Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/K6ka: Difference between revisions
→Support: s |
→Support: !vote and wow |
||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
#'''Support''' - highly accomplished for his age! [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 21:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' - highly accomplished for his age! [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 21:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' strong candidate <font face="#" color="#35b794">[[User:Dschslava|'''Dsch'''slava]]</font><font color="#3558b7"><sup>[[Special:Contribs/Dschslava|'' Δx '']]</sup>[[User talk:Dschslava|parlez moi]]</font> 21:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' strong candidate <font face="#" color="#35b794">[[User:Dschslava|'''Dsch'''slava]]</font><font color="#3558b7"><sup>[[Special:Contribs/Dschslava|'' Δx '']]</sup>[[User talk:Dschslava|parlez moi]]</font> 21:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC) |
||
#'''Strong support''' Lucky 25? Wow! I reached out to k6ka ''just'' last week regarding them considering adminship. After writing a nomination, a few editors approached me cautioning k6ka's range of experience, etc. Second-guessing prospects, I told k6ka that I would nominate after a bit more of time. In the same boat as you, [[User:MusikAnimal|Musik]]. Clearly, I have no second thoughts about this support. Well deserved, and Happy New Year [[User:k6ka|k6ka]]! --[[User:JustBerry|JustBerry]] ([[User talk:JustBerry|talk]]) 21:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC) |
|||
=====Oppose===== |
=====Oppose===== |
Revision as of 21:54, 31 December 2016
Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (25/0/0); Scheduled to end 19:41, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Nomination
K6ka (talk · contribs) – It's long overdue that I present to you k6ka for consideration for adminship. In many ways, k6ka reminds me of me: they're rather gnomish, focusing more on the maintenance side of the project and helping other users rather than writing articles directly. I first came across k6ka in 2014 when they began clerking at the Wikipedia:Changing username venues. I was rather impressed with their diligent work there - they had a keen sense of the relevant policies, guidelines, and community norms, and excelled at helping users navigate the sometimes-confusing username change process. Accordingly, I encouraged them to apply for the meta:Global renamer privilege when it became available to non-bureaucrat users in 2015. Since their successful candidacy, I've had the privilege of working alongside k6ka on the global rename queue, at meta:Steward requests/Username changes, Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple, as well as Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations (where they continue to clerk in advance of the much-awaited global usurpation policy). While k6ka does not have a large volume of content-writing contributions that can be presented for scrutiny, neither did I when I became an administrator many moons ago. And we need administrators who are willing to do the grunt-work of clearing backlogs, just as we need our article writers to focus on creating high-quality content for our readers. Accordingly, I strongly recommend granting k6ka the administrative toolset - I'm certain you will not be disappointed with their administrative work. –xenotalk 16:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Co-nomination
xeno gave a great summary of K6ka's work in the renaming-department of Wikipedia. With a whopping 34,000 mainspace edits however, K6ka also does great work with counter-vandalism. First thing one notices when they go to k6ka's talk page are multiple notices that would help new editors, which are frequently attracted to vandal-fighters' talk pages. If you visit k6ka's subpages, there are multiple ones that might attract a new user. One that catches the eye is User:K6ka/Becoming a vandal fighter. It is pretty much an unintended, extremely simplified version of User:Callanecc/CVUA/Tasks. With 3 years of activity, a clean blocklog, and exemplary responses in the archives, it is pretty clear that k6ka is civil. I am sure that k6ka would be a great contribution to the mop corps. Dat GuyTalkContribs 19:16, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, thank you for the nomination. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A: I intend on focusing primarily on AIV, as my background on Wikipedia is largely comprised of vandal fighting. I have also reported a number of usernames to UAA, and my background in global renaming will also come in handy there, as I can already process username change requests. I have tried out New Pages Patrolling, but very scantily, and I don't intend on working there anytime soon. I also don't have much interest in working at AFD. I have had experience with the admin tools on Wikia, but Wikia and Wikipedia are two very different places, so expect me to be a bit careful with the tools within the first week of adminship. Of course, I'll ask for help during difficult situations.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: Much on my work on Wikipedia has been fighting vandalism, and recently I have been very active on WP:CHUS, processing requests there. Before I received global rename, I was a clerk there — a non-admin clerk, admittedly, but the job didn't require the admin bit, and it was really mostly about fixing malformed requests and notifying users about problematic requests.
- I will admit that I do not have much content creation tucked under my belt. Most of my non-maintenance edits on Wikipedia have been gnomish work, fixing typos, some copyediting here and there, adding a source, etc. Recently I've been working on Tribu (film), which isn't a particularly *exciting* article, but while it may not meet up to even GA standard, it still looks better than when I first found the article earlier this year.
- 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 been fairly careful to avoid conflict on Wikipedia, though there have been some shoe scuffs here and there. The most significant of the conflicts I had been involved in took place at Talk:Street Artists Program of San Francisco about two years ago. I only made one edit to the article in question; I noticed that a substantial part of the article was removed despite being sourced, so I reverted with an explanation. I tried to explain our policies to the editor that got reverted, but as I lacked interest in the subject of the article, I limited my participation on the talk page. There was a resulting edit war on the article, one that I did not partake in, and eventually the editor was blocked per WP:NOTHERE. It did help me familiarize myself with the content policies, and above all it was a very important reminder not to lose one's cool and to always assume good faith, especially if you're telling other editors to do the same. I don't recall too many times where I have been frustrated with an editor, and I'm willing to apologize for any cases where I have snapped, since that's never okay even if I was right.
- My only significant appearance on ANI can be found here. It was not a user conduct issue, but a technical one; a glitch in the MediaWiki software resulted in random users being notified about messages left on their talk page even when no such message existed. It just so happened that one of the warnings I (correctly) issued somehow gave an innocent user a notification, and the user got confused and thought something was up. The problem was already being discussed at the correct venues, and was fixed shortly after.
You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.
- Additional question from Linguist111
- 4. You see the following usernames at UAA or in the new users log. None of the users have edited yet. What do you do?
- JulieLejeune&MelissaRusso
- K7ka
- SpeedyDelete201
- DonaldTrumpFan930
- Jim bo
- UndoEdits732
- IWannaBeAnAdminAndSPIClerk
- A:
- JulieLejeune&MelissaRusso: This username is clearly in violation of WP:ISU, as it implies that the account is in use by two or more people. A quick Google search indicates that these two names are real people who are already deceased, so that would also be of something to note, especially if the user chooses to edit articles that are related to the subjects in their username. WP:UAAI states that
it is not sufficient to block an account for implied sharing alone
, so the best course of action would be to tap the user on the shoulder and inform them about their username, and encourage them to change it. - K7ka: A red flag for sure. I'm willing to err on the side of caution and wait for them to edit. If it's clear that they are attempting to impersonate me and are disrupting Wikipedia, I'll block immediately. If they aren't editing, it may be best to AGF and leave them a note advising them about the similarities between our usernames.
- SpeedyDelete201: May count as a misleading username as it
appear[s] similar to naming conventions used by community administrative processes
. If they aren't editing disruptively I'd softblock and encourage them to change their username. - DonaldTrumpFan930: Nothing inherently wrong with this username, but would monitor this user for any biased/promotional editing. Highly unlikely that they would be blocked for their username, however.
- Jim bo: May be an intentional reference to Jimbo Wales, and may also be perfectly innocent; their nickname (or real name) may be "Jimbo" or "Jim Bo" and there's nothing wrong with that. Would monitor for inappropriate edits, however.
- UndoEdits732: Much like "SpeedyDelete201", it may count as a misleading username and it may imply disruption as well. Again, if there aren't any disruptive edits, I'd softblock and encourage them to change their username.
- IWannaBeAnAdminAndSPIClerk: This username doesn't seem to be a clear-cut violation of WP:MISLEADNAME, as it makes it fairly clear that it isn't yet an admin or an SPI clerk. It does imply, however, that the person behind the username already has a knowledge of Wikipedia administrators and sockpuppet investigations. I would not block immediately without sufficient evidence; it could be a troll, an actual sockpuppet, or a young, enthusiastic hat collector — best case scenario is that it's nothing harmful at all. Would monitor their activity, and if a block is issued, it would be because of their actions; the username itself is not enough to warrant a block alone.
- JulieLejeune&MelissaRusso: This username is clearly in violation of WP:ISU, as it implies that the account is in use by two or more people. A quick Google search indicates that these two names are real people who are already deceased, so that would also be of something to note, especially if the user chooses to edit articles that are related to the subjects in their username. WP:UAAI states that
- —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:19, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- A:
- Additional question from Beyond My Ken
- 5. In 2013 53% of your edits were to mainspace. In 2014, they fell to 47%, then 43% in 2015, and this year they are a little under 30%. Why is that? What have you been been doing instead of editing the content of the encyclopedia?
- A: In 2013 I was still a fairly inexperienced editor, without much knowledge of the Project namespace; as such, I mostly edited mainspace articles. In 2014 and 2015, I focused heavily on vandalism-fighting and patrolling, which created a significant uptick in User talk and Project namespace edits. I did less patrolling in 2016, however, and primarily focused on working at WP:CHU, hence the reduction in mainspace edits. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:28, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Discussion
- Links for K6ka: K6ka (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for K6ka can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
Support
- Support as co-nominator. Dat GuyTalkContribs 19:43, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support I've known K6ka for a while now and I can say, without a doubt, that I would trust them with the admin tool set. Their judgment in matters of renaming prove that they are competent enough to be granted the bit. --Majora (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support – I've interacted with K6ka several times on IRC (often when our names are confused), and they will clearly be a great admin. KSFTC 19:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Lets see how many people say thought he was one already ;) Full RuneSpeak, child of Guthix 19:52, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Obvious net positive. k6ka has been trusted with global renamer for a while, which is a right that can crash the site if misused, so he's reached the threshold of trust many times over. As far as competency, every interaction I've had with the candidate has been extremely positive. WP:AIV and WP:UAA both need additional administrators to process things in a timely manner. The former is high-priority, and the latter is chronically backlogged. ~ Rob13Talk 19:53, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Per xeno. Lourdes 19:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Bradv 19:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support: (edit conflict × 5) Another case of "I thought he was already." Clear net positive. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 19:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Obvious net-positive. Thought they were one already. Someone should really write an essay about that. --AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 20:02, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- @AntiCompositeNumber: Ask, and ye shall receive. Lepricavark (talk) 20:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Number 10, double-digits! WP:NETPOSITIVE. Happy New Year! Linguist Moi? Moi. 20:24, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support clear net–positive. Lepricavark (talk) 20:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Per Rob13. Clearly deserves the tools. Joshualouie711talk 20:32, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support - In the nicest possible way this is loooong overdue!, But anywho another excellent candidate who I'm sure will make an excellent admin :), I see no issues here, Good lock. –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 20:38, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support About time. Widr (talk) 20:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Absolutely, no qualms at all. — foxj 20:50, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support as a well rounded editor with a clear need for the tools. K6ka has a demonstrated civility and the level of clue we should expect from our administrators -- samtar talk or stalk 20:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support - it would be almost inappropriate to simply say, "we need more admins," because it ignores how strong a candidate K6ka is. I've seen him around plenty and have full faith in his abilities and competence with the mop. Best, GABgab 20:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Why not? -FASTILY 21:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support Absolutely. Go forth and fix UAA. ;-) Katietalk 21:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Certainly. Haven't encountered this user before, but he seems to be just what we should be looking for in new admins. United States Man (talk) 21:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Another editor I'm surprised to learn doesn't have the tools. 81k edits, no blocks, strong gnome. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support I started to write a nomination statement for K6ka over a year ago, but never finished it or presented it to him. Now I won't get the credit as a nominator :( but that's OK, just glad to see this happening! On the counter-vandalism front, K6ka is easily one of the best in the fleet. It only makes sense to give them the block and protect buttons. I can count on two hands instances they've resorted to pinging admins on IRC to protect a page due to rapid influx of vandalism, when the WP:RFPP request had gone unanswered for some time. Clear case of they need the tools, but don't have them, and the project consequently suffers. That's a net-positive, but I think they'll far exceed even that classification. Sure, content creation is important, but the bulk of adminship is about preventing abuse, and that's something K6ka excels at — MusikAnimal talk 21:34, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support - highly accomplished for his age! Bearian (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support strong candidate Dschslava Δx parlez moi 21:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
- Strong support Lucky 25? Wow! I reached out to k6ka just last week regarding them considering adminship. After writing a nomination, a few editors approached me cautioning k6ka's range of experience, etc. Second-guessing prospects, I told k6ka that I would nominate after a bit more of time. In the same boat as you, Musik. Clearly, I have no second thoughts about this support. Well deserved, and Happy New Year k6ka! --JustBerry (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
General comments