriette 22:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
67. Oppose. Experience. William M. Connolley 22:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC). reply
68. Oppose. Insufficient demonstration of involvement and understanding of the task.-- cjllw | TALK 23:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
69. Ajwebb (lack of) Experience Avalon 23:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC) reply
70. Oppose. I would like to see more evidence of work for the encyclopedia. -- JWSchmidt 01:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
71. Oppose, lack of experience. -- SCZenz 01:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
72. Oppose - Vsmith 01:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
73. Oppose. Experience. Velvetsmog 01:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
74. Oppose. Neutrality ^talk 04:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
75. Raven4x4x 08:41, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
76. Oppose. Adrian Buehlmann 10:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
77. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
78. Oppose. Lack of experience. __earth 12:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
79. Oppose as above. enochlau ( talk) 13:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
80. Oppose, insufficient experience -- Gurch 14:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
81. Oppose, lack of exerience. - Liberatore( T) 15:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
82. Oppose, lack of exerience.-- Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 17:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
83. Lacks experience. JoaoRicardo ^talk 20:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
84. Oppose -- Krash 21:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
85. Oppose, lack of experience. Prodego ^talk 22:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC) reply
86. Oppose. (Note: Vote only reflects suitability of candidate to the role, and does not reflect overall contibutions or personally.) - Mailer Diablo 00:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
87. Oppose. Only 874 edits since last march. Though not to get editcountitis, there's also not a whole lot of info on his user talk page to tell me how he has resolved disputes in the past. Dr. Cash 01:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
88. Oppose Timrollpickering 01:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
89. Oppose KTC 03:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
90. Oppose-- Masssiveego 07:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
91. Oppose Lack of experience. Majority of edits are on user's own page. -- Hurricane111 16:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
92. Oppose-- Dr. B 17:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC) reply
93. Oppose--User said he's been editing for a long time without username, but can't verify and it's not the same anyway. Superm401 | Talk 02:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
94. Oppose Sunray 07:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
95. Oppose -- Ignignot 16:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
96. Oppose – AB C D ^e ✉ 17:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC) reply
97. Oppose due to lack of experience. Bahn Mi 19:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC) reply
98. Oppose - lack of experience -- Francs 2000 01:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
99. Oppose still new, but I'm sure there's a lot of potential for future elections. Deckiller 01:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
100. Oppose lack of experience. -- Mononoke 10:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
101. Oppose arbitrators need to decisive, once they are involved a decision needs to be made Gnangarra 15:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
102. Oppose lack of experience in disputes. -- Marcika 18:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC) reply
103. Oppose. Preaky 05:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
104. -- Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     Oppose it would be nice if the canidate would answer question, but also, he lacks experince in disputes... CuBiXcRaYfIsH 06:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     • CuBiXcRaYfIsH does not have suffrage; he registered at 22:58, 15 December 2005 (UTC). ( caveats) — Cryptic (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply

105. Oppose. Stood so late that candidate couldn't properly be investigated via hustings, perhaps deliberately. -- Victim of signature fascism | help remove biblecruft 18:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC) reply
106. Oppose per Talrias and Dr Cash. Youngamerican 14:22, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
107. Oppose. -- moof 20:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply
108. Oppose Bratsche ^{talk | Esperanza} 23:53, 16 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     Oppose. Sorry. Detriment 00:28, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     User had less than 150 edits at the start of the election, so may not have suffrage. Flcelloguy ( A note?) 02:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply

109. Lack of experience, somewhat naive promises in candidate statement. Guettarda 14:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
110. Oppose lack of experience. kaal 16:31, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
111. There's a difference between judging someone by the length of their path and just not having enough experience for the job. Ingoolemo  ^talk 17:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC) reply
112. Oppose Tuohirulla 22:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC) reply
113. Oppose, despite admirable attitude; inexperienced. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 17:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC) reply
114. Oppose, immature demeanor - JustinWick 03:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     Oppose, lack of experience. Nortonew 02:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply

     • Nortonew does not have suffrage; he had only 138 edits as of 00:00, 9 January 2006 (UTC). ( caveats) — Cryptic (talk) 05:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC) reply

115. Oppose Flcelloguy ( A note?) 01:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply
116. Oppose RFA'a are not a place of bringinng people together, they often result in sanctions and difficult decisions. ( Bjorn Tipling 06:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)) reply
117. Oppose CDThieme 23:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC) reply