Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gwen Gale 2: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Gwen Gale: Support is 41
CattleMan (talk | contribs)
1,271 edits
Line 112: Line 112:
#'''Sí'''. '''[[User:WBOSITG|<font color="navy">weburiedoursecrets</font>]][[User talk:WBOSITG|<font color="navy">inthegarden</font>]]''' 19:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
#'''Sí'''. '''[[User:WBOSITG|<font color="navy">weburiedoursecrets</font>]][[User talk:WBOSITG|<font color="navy">inthegarden</font>]]''' 19:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Everyone who got here ahead of me said it best...and first! [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 19:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Everyone who got here ahead of me said it best...and first! [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 19:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
#'''Support''' Per ANswer to my question. <font face="Arial Black"> [[User:Trees Rock|<font color="Green" size="2">Trees Rock</font>]]<sup>[[User:Trees_Rock#Goal|<font color="Green" size="1">MyGoal</font>]]</sup></font> 20:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


=====Oppose=====
=====Oppose=====

Revision as of 20:17, 18 May 2008

Gwen Gale

Voice your opinion (talk page) (41/1/2); Scheduled to end 22:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Gwen Gale (talk · contribs) - Ladies and Gentlemen, I offer you Gwen Gale, my next candidate for adminship.

Gwen Gale joined Wikipedia in early 2004 under the account Wyss, which she amassed over 13,000 edits under, and used up until late 2006. With Gwen Gale, she has over 17,000 edits, totaling over 30,000 under both. To move away from edit counts, Gwen’s article writing is impressive: she has significantly edited and improved articles ranging from topics such as Amelia Earhart and Apollo 1 to Lesbian and Shamrock Hotel. In addition to her great article-writing skills, Gwen is also at good vandal-fighting, knowing when to use and when not to use the rollback feature, which I granted to her. She is also very active on WP:ANI, giving regular input to issues raised there.

This is her second request for adminship. She was nominated by Epbr123 in January. However, that RfA did not pass because a lot of the users opposing were concerned about past disputes, and whether she had learned from and moved past them; and also some minor issues about her temperament. I do believe that Gwen has indeed taken the concerns raised in that RfA to heart, and will make an excellent administrator.

In my own interactions with Gwen Gale, I have found her to be very civil to me and with other users: she’s great at communicating, and it’s a delight when talking to her. She has E-mail enabled, which will be useful when editors will need to contact her in private.

I believe that Gwen Gale is easily experienced enough to be an administrator. I am honored to be able to nominate her. Acalamari 22:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination from Antandrus

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you Gwen Gale, already known to many of you as a calm, helpful, and respectful presence and voice of reason in many parts of Wikipedia. I had opposed her on her last run, and it's the oppose I most wish I could retract of any I've ever made: a lapse in judgement on my part. I'm making it right by co-nominating here, for people this good we should not pass by. Gwen has already been acting as an administrator, as anyone who has followed her posts on the noticeboards has observed. Every time she posts, it's helpful in some way. This is as rare as it is wonderful, and a refreshing change from the negativity which is so common there.

For her exceptional talents, which include finely-articulated common sense, skill at defusing conflicts and de-escalating dramas, being bold where appropriate, kind always, and being an exemplary Wikipedian in every way, I co-nominate Gwen, in conjunction with Acalamari. We need more people like her in the admin corps. For integrity and wise advice, with a delightful dash of humor, I rate her among the best we've got. People this good need to be given keys to the mop closet: please join me in supporting Gwen. Antandrus (talk) 00:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Acalamari and Antandrus, thanks. I accept your nomination. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: For the past few months I've spent much time at WP:ANI. Lots of the posts there don't need admin attention but rather, an experienced editor and I've tried to help out with many of those, as time has allowed. However, more admins are always needed at ANI and I'd be one of them, same goes for WP:AIV, WP:RFP, CAT:CSD and WP:AN3 along with anywhere else I might be asked to pitch in.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I tend to work on topics which for me, represent an overlap of two or more core areas of my own interest. I try to combine WP:V and WP:WEIGHT with a steadfastly wide historical perspective and coherent writing style. I always see an article as a "whole" so my edits are often targeted at integrating helpful but perhaps carelessly written edits into a smoothly flowing narrative. I think my most helpful contributions have had to do with putting all this together, with all kinds of editors. More often than not, one can nudge a very knowledgeable but inexperienced editor towards sharing what amounts to their acquired knowledge of verifiable sources.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I've had no meaningful disputes since my last RfA in January. Although, having come to understand something about how and why Wikipedia works, I'd already snugly settled into my peaceful, "hard core cooperative" editing outlook at the time, I took the lingering criticism I got back then truly and deeply to heart and I must say, the past three months have been by far the smoothest and happiest I've ever spent editing Wikipedia. While you're reading this though, we very much need reliable sources about the history of Hummus. Please help us out if you know anything about scholarly or near-scholarly sources on this topic.
4. What are your thoughts on the drama in your past RfA? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A: It was drama! But it helped a lot. When all was done, the support and kind words I got were wonderful and I was very pleased with the net outcome. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, perhaps I wasn't very clear. There are a lot of legitimate issues raised in your past RfA. There were also come cases where the signal-to-noise ratio was low. What are your thoughts on both of these cases? (ie. what do you take out of the legit. issues, and out of the all noise parts of the RfA?) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As Antandrus so insightfully noted above, after my last RfA I deliberately began acting and editing everywhere as I had already planned, like an admin (in so much as an editor could do this without misleading anyone) and was very thankful for the added input. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Option Question By Trees Rock

5. How can we trust you as a admin?
Note that as per this discussion, no-one will object if you don't answer this — iridescent 02:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note I still can ask the question Trees RockMyGoal 02:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A: Cuz :) Which is to say, if I botch something, please tell me and I'll fix it, fast (the fun link says 12 months but the community should take this as a "lifetime" thing). This said, I'm familiar with admin policies and often check them anyway before doing something on a project page, I always try to be civil as can be (even if it hurts during the odd, weak moment, eek!), I haven't mis-used the rollback rights and I've very much taken heed of and addressed any past concerns. I hope my contributions and behavior speak for themselves. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Optional Question By Zginder

6. What do you consider the most important Wikipedia policy and why?
A: WP:V, because we're building an encyclopedia, a widely noted and consulted tertiary reference source. Every other Wikipedia policy is meant to get us there as smoothly and with the least kerfuffle as can be. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Optional question from Dlohcierekim

7. Just finished reading your prior RfA and the talk page. At the time, others seemed to share the concerns raised by BobTheTomato in this one. Some opposers took issue with your responses to opposes. What has changed since then?
A. Hopefully, my answer here might also be taken as having further to do with User:Dihydrogen Monoxide's q4. In the aftermath of my last RfA, Slim Virgin said something which I've carried with me ever since: Gwen, the lesson here is that, as an admin, you have to learn to take the blame for everything that goes wrong with the website -- including things you have done, things you have not done, and things you couldn't even imagine doing. Otherwise, you'll be accused of being thin-skinned and will probably spend your entire adminship in tears. Meanwhile, I decided straight off to edit following my notions of how the "most helpful admin on Wikipedia" would do things. This shift wasn't hard to make and it wasn't all that big, but there was a shift, which I had planned on making by then anyway. If you want to ask a followup for more specifics, please go ahead, but it mostly has to do with skirting confrontation even in the most daunting of source disagreements and instead, doing everything I can to bring editors of many and sundry outlooks together in building stable articles. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

RfAs for this user:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Gwen Gale before commenting.

Discussion

Support
  1. Support, seen her around enough, no issues. Wizardman 01:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. I wholeheartedly support Gwen for administrator. She is balanced, coolheaded, insightful, open-minded, and thoughtful... all qualities demanded of a good administrator. Pinkville (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Strong support We need more Gwens who actually think about what they're doing and less human-bot hybrids. I don't always agree with her but at least she understands what we're supposed to be doing here. — iridescent 01:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Change to Strong support thanks to a perfect answer to Q6. Gwen is WP:NOT#MYSPACE made flesh. — iridescent 19:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per my co-nom, of course! Antandrus (talk) 01:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support, I had some reservations last time around, but I believe that those concerns have been addressed and that the tools will be well-placed here. Best of luck. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, per the reasons I gave during the first RfA. Majoreditor (talk) 01:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support, obviously. Sceptre (talk) 02:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support of course, per Pinkville, Iridescent, and of course Majoreditor. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. Tons of experience and a very prolific mainspace contributor. I don't really like her shortcutting in the edit summaries, "c", "flw", "det", "capt", but I can get over that. Useight (talk) 02:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Trust nominaters. Gwen Gale is very reliable, net gain and more. Good luck. --Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 02:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. I strongly support this nomination for the reasons I listed in my nomination statement and the reasons I supported last time. Acalamari 02:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support No problems here. Sp encerT♦C 02:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Strong support. I didn't realize that this User was User:Wyss, but I have a great deal of respect for Wyss. Corvus cornixtalk 02:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Impressed with wisdom and overall high clue quotient shown in frequent comments and actions at WP:AN/WP:ANI. Thoughtful, helpful, cool, and (based on the fact that I agree about 75% of the time) smart. ("Very smart" would have required agreeing with me over 90% of the time...) Significant mainspace contributions help make up for all the useless admins like me who don't write. --barneca (talk) 03:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. A "high clue quotient" is what we need in administrators. Daniel (talk) 03:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support -- Ready for the mop. --SharkfaceT/C 03:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Strong support - absolutely no problems here - Alison ❤ 03:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support - Past experience with this editor gives me great confidence that she will make a great admin. --Kralizec! (talk) 04:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Midorihanacontribs~ userpage 05:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 05:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support - Incredible article work. Wisdom89 (T / C) 06:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Strong support Sensible, good grip on policy, civil. Outstanding candidate. --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. —Dark talk 06:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Supported last time. Spartaz Humbug! 07:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. My interactions with Gwen/Wyss back in 2006/early 2007 were shaky, but I've been impressed by her civility and cool-headedness as of late. At this time, I don't see any concerns granting her adminship. Ral315 (talk) 07:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. GOAL! O I mean Support MBisanz talk 07:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. I would suggest Gwen try and put a bit more effort/thought into giving fuller answers to questions asked of her in an administrative capacity. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Certainly. I think she'll do great work as an admin. --PeaceNT (talk) 10:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Aye - no problems here now, good candidate. Black Kite 10:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Agree: her answers to our questions were good enough. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 10:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. · AndonicO Engage. 11:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support I agree with Iridescent: we need more human Gwens and less human-bot hybrids. jmcw (talk) 12:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Marginly "light" answers to the questions are no match to a review of contributions - which shows a dedicated policy and guideline wise editor. In addition the candidate has clearly worked hard to address the concerns from the last RfA. Definetly a net positive to our work. Pedro :  Chat  12:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support seems to be a cool headed, civil person. Good skills in deletion and article building.--Lenticel (talk) 12:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Strong support. Rudget (Help?) 12:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support I've nothing that would indicate she'd have any trouble as an admin. CrazyChemGuy (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Drama-free support. Learned her lesson, will be a fine admin - Revolving Bugbear 13:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support wonderful candidate, brilliant article work. Good luck! --Cameron (t|p|c) 16:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. Good editor. Hope to be working with you on the admin team soon! Malinaccier (talk) 17:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Sí. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support Everyone who got here ahead of me said it best...and first! Ecoleetage (talk) 19:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support Per ANswer to my question. Trees RockMyGoal 20:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose. As before, so I copy the text from my previous oppose: In my dealings with her at Abraham Lincoln, I was accused of edit-warring, personal attacks, and all manner of wikipolicy violations, none of which I'd committed. She couches her accusations of bad faith in faux politeness, but they remain unsubstantiated allegations, as she never supported them in any way. In addition, she edit-warred at that page, badgered against consensus, and displayed some quite blatant POV problems at the talkpage as pointed out above. It's disturbing to me that this candidacy is on track for promotion. BobTheTomato (MrWhich) (talk) 08:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    An interesting thread she started on the talkpage of her last RfA, basically insulting all of those who dared oppose her. BobTheTomato (MrWhich) (talk) 08:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd also like to add that this oppose is at least partially per her non-answer to the perfectly legitimate Q#4. BobTheTomato (MrWhich) (talk) 08:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    No the only reason that wasn't answered was because she was offline and has only answered now that she's come back and seen it.--Phoenix-wiki 11:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To judge from the timestamps of Bob's comment and her answer to question 4, I assume that by 'non-answer' he means 'inadequate answer' Olaf Davis | Talk 12:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    BobTheTomato, I'm fascinated by your list of contributions: since 23 January, you appear to have been exclusively interested in Gwen Gale. Care to comment on what might be taken or mistaken for somewhat obsessive behavior? -- Hoary (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Something of a mystery here as user has asked to Vanish. Dlohcierekim 15:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    And Gwen's treatment of me at Abraham Lincoln was part of the reason why. I will gladly unvanish this account to oppose this nominee. Apparently, she will get the tools notwithstanding my oppose, but the oppose should stand, even if it means unvanishing my account. BobTheTomato (MrWhich) (talk) 15:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
  1. Neutral - it's been four months since this candidate' last nomination. I think any opposition votes should focus on this time period. Her obvious and blatant prior misdeeds should be overlooked as a courtesy to the nominating admins who have, no doubt, been providing the appropriate mentoring and oversight. Rklawton (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral -Pending answer to my question. Trees RockMyGoal 14:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gwen_Gale_2&oldid=213315608"