Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Butseriouslyfolks

Butseriouslyfolks

Voice your opinion (talk page) (28/0/0); Scheduled to end 23:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs) - I was thinking of waiting on this user a little while before nominating him, but in reality, I think he is ready for the tools now. He's done great work in many aspects of Wikipedia. He has become an asset at Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations, and his adminship would help him out more there. He does do some image work as well, which is always great. He helps out at schools, and the deletion thereof. Granted, schools have been a problem here forever, but he always keeps a cool head in those discussions and does what he's supposed to do in those discussions (not anger anyone). He contributes to the encyclopedia, helps out in discussion, and continues to improve every time I see him. He would be great as a wikipedia administrator. Wizardman 22:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I gratefully and humbly accept. -- But|seriously|folks  23:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I plan to start in areas where I am most familiar. I spend a lot of time following up on copyvio leads generated by Wherebot at WP:SCV. We could use another admin over there as copyvios sometimes sit undeleted for a while if the regulars are busy elsewhere and it's not stacked up enough for a backlog tag. I would also like to help out with the WP:CSD backlog, particularly the copyvios at WP:CSD#G12. I will also help out with reviewing images at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images, Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion and Category:All replaceable fair use images and related pages. I expect I'd gradually work into the other XfD's, starting with uncontroversial closures. (Since I'm quite active in school AfD's, I would not be closing them unless they were unanimous or nearly so.)

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

A: I'm so busy IRL that it's difficult for me to get extended blocks of time on Wikipedia. As a result, I tend to spend my time here helping out at WP:SCV and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools, tagging problem images and copyediting (rather than creating encyclopedic content, which requires more time and energy). I think my best contribution is at WP:SCV, where I work hard to keep things from getting backlogged. My best work on a single article is probably my improvement of Sesquicentennial Exposition. I am also happy to have found and added a public domain photo of a young Grover Cleveland, created and interlinked a few stubs (like Curtis Organ, Irvine Auditorium and Kirk Hyslop) and made smaller contributions to diverse articles. I've also tinkered with a few templates, although I have a lot to learn as far as coding is concerned.

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: Yes; it's difficult to avoid controversy when tagging the work of others for copyright infringement. I try to always remember that some editors take such things personally and temper my responses accordingly. I spend a lot of time explaining copyright policies to other editors, and I encourage them to ask me further questions if they do not understand. Sometimes, when I find myself getting particularly frustrated, I just click on the X in that red box at the top right of my monitor (i.e., I close the window), and I feel much better. I have also offered others the opportunity to have the last word, which usually settles things down quickly. We're all in this together, and getting combative with others does not advance the project.

Optional question from Pascal

4 You mention that you plan working on unfree images. As I'm sure you're aware this is currently one of the greatest sources of ill-will and frustration, especially for newbies. So open-ended question: what are your thoughts on this? In particular how would you approach the growing number of users who systematically tag for speedy-deletion images without a detailed fair-use rationale or, conversely, systematically take down these speedy-tags? What do you think is the best way to enforce WP:NFCC in order to reduce collateral damage? Should we care about the collateral damage?

A: I agree. Wikipedia's policy on unfree images may be the most complicated area here. There is even disagreement among experienced users at Wikipedia:WikiProject Fair use as to its interpretation. I think it would be very helpful if the Foundation would give us clearer guidance in this area, as it is more a matter of law than a question of consensus, but we have to do the best we can in the absence of such guidance.

I have received a number of messages on my talk page in response to my tagging of unfree images, and I always explain my understanding of WP's policy to other users to the best of my ability. Fortunately, I have found most of them to be accepting of my explanations and willing to work within the policy.

At the moment, our nonfree content criteria require a detailed fair use rationale. While I personally try to avoid tagging images where I feel the rationale is obvious (such as a CD cover used to illustrate an article about the CD itself), such tags are appropriate under our current policy and therefore should not be removed unless an appropriate fair use rationale is provided. If people are systematically removing these tags, they should probably be warned and encouraged to participate in the discussions at the nonfree content talk pages so that the policy can be modified, if appropriate, rather than taking things into their own hands.

Due to the complexity of this area, I think more guidance is necessary. Some might call it instruction creep, but the best way to avoid problems in this area is to lay out a comprehensive set of rules, with plenty of examples, so casual users can at least check whether their proposed use is clearly acceptable or clearly unacceptable. As for the grey area in between, I think that will always be up in the air unless we get legal guidance. -- But|seriously|folks  04:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

General comments

• See Butseriouslyfolks's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Butseriouslyfolks: Butseriouslyfolks (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Butseriouslyfolks before commenting.

Discussion

• Everything else seems to be good, but I'm concerned about this edit where you point out that you attempted to add false information to mobygames.com (a user-contribution powered site) in order to highlight their unreliability. This seems quite wp:point-like, as well as being something that would've probably gone without notice in reverse. Plus, using my username (as an editor on the other side of the discussion) as the false info was either just silly, or a bit rude. Anything you'd like to clarify about that? --Quiddity 17:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Support as nom. Wizardman 23:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
2. Support - I had a check through your contribs earlier on and I see no problems - best of luck. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
3. Support -- seems good. As a side note, might want to get more into the template namespace. But then again, not many people go there. Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
4. Support No concerns here. Looks good. —Anas ^talk? 23:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
5. Support Same as above. Has the mindset, won't abuse the tools. Ganfon 23:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
6. Support I agree with the other supporters in their statements. Captain panda 00:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
7. Support dedicated copyvio hunter... we've promoted several "graduates" of WP:SCV and they've all been great blue-collar admins. BSF is ridiculously active there, and I think he should be a big help with the various backlogs, especially copyright-related ones. --W.marsh 00:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
8. Support No problems here :-). ~ Wikihermit 02:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
9. But seriously folks... support this guy :P Kwsn^(Ni!) 03:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
10. Support I like the username better than the user, but what can you do?... I've seen his comments on occasion, but I'm really impressed by his focus on weeding out copyvios. It's not easy, and anyone who is dedicated toward that goal deserves to receive the tools and continue working on it. Shalom ^Hello 03:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
11. Support Unlikely to abuse admin tools. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 04:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
12. Support I see no significant problems with this editors' contributions. (aeropagitica) 04:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
13. Support Same as above. Hydrogen Iodide 05:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
14. Support Looks good to me.  RGTraynor  06:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
15. Support Based on 1) Trusted Nominator 2) Strong contributions from a candidate who says he has little time to edit! 3) Civility evidenced from contribution history 4) Excellent and expanded answers to the questions. Good luck. Pedro |  Chat  08:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
16. Support. Neil ╦ 09:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
17. Support No issues...good luck! Jmlk17 09:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
18. Support - Seriously folks..I thought he was one ;)..--Cometstyles 12:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
19. Support - We need more admins to deal with copyright... keep up the good work. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 13:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
20. Support - Garion96 (talk) 15:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
21. Support per nom. Peacent 16:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
22. Support as per nominator. Politics rule 17:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
23. Strong support I thought Butseriouslyfolks was an administrator as well. I can trust Wizardman's nomination. Acalamari 17:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
24. Support Fine administrator material. Eusebeus 17:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
25. Obviously. —AldeBaer (c) 18:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
26. Support, nothing disconcerting about this user's answers or contributions. Arkyan • ^(talk) 21:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
27. Support Nice answer to Q.3... Scarian^Talk 21:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
28. Support Good range of experience, has useful skills especially in copyvio work; seen him/her around, no problems. Good candidate.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
29. Strong Support A sensible candidate with great expeirence. Thewinchester ^(talk) 01:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
30. Support No concerns. H irohisat^{Talk Page} 02:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
31. Strong Support -- Very actively editing, no apparent flaws in contributions. I'd say this user is more than ready for the promotion.The Kensington Blonde _Talk 04:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

#Neutral I don't understand why you left a bunch of templates here for an established user. ~ Wikihermit 23:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC) (understandable, changing to support)

The short answer would be that the user in question posted a bunch of articles that were copied verbatim from the subject organizations' websites. I had already posted a few of the warning templates before I realized the scope of the situation, so I kept going. If I knew from the start that I would find ten of them, I probably would have posted the warning differently. If you are suggesting that DTTR applies, I feel that essay is most relevant as it pertains to disputes. This was a simple copyright issue, and the editor in question did not take offense. I later helped with the subsequent merger of the articles in question and made a constructive suggestion on the editor's talk page. -- But|seriously|folks  00:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, nothing wrong with routine template notifications. DTTR is intended mostly for the attacks/3rr/vandalism templates. Even regulars might be insufficiently aware of the details of the copyvio mechanisms. Pascal.Tesson 00:26, 5 July 2007 (UTC)