Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DanCherek

DanCherek

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (88/0/0); Scheduled to end 19:22, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Nomination

DanCherek (talk · contribs) – DanCherek is a consistently excellent editor and one I am very happy to nominate for adminship. Friendly and knowledgeable, Dan is a strong force in the anti– copyright violations field with over 16,500 reviews at Copypatrol and is one of the most frequent requesters of RD1 revision deletions and G12s. Dan is also a regular at contributor copyright investigations, and consistently offers help to those asking questions about copyright at noticeboards and his talk page. Aside from his work in the copyright arena, Dan is a prolific content creator with a featured article, a featured list, 15 good articles, and over 70 did you know hooks. Dan is also a frequent face at the Resource Request, processing several requests there, and is always willing to collaborate with others. DanCherek is a skilled editor with a good attitude and temperament– I have no doubt he will be a great administrator, and hope the community feels the same. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:14, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Co-nomination

I am happy to co-nominate DanCherek for administrator. He's been active on Wikipedia as a content contributor, working on promoting articles to GA status and participating at DYK, and has a Featured Article as well. At CopyPatrol, he's at the number three spot on our all-time leaderboard, and has been tirelessly clearing the bulk of the reports for many months now; and he has some experience with other back-of-house tasks as well. He's a good and patient communicator, has a steady temperament, and has a clean block log. I think he's a great candidate. — Diannaa (talk) 18:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination, with thanks to Moneytrees and Diannaa. I have never edited for pay. A decade ago, as a minor, I made several trivial copyedits from a previous account. For privacy reasons, that account (to which I have since lost access) has been disclosed to ArbCom and my nominators.

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. Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?

A: I have immensely enjoyed editing Wikipedia and I'd like the chance to continue contributing to the community in this additional capacity. More specifically, I've worked on copyright cleanup on Wikipedia for over a year – primarily assessing reports at CopyPatrol and occasionally clearing out CCI cases – and that often results in requests for revision deletion (RD1) or speedy deletion (CSD G12). Having the ability to carry these out myself and to fulfill others' requests would be extremely useful. Based on my past experience with additional areas of the project such as counter-vandalism, I'm also interested in helping out with evaluating requests at WP:AIV, WP:UAA, and other speedy deletion categories.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I love writing on Wikipedia about topics that are interesting to me (and hopefully others), and I am particularly proud of a couple of the articles that I've created or expanded. I really enjoyed working on A Beautiful Crime, a featured article for which I received the Four Award; it appeared on the Main Page as the TFA on January 29, 2022. I've also helped promote a featured list (List of awards and nominations received by Jake Gyllenhaal) and various good articles such as Chaconne in G minor, The Old French Tristan Poems, and W. Sterling Cary. (A big shout-out to the reviewers whose feedback helped get those articles to their current states!) Additionally, I am glad to have been able to use my institution's library collection to fulfill hundreds of source requests at the Resource Exchange, since I know that sometimes a single source can make all the difference for a given article.

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: Working in copyright cleanup on Wikipedia can be tricky. It requires nuance because you are primarily interacting with good-faith contributors – editors who are trying to make articles better but who may not be familiar with certain aspects of Wikipedia's copyright policy. It's perfectly natural for one to feel frustrated when their edit is partially or wholly reversed, and I think that being able to recognize and empathize with that kind of reaction is a good starting point for de-escalating conflicts that may arise. In such situations, I will also double-check my work, recognizing that I am far from perfect and, like everyone else, will make mistakes from time to time. If that happens, it's important to apologize and self-revert if needed. In general, I don't find myself getting stressed over Wikipedia, but I've learned that taking a break and spending a few hours doing real-life things, away from the computer, is often helpful for regaining perspective on editing disputes or other tense situations.

---

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.

Optional question from Idoghor Melody

4. I have already supported this RFA, but let me ask. Would you ever block an Administrator when necessary? And would your process for doing so be the same process as blocking an editor who isn't an admin? If not, what would you do differently?

A: Thanks for the question. With an expanded toolset, administrators are in a position of community trust and are held to the same expectations that apply to non-admins, plus a few additional important ones. So while I think there is a reasonable expectation that an admin should not be engaging in block-worthy activity, they don't get some kind of special immunity if they are. All that being said, I want to emphasize that I plan to start slow if this RfA is successful, and any blocks I place in the near term would likely be of the AIV/UAA variety.

Optional question from Toadspike

5. What are your thoughts on voluntary recall processes, and will you hold yourself to any? This question seems almost obligatory at RfAs now and I'm surprised no one has asked.

A: I appreciate the question. Yes, I would be open to recall. I think the sample process makes sense and would be willing to have that, or something similar, outlined on my user page if this RfA is successful. But, you can't really talk about recall without acknowledging the fact that there hasn't been a successful recall petition in a decade (if I "recall" correctly). Some are opposed to such a non-binding commitment, which isn't an unreasonable perspective. In almost all cases where an admin has really messed up, they'll either acknowledge it and offer to resign the tools upon a simple request, or they'll dispute it and it probably gets taken to WP:ARC. The recall process attempts to be a middle ground, but it's easy to see why some skeptical editors feel that it is redundant to either of those outcomes. More important than this debate over recall or not: as an administrator, I would do my best to use the toolset carefully, and to listen and respond in good faith to any concerns that are raised on my talk page or elsewhere.

Optional question from CollectiveSolidarity

6. You have already met 8/10 points out of my criteria, but I would like to ask you : What was your biggest mistake made while editing? And what did you learn from it?

A: Thanks for asking! Recently, I felt pretty bad when I made specific commitments to improve certain articles for The Core Contest and a featured article review (these were happening at the same time), and then made far less progress on each than I had hoped for, due to a combination of real-life things and poor time management on my part. Though I know we're all just volunteers, giving up on those felt like a letdown to myself and others who had offered kind encouragement or advice for those projects. Going forward I am being more careful about what I take on, and more generally about balancing various things that are going on, because it's important for me to try my best at following through on things when I say I'll do them and because these commitments can affect others as well.

Optional question from Banks Irk

7. Another editor asked this question in a much more politic way, but the question was deleted because they asked it as an IP rather than logged in under their username. Did you edit under a different account or accounts prior to your current account? Was that account blocked for any reason?Banks Irk (talk) 00:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

A. Thanks for the question. As I mentioned above in the acceptance statement, I made a dozen grammar-correcting edits in high school from another account. None of the edits were reverted, and the account was never warned or blocked. I haven't directly linked it here because the account contains personal information (like my real name), and so I chose to instead submit the information to ArbCom last year, as well as my nominators prior to the start of this RfA. I will also extend the offer to share the details with any functionary upon request. After that brief stint, I moved on to other hobbies, and did not make any more edits to Wikipedia until December 2020 when I registered this account. So, how did I find my way back to Wikipedia? As someone who was interested in various statewide and federal politics in the U.S., I found myself reading Wikipedia more and more in 2020 (a big electoral year) because articles like 2020 United States Senate elections made it so easy to keep track of them. When I signed up, I thought that would be where I would spend the most time editing – and I did for a while, though I eventually got tired of it. A quick comment on edit count, while I'm here, since it was brought up previously: I've never really concerned myself with my edit count, or that of other editors – it's all quite meaningless to me because I can make a single edit like this one which is obviously very substantive (not pictured: the week I spent writing that in the preview window without hitting "Publish changes"), while in the same amount of time I could fire up any number of semi-automated tools and make thousands of easier edits. So having X number of edits simply means I carried out a lot of round-robin page moves recently, or disambiguated a bunch of wikilinks a year ago. I consider those contributions pretty immaterial in terms of the actual ones that I'm proud of, such as the ones listed in the answer to Q2.

Discussion

• Links for DanCherek: DanCherek (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for DanCherek 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

1. Seen him around quite often and always been highly impressed. I keep forgetting he isn't already an admin! --Dylan620 (he/him · talk · edits) 19:31, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
2. Support Per noms. ~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 19:38, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
3. Aw, heck yeah! DanCherek is a pleasure to work with—knowledgeable, thorough, unfailingly collegial. What a great addition to the admin corps. Thanks for standing! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
4. Strong Support Very, very happy to see this. It would be great to have another copyright admin around. Thanks Dan for running! Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 19:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
5. A strong overall contributor with the right temperament to be an admin. Thanks for putting your name forward. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
6. Support No apparent reason to oppose. PhantomTech[talk] 19:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
7. Support 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 19:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
8. Support with pleasure. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:52, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
9. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
10. Support - No reason to oppose. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
11. Support, appears to be a quality contributor who does a lot of good. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
12. Support thought he was one already.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
13. Support - Copyright clean-up is an important area and it's good to have an experienced person taking on being an admin in that field. FOARP (talk) 19:59, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
14. There are a few people whose judgment I trust enough that I think they should just be able to make anyone they want an admin immediately. Diannaa is one of them. No offense to Moneytrees, who I'm sure is a fine judge of character, nor Dan, who I'm sure would impress me if I researched his contribs. Anyway, looks like it's going to be one of those 200-3-7 RFA's. For added excitement, would you like me to jinx it the way I jinxed User:Tamzin's? Oh, wait, I just did. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

    Ah, the Floquenbeam curse. A widely-feared hiccup in adminship nominations.^[Humour] casualdejekyll 20:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

    Kinehore. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 21:26, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

15. Support - excellent CCI experience, happy to support. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:04, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
16. Support; superb candidate. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
17. Support: Great editor to see and deserves to have the admin mop. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 20:07, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
18. Support, seen them around--Ymblanter (talk) 20:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
19. Support clear net positive.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
20. Support Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
21. Support will be a net-positive to the project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
22. Support NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 20:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
23. Support casualdejekyll 20:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
24. Support a FA, many GAs and DYKs, great work in the copyright area, no concerns. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 20:34, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
25. Support Why not? --Victor Trevor (talk) 20:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
26. Support as per my co-nomination statement. — Diannaa (talk) 20:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
27. Support Seen Dan around, they've got a use for the mop, and have some impressive content to boot. In other news, I think this may be my first RfA vote! I keep missing them... Toadspike (talk) 20:40, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
28. Support: Excellent user. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:36, 2 August 2022 (UTC) (Edit conflict x2 by Dylan620 per Special:Diff/1101988538)
29. Support the users contribution have influenced me to do so.--Noman☆ (Talk) 20:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
30. Support - hako9 (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
31. Support — My interactions with DanCherek have been limited to good article reviews, where he has produced some of the finest articles I have reviewed. I am also aware of his excellent copyrights-related work and he should make for a diligent administrator. — The Most Comfortable Chair 20:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
32. Support – more hands are always needed at CCI, and DanCherek is certainly qualified to wield the mop. –FlyingAce^✈hello 20:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
33. Support - Seems generally helpful, and no reason to think they'd abuse the tools. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
34. Support. I thought you were an admin already! — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
35. Support. Looks okay to me. Deb (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
36. Support per nominators I like the strength of the work with COPYVIO's. Knowledgeable, capable, clear thinking and easy to get along with.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
37. Support - Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 21:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
38. Support of course. Copyright is an area that is important and understaffed. I'm sure they'll appreciate the help! –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
39. Support per nom, I can honestly say, when it comes to this user's DYK contributions, I did not know. Andrevan@ 21:30, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
40. Trusted, competent. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:37, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
41. Support scope_creep^Talk 21:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
42. Support Looks like a great candidate. --Canley (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
43. Support: an excellent content creator and a very valuable member of our project for getting his hands dirty with CCI stuff. He seemingly has endless patience to answer questions and speak politely to people who are (unintentionally) adding many hours to our labour time. A recommendation from Diannaa and Moneytrees is a huge reassurance. When seeing his name around before, I've been surprised at how new he is, though it's now 18 months, which is not so little. If this passes, will it be our first sysop who joined in the 2020s? — Bilorv (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

    @Bilorv, technically yes, although Blablubbs, while having created their account in 2014, realistically only really joined in June 2020. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 23:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)>

44. Support, one of those people I always vaguely think is an admin anyway based on their work and comportment, so it'll be nice to no longer have to correct myself on that. Plus, anyone who wants to come work at CCI/CP as an admin has my support. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
45. Support: Absolutely. He's clearly here to build an encyclopedia, and is handling difficulties with patience and class. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
46. I've looked through a sample of about a hundred pages the candidate tagged for non-G12 csd, and haven't found any I disagree with. Not even one that I have so much as a quibble with. That's a better error rate than just about any admin gets. —Cryptic 22:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
47. Support: no issues; NOBIGDEAL. HouseBlaster^talk 22:17, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
48. Support. Copyright experience is a huge plus. ––FormalDude talk 22:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
49. Support If I had misgivings, it would be on the order of too soon with just two years of editing, and 100+ edits per day, the vast majority of which are non-substantive, but in the spirit of "first, do no harm", this nomination does not arouse misgivings. When handed the mop, I expect the nominee will use it principally, if not exclusively, in the Wikignomish areas they focus on. So, no worries. Banks Irk (talk) 22:39, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
50. Strong support Wait, Dan's not an admin? — GhostRiver 22:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
51. No concerns. GeneralNotability (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
52. Support per nominators. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 23:20, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
53. Support for that recall pun. On a more serious note, the more competent folks to help Diannaa at copyright cleanup, the better. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
54. Support per positive experience with the candidate at Talk:Real Estate Bank of Arkansas/GA1. Hog Farm _Talk 23:53, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
55. Support Seems to be a prolific article creator and has several GA's and other awards under their belt. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
56. Support I could have sworn they already were one. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
57. Support PacificDepths^(talk) 00:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
58. Strong support LGTM! Chlod (say hi!) 00:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
59. Support will be fine. Good communicator Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
60. Support: Always a welcome sight around DYK – logical, reasonable, and flexible. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
61. Support I considered asking further questions, but don't see the necessity and I would like to err on side of making adminship less of a big deal than it is. Clearly DanCherek is a net positive in both content creation and notably moderation (copyright/revdeletions). Wholeheartedly support! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:43, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
62. Stephen 00:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
63. Support 16,500 copyright patrols, that is a very good reason! We need more cleanup on that area! ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
64. Support Aoba47 (talk) 00:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
65. Support per nom. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
66. Support - Can't see any red flags, does excellent work. Will do well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
67. Support. 9/10 on my criteria. I actually already thought he was a sysop. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 01:38, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
68. Support Epicgenius (talk) 01:54, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
69. 69! Erm, Dan is not only capable and sharp, but also, just a chill guy. Which is a great combination. Will be a great fit. El_C 02:01, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
70. Support BOZ (talk) 02:07, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
71. Support Ruy (talk) 02:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
72. Support DanCherek and I have crossed paths quite a bit. From experience, I know that he is kind and helpful to new editors (for starters), as well as one hell of a copyright patroller. His CSD log shows that he understands the different criteria and how they are applied. Overall, he is an ideal candidate for the mop— I wish him the best! Helen(💬📖) 02:16, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
73. Support Great candidate, excellent experience in CCI, AfDs, and GA/FA/DYKs. VickKiang (talk) 02:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
74. Support Experienced and valued content creator and has a good reason for needing the tools. Vladimir.copic (talk) 02:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
75. Support Not a big deal but he is a valued creator who has a long history at patrolling copyrights. Thingofme (talk) 02:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
76. Support Dan is an experienced and outstanding good editor which I think is suitable of being an admin. XYF37 (talk | contribs) 02:37, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
77. Support Needs the tools, has shown himself trustworthy many times over, an excellent content-creator in addition to mop-wielder. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 02:50, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
78. Support Seems like he does good work and is well-suited. LemonOrangeLime (Talk) 02:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
79. Support with pleasure. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
80. Support, Experienced editor. Thought already was an admin! --JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 03:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
81. Support —VersaceSpace 🌃 03:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
82. Support - can't see any reason not to. Been around awhile, made a lot of edits, many of very high quality. Went through talkpage history and came away impressed by their candor, humility, and downright helpfulness, though can't say I read everything. Trusted noms, good answer to questions. Although this isn't a requirement, it's clear that the candidate has purpose in requesting the tools. Wrote Chaconne in G minor. What's not to like? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
83. Support. Seen his good work. Best of luck! Chanaka L (talk) 03:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
84. Support Excellent candidate, no problems that I can see. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
85. Support eminently qualified. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 03:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
86. Support per nom. Liliana ^(UwU) 04:38, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
87. Support. Have a huge amount of trust in and esteem for Diannaa, which makes following her lead the right thing for me to do. Only wish we had many more like this candidate! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 04:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
88. Support Why not? -FASTILY 05:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

General comments

• Hello Dan. How is "Cherek" pronounced? —usernamekiran (talk) 19:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  I say it like "Eric" with a "ch" in front! But honestly, however you want and I'll never know the difference. DanCherek (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  "ch" of "chemistry" or "change"? —usernamekiran (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  "ch" of "chair", I am hoping. — The Most Comfortable Chair 20:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  Good point. I meant it as in "change" or "chair". DanCherek (talk) 22:23, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  So “chair” with an “ick” on it. Having kids, I’ve seen many of those round my dinner table.Jacona (talk) 01:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

  actually chuckled IRL at that one HouseBlaster^talk 01:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

  Odd... ne'er heard Cher followed by "ick" before. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 04:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)