Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Aoidh: Difference between revisions
→Support: +1 |
|||
Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
# [[WP:Why not?|Why not?]] --[[User:Guerillero|<span style="color: #0b0080">Guerillero</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Guerillero|<span style="color: green;">Parlez Moi</span>]]</sup> 12:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC) |
# [[WP:Why not?|Why not?]] --[[User:Guerillero|<span style="color: #0b0080">Guerillero</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Guerillero|<span style="color: green;">Parlez Moi</span>]]</sup> 12:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC) |
||
# Fantastic, [[User:Aoidh/Challenges|Challenging]] content creation, a wealth of relevant experience and a good temperament. Thank you for standing! — [[User:Bilorv|Bilorv]] ('''[[User talk:Bilorv|<span style="color:purple">talk</span>]]''') 13:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC) |
# Fantastic, [[User:Aoidh/Challenges|Challenging]] content creation, a wealth of relevant experience and a good temperament. Thank you for standing! — [[User:Bilorv|Bilorv]] ('''[[User talk:Bilorv|<span style="color:purple">talk</span>]]''') 13:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC) |
||
# Interesting; i remember the candidate's previous account/name quite well, and would definitely have expected to oppose had that account ever come here, and yet...yet here i am happily in this section of the Request, brought here by the nomination statements, my looking around his contributions, his answer to Q3 ({{diff|User talk:Sdkb|1100060875|1100051068|this}} link in particular), and the opportunity to see our admin corps grow by one more quality member. Happy days ~ '''[[User:LindsayH|Lindsay]]'''<sup>'''[[User_talk:LindsayH|H]]'''[[User_talk:LindsayH|ello]]</sup> 13:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
=====Oppose===== |
=====Oppose===== |
Revision as of 13:13, 4 March 2023
- The following discussion is preserved as a request for adminship that has been automatically placed on hold pending a decision as to the outcome. Please do not modify the text. The result of the discussion will be posted soon.
Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (68/0/0); Scheduled to end 20:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Nomination
Aoidh (talk · contribs) – Greetings, all. Today Vanamonde93 and I are eager to nominate Aoidh, an editor here since 2010, to serve as an administrator. Over the past several months, Vanamonde93 and I had independently reached out to Aoidh, asking him to consider this possibility. But our convergence upon Aoidh was hardly a coincidence: we had both observed in Aoidh that peculiar combination of versatility and equanimity which makes for a great administrator. Indeed, he has done much more good for the site than I have, and over a wider range of areas, and all that in less time! And his mistakes, which are on the whole quite infrequent, clearly reveal his humility and conscientiousness. Now, when I had first contacted Aoidh (in August 2022), I had expressed my main concern over his résumé: an editorial gap ending in May 2022 (not that I should be one to complain about editorial gaps!). But after 9 consecutive months of fruitful contributing, I can no longer hold even that against him. I think we would be remiss to not to trust Aoidh with the tools corresponding to his character and experience; so please join Vanamonde93 and I in recommending Aoidh for adminship. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Co-nomination statement
I am a frequent closer at AfD, where Aoidh came to my attention as an editor whose comments are always carefully considered. Upon investigation I found a well-rounded user who can make productive use of the admin toolset. Aoidh has a history of solid contribution at AfD, where his comments have often helped shaped consensus. His participation there also shows an ability to self-reflect and re-examine evidence, a key trait in a successful admin. In conversation with me Aoidh made the wise observation that AfD is more in need of participants than closers: nonetheless, giving a frequent participants the ability to close discussions is a good thing, as users like Aoidh are best placed to see when discussions have run their course and can be closed. Aoidh has also found time to patrol recent changes, with nearly 700 reports to AIV, RFPP, and ANEW combined. And he's shown he's comfortable with content work, having accumulated six GAs and at least 25 DYK credits in a variety of areas. Since he returned to full-time activity after a lengthy hiatus, I believe he will be a clear net positive with the tools, and I hope you will join me in supporting him. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination and sincerely thank the nominators for the kind words. I also can attest that I have never edited Wikipedia for pay or compensation of any kind, and the only other account I have edited with is User:Aoidh (Away). This account was known as User:SudoGhost and I accidently made a single edit under that name after the name change because I switched from Commons to en.wiki and didn't notice it logged me into en.wiki as SudoGhost (name changes weren't universal at the time). - Aoidh (talk) 20:50, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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: The spark of interest was lit when Arbitrarily0 asked me about it on my talk page. It's been in the back of my mind since then and I've read every admin/RfA essay I could get my hands on. When I then came across Signpost article called “Admins wanted on English Wikipedia” I felt I should volunteer to help, because I do genuinely enjoy helping, especially with the clearing out of backlogs (more on that in my second answer). What interests me specifically with being an administrator would be working in areas such as AIV, RFPP, and AN3. I feel that AfD needs more participants than closers at the moment, but I wouldn't be opposed to helping close such discussions when there's a backlog. I have also been learning the process of promoting DYK hooks and while I'm still very much in the learning stages of that process, I would like to eventually be able to help with the admin side of DYK once I have more experience in that area.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: I'm very happy with the articles I've created such as Leafpad and Gwinnett Environmental & Heritage Center, and articles I've expanded such as Buford, Georgia and Ball Ground, Georgia, but I think my “best” contributions are the anti-vandalism/spam work I've done over the years, especially reverting the subtle, purposefully incorrect additions (hoaxing vandalism) and spam. I was also one of the editors who took part in the drive to take Category:Biography articles without living parameter down from 10,000+ entries to 0 and I still keep an eye on it and empty it out from time to time. I've also cleared out Category:Unassessed Buddhism articles and Category:Unknown-importance Buddhism articles from however many thousands of entries they had (and the same with the WikiProject Linux counterparts), and while those categories aren't very front-facing, I do feel clearing out things like that and being able to have a better picture of what needs addressing does matter. I've also created some templates that are used in Twinkle and other tools for warning editors that tend to have a focus on being less WP:BITEy, such as Template:Uw-ewsoft, Template:Uw-notvand, and Template:Uw-middlepost.
- 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: When I first started editing Wikipedia I had very thin skin. For example, in 2012 an editor called me a “grammar nazi” and I went to go straight to AN/I and was unhappy that my grievance was not handled in the way I wanted. It was not an overnight thing, but the way I've dealt with that is just to come to the understanding that editors are going to disagree, and they may say things you don't like, but it really is better to just focus on the content than to make a big deal out of a single less-than-ideal comment. A much more recent example of a stressful conflict is when I got into an edit-war over (ironically) Template:Uw-ewsoft. In short, there was a misunderstanding about content added to the template. When I realized that I was the one in the wrong and realized that I was edit warring I self-reverted and apologized to the other editor. What I took away from that is that it's critically important to stop and get the whole picture before hitting undo, even if you think you know what's going on, and if they're referring to something you don't fully understand, to get a full understanding of it first.
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 questions from Dreamy Jazz
- 4. Thanks for going for RfA. Feel free to skip my questions if you desire.Would you consider being open to recall?
- A: This is the one question I was expecting so I've already given it a lot of thought. The recall process set forth at User:Worm That Turned/Recall process is reasonable and I would be open to recall under that criteria. - Aoidh (talk) 22:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- 5. An editor makes 4 reverts on an article to remove unsourced controversial allegations about a living person and a different editor has made 4 reverts to re-introduce this information. One of the editors brings this situation to WP:AN3. You decide to look at this report in an administrative capacity. What would you do in this case?
- A: In a situation like this the details affect how best to approach it. The WP:BLP policy's position of unsourced controversial information is very important, so the highest priority would be to protect the BLP article in that regard. Were they warned about 3RR/EW or should they have reasonably known about it? Whether there is an ongoing discussion at the talk page and/or WP:BLPN would factor into how it should best be handled, but depending on the content itself the edits removing the unsourced information might be considered an exemption under WP:3RRNO #7, so that should be taken into consideration as well. If there's an ongoing discussion and depending on the level of activity on the page itself it might be best to either protect the page or WP:PBLOCK one or both of the editors to allow discussion to continue. If that doesn't seem feasible and the editor adding the unsourced information isn't discussing anything, a block of some kind would likely be warranted. However, making sure the article remains WP:BLP-compliant is paramount, and making sure that the edit-warring does not continue is part of that. - Aoidh (talk) 23:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Optional question from Dolotta
- 6. Of the places you plan to work in as an administrator, what area do you have the least experience in?
- A: I did touch on this above, but I do eventually hope to use the administrative tools in the DYK area, but I am presently far from experienced in that area (this aside there are still many practices that aren't necessarily documented). Even if I become an administrator I fully intend to get a much better grasp on the DYK prep/promotion process before even thinking about using the administrative tools in that area. As for administrative actions I'd use sooner, possibly AN3, since WP:PBLOCK is a relatively new thing that I have limited experience with, and partially blocking is a newer thing that I'd have to remember to consider when reviewing reports. - Aoidh (talk) 22:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion
- Links for Aoidh: Aoidh (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for Aoidh can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
Support
- Support, naturally, as co-nominator. My first time being first :) Vanamonde (Talk) 20:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I meant to ask you about this but forgot to… Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Good content work, good demeanor, it’s a yes from me. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support; After reviewing the users edits, history, and answers to above questions, I see no reason not to support. Illusion Flame (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I have collaborated on many articles over many years with this editor and, without any reservations, I think he would make an excellent admin. - Ahunt (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Salvio giuliano 21:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support for their calm and sincere statements. --Egeymi (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support alone for the thoughtful answer to Q3. Learning from one's mistakes, recognizing and not repeating them is an admirable trait. The fact they did so and have used it to help with disputes later on tells me they have the mentality to serv well as an admin. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course, will be a great administrator! — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 21:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as one of the editors who helped to get Category:Biography articles without living parameter down to 0 a while back, I have interacted with this user before. I trust the nominators and their answers are well written / thought out. Here's to (hopefully) the first successful RfA of 2023! Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a grim statistic that I hadn't kept track of...breaking that streak would be quite nice! Vanamonde (Talk) 21:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delighted to support. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 21:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Will be a net-positive to the project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support omg Aoidh. SWinxy (talk) 21:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: has clearly thought out answers to questions and has made substantial contributions to both content creation and anti-vandalism work. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I wasn't expecting you to run anytime soon. I'm glad you are though. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support! Tails Wx 22:05, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Gusfriend (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as co-nominator. Thank you for your openness to adminship. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:41, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- — hako9 (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:56, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -- Absolutely no qualms from me. -- Dolotta (talk) 22:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I've seen Aoidh's name around for nearly 10 years now and am glad that he's finally running for adminship. In my opinion, he's a good fit for the tools. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:01, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Excellent candidate for the mop for all of the reasons enumerated by the nominators.-- Ponyobons mots 23:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 23:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support no concerns here – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 23:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- support--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support No concerns from me. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 23:22, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Good luck, Aoidh! --Vacant0 (talk) 23:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yup Andre🚐 23:39, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I have no concerns —Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him) 23:45, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- * Pppery * it has begun... 23:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Galobtter (pingó mió) 23:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support A quick scan through some of Aoidh's talk pages show me what I like to see in an admin: helpful, rational, willing to admit when he's goofed, and calm (even when he's talking with someone who...isn't.) Joyous! | Talk 23:52, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - No concerns at this time, and appreciate the answers to the questions so far. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 00:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Seen him around, entrust him with admin tools. {{ping|ClydeFranklin}} (t/c) 00:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, seems good. SVcode(Talk) 00:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I've seen Aiodh around, and like what I've seen. Will make a fine admin. Miniapolis 00:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – looks to be an excellent candidate. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I don't see why not. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Excellent candidate with solid AfD, anti-vandalism, and content experience; no concerns. VickKiang (talk) 01:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Beccaynr (talk) 01:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support notwithstanding that I have had no interaction with the candidate, and I have some serious reservations. As the candidate admits, their edit history confirms that early on, they had a very short fuse, and there are dozens of edit summaries that can most charitably be characterized as snippy, less so as bitey, and downright abusive if not so charitably inclined. But there's little of that more recently, so perhaps they'd matured. My impression of their furious pace of editing the last year plus seems mostly gnomish, with little content added, not that gnomes aren't needed here. Which takes me to my third point, that I see little need for the tools given what they actually work on. The answer to question #1, when you read between the lines, is really "I want to be able to block people". Frankly, that seems to be the subcontext of many successful RFAs, so that's not sufficient reason to oppose. I just wish that candidates would be honest and forthright about it. I've seen lots of obfuscation by candidates about that with convoluted but transparent explanations about all the things that they need the tool for; when promoted they do virtually nothing with the mop but go on a blocking binge. I expect the same in this case, but I'm supporting anyway.Banks Irk (talk) 01:25, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- This reads more like an Oppose than a Support. Are you scared to post under Oppose? If so, I don't blame you. Xxanthippe (talk) 05:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC).[reply]
- Support notwithstanding nothing. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support 👍 X750. Spin a yarn? Articles I've screwed over? 02:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support NOBIGDEAL, not a jerk. HouseBlastertalk 04:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looking good. Sheep (talk • he/him) 04:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support NOBIGDEAL, no issues in the past few years. BilledMammal (talk) 04:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: NOBIGDEAL, net positive, why not? Hey man im josh (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support --Minorax«¦talk¦» 04:29, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: no reason not to. Bestagon ⬡ 04:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support – no concerns. –FlyingAce✈hello 05:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Meets my criteria. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 05:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I thought you already were an admin and was wondering when you were going to finally promote a DYK set to Queue, because at the rate we are going, we will burn out the two admins who have taken on a disproportionate load over the past few months. The need for admins who are willing to perform specialist tasks is real, and I can't wait until you can help in a broader capacity. I have seen you run toward difficult topics that other editors would shy away from; volunteer for obscure tasks when few other editors were willing to; make massive mistakes, own up to them quickly, and fix them; check main page candidates meticulously; ask for feedback and input when you have been unsure; but also act decisively and confidently on more familiar territory at AfD. In my book, knowing what you don't know and maintaining respect for other editors even when you disagree are important qualities in an admin, and I can say firsthand that even that one time we disagreed, I did think you were being a bit heavy handed, but I never thought you were being disrespectful or mean, and I learned things from you. Cielquiparle (talk) 07:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:23, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose for A3, in which the candidate breaks the time-honored RfA tradition of insisting that you are utterly infallible and crossing your fingers no one calls you on it. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 08:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- For those who, like me, don't get jokes: above is support !vote, not oppose. a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 09:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 09:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - I have encountered this thoughtful editor at AfD and appreciated his contributions there. Elinruby (talk) 09:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support No issues -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support No issues Thingofme (talk) 10:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Volten001 ☎ 10:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Looks good to me. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 11:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, no problems here. Graham87 11:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support per the excellent nomination statements provided by Arbitrarily0 and Vanamonde93. Kurtis (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Why not? --Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Fantastic, Challenging content creation, a wealth of relevant experience and a good temperament. Thank you for standing! — Bilorv (talk) 13:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting; i remember the candidate's previous account/name quite well, and would definitely have expected to oppose had that account ever come here, and yet...yet here i am happily in this section of the Request, brought here by the nomination statements, my looking around his contributions, his answer to Q3 (this link in particular), and the opportunity to see our admin corps grow by one more quality member. Happy days ~ LindsayHello 13:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
General comments
- Off-topic question for the candidate - how do you pronounce your username? Is it one syllable or two? —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It is admittedly not an intuitive word to pronounce in English. I've got a userbox on my user page explaining the pronunciation but for those not familiar with IPA, if you kind of say something between "aye" and "oi" it's about like that and it is one syllable. - Aoidh (talk) 23:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! IPA, regrettably, is Greek to me. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- We, Slavs, read everything (almost) as it's written, so I can't stop pronouncing it as /aojdx/, sorry./lh a!rado🦈 (C✙T) 09:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It is admittedly not an intuitive word to pronounce in English. I've got a userbox on my user page explaining the pronunciation but for those not familiar with IPA, if you kind of say something between "aye" and "oi" it's about like that and it is one syllable. - Aoidh (talk) 23:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the answers to my questions. You have my support even more than before . Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 12:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.