Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2009/Comments/RMHED

RHMED[edit]

Is this a serious candidacy?--chaser (talk) 21:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. I think it's intended as a hilarious and amusingly original joke. AGK 22:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, can we make a motion to strike down this joke candidacy?--Ipatrol (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No; the editor is eligible to run. There are no other restrictions, so unless there's consensus that it is disruptive, there is no issue here. Skomorokh 02:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His string of RfAs pretty much mocked the community, his ArbCom run last year had the brilliant candidate phrase "If you want to see the shit hit the fan, then vote for me" as well as the startling assertion that he was a drunk, not an alcoholic, and this isn't even touching his actions as an editor. He racked up ten times as many Opposes as non-moral Supports, and hasn't shown he merits any better this time, quite aside from his edit count showing he took most of 2009 off. Ravenswing 14:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Analysis[edit]

A detailed analysis of this candidate's edits in article, user and project space can be found at User:Franamax/Ucontribs-2009/RMHED. Franamax (talk) 06:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of Headbomb's comment[edit]

Holy shit! I know it's on the talk page of a user I'd see how far I can punt, but Wikipedia is a place of passive aggressive backstabbing, young man! I will give the man credit for at least speaking his mind instead of issuing veiled threats, that's for sure. Vodello (talk) 21:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]