Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2025/Candidates

2025 Arbitration Committee Elections

Status as of 03:09 (UTC), Thursday, 4 December 2025 (Purge)

Thank you for participating in the 2025 Arbitration Committee Elections. The preliminary results have been posted.
Next up: The final results are pending certification by the scrutineers.
You are invited to leave feedback on the election process.

Shortcut

WP:ACE2025/CWP:ACE2025/C

The nomination statements of editors running in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections appear below.

Eligibility criteria

An editor is eligible to stand as a candidate if they:

have a registered account which has made at least 500 mainspace edits before 1 November 2025,
are not prevented from submitting their candidacy by a block or ban,
meet the Wikimedia Foundation's criteria for access to non-public personal data,
are willing to sign the Foundation's non-public information confidentiality agreement,^[a] and
have disclosed any previous or alternate accounts in their election statement (legitimate accounts which have been declared to the Arbitration Committee before the close of nominations do not need to be publicly disclosed).

Caution about scrutiny

Candidates should be aware that they are likely to receive considerable internal and external scrutiny. External scrutiny may include attempts to investigate on- and off-wiki activities; previous candidates have had personal details revealed and unwanted contact made with employers and family. We are unable to prevent this and such risks will continue if you are successful.

Simultaneous membership on other committees

To avoid any potential conflicts of interest, current arbitrators may not serve as members of either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee.

Candidate statements

Statements must:

be submitted after 00:00 UTC on 02 November 2025 and until 23:59 UTC on 11 November 2025,
not exceed a limit of 400 words^[b] (although candidates are free to link to a longer statement if they wish),
confirm that the candidate will fully comply with the criteria for access to non-public data,
include a disclosure of all prior and alternate accounts or confirmation that all such accounts have been declared to the Arbitration Committee, and
be created using the inputbox below, by appending your username to the existing text, clicking the button, and following the instructions.

Applications are considered complete only when properly filled out and transcluded by the deadline. Deadlines will be strictly enforced regardless of technical problems that may occur. Candidates are advised to have their application ready early.

The nomination period is now over.

Footnotes

^
From the Wikimedia Foundation's Access to nonpublic personal data policy:
Because we believe that safeguarding the privacy of the Wikimedia community is an important Wikimedia value, those who have access to nonpublic personal data need to:
- Be at least 18 years old (except email response team members, who must be at least 16 years old);
- Provide contact information; and
- Sign a confidentiality agreement.
^ The mandatory disclosure of alternate accounts and declaration of intent to comply with the WMF identification policy are exempt from the 400-word limit, although candidates are encouraged to be concise.

Standing candidates

Click to shuffle candidates

HouseBlaster

Hello, I'm HouseBlaster, and I am running for the Arbitration Committee!

I'm an avid Wikipedia reader; that's still how I spend most of my Wikipedia-related time. As an editor, I'm a current arbitration clerk, administrator, VRT agent, and global renamer. I've spent time closing discussions at categories for discussion, assessing consensus and tactfully resolving close challenges. I volunteer as a newcomer mentor through the built-in mentorship program; newbies are the future of the project, and I do my utmost to support them. I work on content, too—examples include 1934 German head of state referendum and Tandon v. Newsom (with the excellent SilverLocust).

As a clerk, I've worked on making it easier to interact with ArbCom. Some highlights include the overhaul of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Directory, to ease navigating the labyrinth of ArbCom. I also worked on recruiting clueful, kind clerks—I am really proud of the group of editors we now have on the team. I also dabble in template work, like upgrading {{contentious topics/talk notice}} (handles multiple topics in one banner) and {{casenav}} (displays a nifty status).

As an arb, I'd like to continue de-mystifying ArbCom. I'd engage with parties in the evidence phase, giving informal feedback on whether evidence is signal or noise—hopefully leading to better evidence submissions. It should be easier and faster to get clarification from ArbCom: it shouldn't take three weeks to determine whether an edit violates the extended-confirmed restriction.

ArbCom has also recently struggled with activity. I pledge that I will mark myself inactive or abstain if I do not have the capacity to vote on something in a timely manner. Dragging out cases and motions is not kind to the humans subjected to them. If elected, I fully expect to serve two years—but if circumstances change, my seat will be up in 2026.

Finally, there are two fundamental principles that would guide every vote I cast: behind every username there is a human who deserves to be treated like one, and at the end of the day, we are an encyclopedia attempting to spread free content knowledge at no charge.

I'd be grateful to have your support in this election :)

Disclosures: I am over 18 years old, I meet the requirements to access non-public data, and have signed the relevant NDA. I am not a member of the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. I control the following legitimate alternative accounts: BlasterOfHouses (talk · contribs), User toolbox (talk · contribs), Houseblaster (talk · contribs), House blaster (talk · contribs), and House Blaster (talk · contribs).

Sdrqaz

Hello, I'm Sdrqaz – an editor, administrator, and current member of the Arbitration Committee.

I still believe that the Committee needs diverse perspectives and that I can continue to strengthen it by providing an independent voice. It is unhealthy for the institution – and therefore the Community – to have every member with the same way of thinking. I believe that sanctions should be preventative, not punitive; I believe that people can change, and we should give them opportunities to demonstrate that.

During my term, I have worked to increase transparency and communication with the Community, from the major to the minor. We still need to do more: there were many times when we failed to make important but embarrassing announcements. We should fulfil this duty carefully: for example, I think that it was right that we made the Foundation CheckUser announcement only after the investigation was complete and we had received the proper commitments.

As with most of the Committee's work, my work is not necessarily public. It includes:

Working on functionary processes, coordinating appointments, as well as reforming the questionnaires to reduce unnecessary collection of private information
Implementing the creation of the conflict of interest volunteer response team, writing most of the policy page and the appointments questionnaire, as well as working with the VRT administrators on the queue's creation

I am concerned that most of my colleagues in the last two years have resigned, retired, or are not running. As the Committee and the project continue to face renewal and upheaval, I hope to be a voice of calm and care.

An overview of my content work (such as shadow docket) and administrative work is on my user page. I look forward to listening to the Community and welcome your questions.

Sdrqaz (talk) 13:45, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have signed the confidentiality agreement, and have only edited with this account and an alternative account for public devices. I also have an unused Doppelgänger account.

Clovermoss

Hi, I'm Hannah. I have a long history as a Wikipedian, as I've been editing here since 2018. I don't have a lot of the experience one might normally expect for this position, but I'm a very caring person that does my best to understand the human side of things and be thorough. I'm also willing to learn on the job. I'm applying because there's a serious lack of candidates and someone needs to do it. I'm probably best known for my mobile editing feedback and Wikipedia:Editor reflections. I've been an admin since December 2023, became the Wikimedian of the Year in 2024, and organized a petition for board reform this year. In terms of content, I've done a substantial amount of it, but I'm the proudest of my contributions to Jehovah's Witnesses. When I first started editing that article, it had many content omissions and cited the group's own publications more than 100 times. I've been rewriting the article with a stronger emphasis on secondary, academic sourcing over the course of years. I'm getting close to taking it through FAC.

I have never edited for pay in a way that would require disclosure. For the sake of an informed electorate, there's a few things I'd like to declare regardless. I received about $5000 in the immediate aftermath of the 2024 WCNA after an impromptu fundraiser was organized on my behalf. I did not ask for this money and nearly had a panic attack when I found out about these plans when they were announced as part of the closing ceremony. Despite my conflicted feelings, I did accept it as there were no strings attached. I used it to pay off some debt and help someone close to me obtain stable housing. I also plan to be compensated for some work I'll hopefully undertake in the near future for Wikiportraits and a Wikimedian in Residence position. I promise that I'll never become a generalized "editor for hire".

I meet the criteria for the foundation's access to non-private data policy and am willing to sign it. Alternate accounts of mine are User:Clevermoss and User:HannahClover.

HJ Mitchell

For those who don't know me, I'm Harry. I've been on ArbCom for the last two years and I'm standing for re-election. I've learnt a lot in those two years. Being an arbitrator is a thankless task and frankly not much fun. I'd rather be writing articles and doing other, more enjoyable, things so if you can find nine candidates you think would do a better job, please vote for them instead; I won't be offended. But ArbCom is also essential—a website and community as complex as ours needs a backstop to prevent disputes about the Arab-Israeli conflict or article naming (to pick two examples) from overwhelming our processes, and to handle things that can't be done in public (usually for privacy or legal reasons). I have been humbled by the dedication of my fellow committee members, and though we may not agree on everything, and life on a committee means that sometimes you get outvoted, I have never doubted that we're all trying to do the right thing. And for that reason, I'm willing to continue serving if you'll have me. ArbCom isn't perfect; we've made some improvements over the last two years but there's more to do. I'm not perfect either; I've made my share of mistakes but I try to work on myself and recognise that I'm fallible. What I offer is not radical reform but a steady pair of hands—someone with staying power, experience, and compassion. I have tried to explain my decisions, for example by giving a rationale for my case votes (I try to make it a rule to give an explanation when opposing or when voting on sanctions for an editor) or by answering questions at ACN.

I bring nearly 17 years' experience as an editor and admin; I have 40 featured articles to my name (though only one since being elected to ArbCom!), including some tricky subjects, and nearly 80,000 admin actions, predominantly anti-abuse and anti-spam. In real life, I have a family and a full-time job as a retail manager so I'm not always around but I feel those other areas of my life bring complimentary skills, and I think it's important that arbs are well-rounded human beings.

Disclosures: accounts (only User:Whisky drinker has non-trivial edits); I have never edited for pay, I comply with the requirements for access to non-public information, and have signed the relevant agreements. That's all folks!

Geni

Well I’ve been around Wikipedia for over two decades now. Been an admin for much of that time and been politically involved enough to be aware of why our policies and practices are what they are. Unless its about lua modules in which case good luck.

I think I can bring two things to arbcom. In the rare case of an actual case I can bring some perspective of what its like to be involved in a dispute that ends up there and how any resulting decision looks (although rather dated since I haven’t been subject of a case since 2007). In the increasingly common work involving offwiki groups I can bring the perspective of someone who has spent a lot of time foundation and chapter adjacent while never being part of either.

I have spent my more recent years editing in the sunny uplands of wikipedia (the vast area of articles where no one is going to pick a fight) rather than the ANI trenches but I do follow such things enough to be aware of what is going on while being able to keep a solid perspective on how peaceful most of Wikipedia is.

Disclosures: I have created various declared socks over the years for various reasons. Most include the name “Geni” and only user:Genisock2 was the last to see any use and that was 7 years ago. I have never edited for pay (well ok the WMF bought be a sandwich once). If elected can and will fully comply with the criteria for access to non-public data.

Hawkeye7

I have been a Wikipedia editor for over twenty years now, with over 120,000 edits. I have contributed to more than 100 Featured Articles, 300 Good Articles and 500 DYK articles. I have an MA and a PhD in military history, and became the lead co-ordinator of our Military History Project in 2022. In this capacity I assess articles, close reviews and write articles and book reviews for our project newsletter, The Bugle. I assist at DYK with reviews and the assembly of the prep areas. I write and maintain the bots used by the featured article and list processes. I was runner up in the WikiCup in 2013, MILHIST Military historian of the year in 2012 and 2024.

I have been involved with GLAM work with the Australian War Memorial and the Australian Paralympic Committee. I was instructor in four Wikimedia Australia workshops, and an accredited Wikimedia Australia media representative at the Paralympic Games in London in 2012, in Rio in 2016 and Paris in 2024. Since then I have continued creating and expanding articles on Paralympic sports. I have travelled around Australia, and to Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates and the United States covering paralympic sports. Some of you may remember me from Wikimania in Hong Kong in 2013, Esino Lario in 2015 or Katowice and Adelaide in 2024.

I want ArbCom to take the lead in solving problems. ArbCom needs transparency in the way that it operates to generate trust. Where possible, it should discuss cases openly and not in camera. It should issue rulings that give clear guidance to editors and admins. Every ruling should be accompanied by a statement of what is being done and why. Where possible, evidence should be restricted to what is on the evidence page. Arbs should recuse themselves on a reasonable request to do so. Above all, I want ArbCom to look beyond editor behaviour and always consider what is best for the encyclopaedia.

I have never been blocked or banned. Thirteen years ago I was desysopped by ArbCom over blocking an unblockable editor. This was a reckless act, and I was punished for it. At the time I truly believed that the editor in question was going to persist in a course of behaviour that would eventually see them banned for good. Since then, I have never been involved in another ArbCom case.

I have never edited for pay. I meet the criteria of and will abide by the Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy, and I ~~am willing to sign~~ have signed the confidentiality agreement.

Girth Summit

Hi - Girth Summit here. This is a bit last minute, but having seen the appeal on AN, it looks like there is a shortage of people willing to put themselves forward for this role. I have in the past been encouraged by one or two sitting arbs to consider standing, but I've always had stuff going on IRL that made me question whether I'd have the time. I think things are a bit more settled at the moment however, so if there is a shortage of available volunteers, maybe it's time that I step up.

A bit about myself. I am Scottish, and live in the UK. My account is from 2008, but I only really became seriously active in 2018. I started out doing counter vandalism work, then moved into working the NPP queue, before being bitten by the article-writing bug. A few of the articles I've worked on have been recognised as GAs and FAs, which I am proud of; I have been lucky enough to work with some of our most talented contributors on some of them, and that collaborative process where we pool our abilities and resources to achieve something that none of us could do as individuals has always been my favourite aspect of this project. I became an admin in 2019 (RfA), and was appointed as a CU in 2021. Since then, I've probably put more effort into SPI than any other part of the project. Perhaps it's time for a change.

Disclaimer: I have very little experience with Arbitration. I initiated a case once (diff), but aside from that I have had little involvement with the committee's procedures, or with Arbitration Enforcement. Frankly, I have always found the Arbitration process rather baffling, even intimidating. So, if voters are looking for candidates with plenty of hands-on procedural experience with how the committee works, they should look at some of the other excellent people putting themselves forward. If you want someone who knows their way around the project and is prepared to muck in as best they can, then I would be willing to serve, with apologies in advance to the more experienced arbs and clerks for their time which I will no doubt take up pestering them for advice on procedure and paperwork.

Disclosures: I have never edited for pay, I signed the relevant non-public information agreements when I accepted the Checkuser appointment, and I believe that I have remained in compliance with them since that time. I declare another account on my userpage, User:Girth Sockit, but I've never edited with it. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asilvering

Hi, I'm asilvering. I've watched the project as a bystander since the early days, but I only started editing in 2021. I ran for administrator in September 2024 and wrote a debrief about it. In September 2025, I applied for and was appointed to checkuser. I recently received an Editor of the Week award for patience and tenacity as a champion of the unseen. I think those are good qualities for an arbitrator to have, and I'd appreciate the chance to live up to them.

If you think you've seen my name before but can't remember where, it might have been from my nominations of a number of very fine people for adminship over the past year, or my notes about Articles for Deletion at the past two admin elections (1, 2). These days, AFDs tend to close before I get a chance to look at them, so you're more likely to spot me working the requests for unblock queue, at Articles for Creation, or at Sockpuppet Investigations. I'm also one of the moderators of the Wikimedia Community Discord server.

People talk about what "role" they'd play on the committee, and about filling gaps in those roles. I've never been on the committee, so I can't say I have any real idea what those roles are or what is needed. But it looks like what's been needed this past year is people who will step up to do the work that needs to be done, and I can be that person. Also, as I write this, there have only been five nominations for nine open seats. It looks like Arbcom needs someone to bang the recruitment drum. Maybe I can be that person too.

I have never edited for pay. As a checkuser, I have already agreed to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy and have signed the confidentiality agreement. I have no other accounts, and have never edited under any other names.

SilverLocust

Hey, I'm Jenson. I've been an administrator for the past year and a clerk for the Arbitration Committee for the past 16 months (through some big cases like Palestine-Israel articles 5 and most recently Transgender healthcare and people). For about the first year of that, most all of the arbitration clerk work was being done by two active clerks (me and my incessantly kind co-clerk HouseBlaster). We've just acquired 5 great new clerks to take over (along with 2 returning clerks), so I've decided to stand for election to be an arbitrator, as my clerical services are no longer much needed. As an admin, I have also helped out with some arbitration enforcement tasks: protecting 1000 pages, creating editnotices for about 2500, and participating from time to time at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard (and helping with some gradual improvements to it).

I will remain on ArbCom only so long as I am regularly able to be active, and will note whenever I am temporarily inactive. ArbCom has many unseen and thankless tasks, but many hands make light work. In contrast, when arbitrators counted as active do not actually vote it makes it hard for the rest of the Committee to promptly resolve divided motions (both public and private) by a majority of the active members. At times motions have been left open for over a month because of arbitrators who neither participated nor noted themselves inactive. I want to minimize that. Similarly, I will seek consensus on ArbCom when issues can be resolved by consensus or four net votes.

Ultimately we are here on Wikipedia as volunteers to create a collaborative encyclopedia for readers – and ArbCom exists as a volunteer body to help enable that collaborative, volunteer community. If you would like to look at some of my content work, see, e.g., Lisa Blatt ( ), Tandon v. Newsom ( with HB), State Dep't v. Muñoz, Grupo Mexicano v. Alliance Bond Fund, Corner Post v. Federal Reserve Board. (For some current projects, see, e.g., Draft:Beauharnais v. Illinois and Draft:De Libellis Famosis.)

The only other account I have ever edited from is SilverLocust+. I have never edited for pay. I will comply with the requirements for access to non-public information.

Guerillero

Hi all, I am Tom aka Guerillero (gull-e-arrow or gare-e-arrow). I am running for a third term on the Arbitration Committee because I believe in the arbitration process and would like to give back to the community by being a steady hand on the committee. I am the author of 3 Featured Articles, 6 Featured Lists, and 12 Good Articles. I have served as an Administrator since 2011 and CheckUser since 2014. Over the next two years, I would like to work on the following things:

Hold the line on off-wiki coordination. A large portion of the committee’s private docket has been editors coordinating on Twitter, Discord, or other forums to shape content on the project. If our consensus-based model is to work we need to ensure that groups do not benefit from off-wiki canvasing.
Push the Wikimedia Foundation to become more protective of the global community in child protection matters. The foundation updated the global child protection policy a few weeks ago. If elected, I will advocate to the foundation that the expanded policy is enforced in a way that eliminates the need for local actions on any project.
Advocate for transparency through responsible disclosures. As a CheckUser, I spearheaded the disclosure of SuggestedInvestgation to the community in a way that respects our non-disclosure agreement while delivering as much information to the community as possible. If elected, I would like to continue this effort on the committee.
Reform contentious topics (CT) designations to automatically sunset after three years of non-use. CT is an important tool for allowing administrators extra authority to resolve conduct issues; however that authority should be used sparingly. If administrators have not utilized the authorities in the last three years the topic area is probably no longer contentious enough to need the extra powers that CT allows. In these cases, power should be returned to the community.
Be a workhorse, not a showhorse.

My guide to arbitration is the best place to get an idea of how I think the process currently works.

I would be honored to earn your vote in this year's election.

The fine print

I am over 18.
I have access to CU and already signed the ANPDP. I will continue to abide by it.
I have never received anything of value (cash, gifts, etc.) for my time here.
The only other account worth talking about is In actu (talk · contribs). In the past, I have had access to two other accounts that were used for a single test or a failed idea.

Aoidh

Hello, my name is Aoidh (pronounced /aɪ/) and I became an active editor in 2011, having created my Wikipedia account in 2009. I had an RfA and became an administrator in March 2023, and after WP:ACE2023 became an arbitrator in 2024. While my career and time on the Arbitration Committee doesn't leave as much time as I'd like for article creation, I have created and improved articles to GA status, and have created some templates for Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings, some of which (uw-ewsoft, uw-notvand, uw-fringe1, uw-fringe2, uw-fringe3) are included with Twinkle.

I am running for a second term because I want to continue the work that we've done to improve ArbCom and its processes while also evaluating ArbCom matters with empathy for people involved, but still acting decisively when a tough decision must be made. During my two years on ArbCom, I have been an active arbitrator for my entire term, and was a drafter on six of the nine ArbCom cases in 2024 and 2025, one of which I did not draft due to my recusal from the case.

I have never edited for pay, I meet the criteria of and will abide by the Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy, and I have signed the confidentiality agreement. I have an alternate account User:Aoidh (Away) that I have for devices that leave my home (phone/laptop) and I originally edited under the name User:SudoGhost until being renamed to Aoidh in 2013.

Izno

Hello. I've done this before. I got a public accolade for it.

You can expect a lot of the same as my last go-around. I might be slightly less active, but you might not notice it since a ton of my work was behind the scenes.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

My socks are on my user page. I have signed the relevant forms.

[1] From the Wikimedia Foundation's Access to nonpublic personal data policy:
Because we believe that safeguarding the privacy of the Wikimedia community is an important Wikimedia value, those who have access to nonpublic personal data need to:
Be at least 18 years old (except email response team members, who must be at least 16 years old);

Provide contact information; and

Sign a confidentiality agreement.

[2] Be at least 18 years old (except email response team members, who must be at least 16 years old);

[3] Provide contact information; and

[4] Sign a confidentiality agreement.

[2] The mandatory disclosure of alternate accounts and declaration of intent to comply with the WMF identification policy are exempt from the 400-word limit, although candidates are encouraged to be concise.

[a]