Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Giggy: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:44, 28 July 2007

Giggy

Voice your opinion (talk page) (32/0/2); Scheduled to end 2:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Giggy (talk · contribs) - It is with great anticipation that I submit Giggy for your consideration, a user whom I believe has remarkably exceeded any conceivable requirements to become an administrator. Giggy was extremely easy to coach, he always promptly responded to any concerns and swiftly improved to overcome and master those worries. Giggy learns with his mistakes, and fast. Communicating with him couldn't be any better, he's always very civil, polite and attentive. Giggy is an experienced and trustworthy user, a very efficient vandalfighter with tens of reports to WP:AIV and a wide participation in a vast array of areas, such as WP:XFD, WP:GAC, WP:RFA, etc.. Wikipedia would undoubtedly benefit with Giggy as an admin, so I now ask my fellow Wikipedians to give him the support he certainly deserves for his hard work and dedication. Húsönd 15:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination from Acalamari: It is my honor to be able to co-nominate Giggy in his second request for adminship. I supported back then, saying that he was a civil user with a decent knowledge of policy. That holds true now, and in the months since then, he is even more civil and experienced with policy. He is also versatile with editing, for he is both a vandal-fighter and article-builder. He created Wikipedia: WikiProject Powderfinger, and has worked on that WikiProject, and the articles within its scope. Giggy has also worked on a lot of articles about computer games as well. His edit count should be sufficient too, at a number of 5286 at last count, with 1067 being to the mainspace, 1152 to Wikipedia-space, roughly 2000 to the various talks, and a good amount of edits in the image and template spaces. I believe Giggy will make a fine administrator, and am pleased to do this co-nomination. Acalamari 16:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I'm humbled by the kind words of my nominators, and I accept. Giggy _U^CP 01:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate’s optional statement - Well firstly, a huge thanks to Husond and Alcalmari for nominating me. I truly am honoured to have such nice things written about me by people who are completely sober and haven’t been bribed. It's amazing!

For those who don’t already know, this is my second RfA, despite the lack of a “2” in the URL (how mischievous). My first RfA can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/G1ggy, under my old username of G1ggy (talk · contribs). You can find my analysis of this RfA, as well as my thoughts on how I’ve addressed the issues raised in it, at User:Giggy/RfA/G1ggy. Thanks for considering me for adminship! Giggy _U^CP 01:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 would mainly focus on the areas I work in these days (yes, a totally unrelated link :D); AfD closures, Speedy deletion, and dealing with vandals. I'm believe I have decent amounts of experience in these three areas (especially AfD, where I am quite active), so I think I would be capable of dealing with any tricky decisions that would come out of them. I would also occasionally appear at TfD and CfD, but this wouldn’t be something I would focus on, as I'm not as experienced around there (I would probably only close clear, pile on consensus decisions). Giggy _U^CP

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

A:The articles I’m most proud of are my three good articles; Age of Mythology, Dream Days at the Hotel Existence, and Call of Duty 2. Age of Mythology also recently went through an FAC (Unsuccessful, but a great learning experience), so I’m really proud of that one! If you look through the articles I’ve started, you can probably guess that expanding articles isn’t my strong point; instead I work on citing sources, MoSsin' it up, and the like. Thus, the majority of work I do is WikiProject based, where I’m able to take the articles produced by others, and improve them as much as I can. We all know that every article can be an FA, but I try to work by the concept that every article should be a GA, so most of my work is getting articles to that consistent level.

On another note, I’m also proud of the work done by WikiProject Powderfinger, which I set up in May 2007...ok, I’m only mentioning it here to advertise it :P Giggy _U^CP

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, I've been in a few conflicts during my time here. Rather then get stressed out about them, I’ve tried to use each conflict as a learning experience, to help me improve my skills for the future. I’ve also done some mediation via the cabal (and I may consider applying for the committee if this RfA is successful), and I believe this has also helped me develop my conflict resolution skills (which I envisage as being extremely useful as an admin). Giggy _U^CP

Optional Questions from Eddie:

4. Have you ever been accused of being a sockpuppet or puppeteer by a non-new user? If so, why?

A: No, I've never been accused of sockpuppetry. Giggy _U^CP 01:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5. How do you feel about Category:Wikipedian administrators open to recall?

A: I think the category is a wonderful idea, and I promise to add myself to it if this RfA is successful. Giggy _U^CP 01:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Optional question from WjBscribe

6. Picking up on a question from your last RfA [1], what are you opinions on WP:BLP? How strictly should the policy be enforced? When should it be disregarded under WP:IAR?

A:

Optional question from Sceptre regarding consensus in the Articles for deletion process.

7. Please read this AFD. As of that revision, there was an even split in numbers of those in favour of keeping the article and those in favour of deleting it. How, though, would you close the AFD, and why? (The AFD closed as a "delete") Will ^(talk) 05:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A.:

Optional question from DGG regarding criteria for deletion.

8. For this nomination for AfD do you still think you were correct to nominate it?

A.:

~~Optional question from DGG regarding criteria for deletion.~~

9. You have the following motto on your userpage "Wikipedia: Factual, neutral, well-written articles on important real-world topics" But 2 of your 3 GAs have been articles on video games. Which represents your actual attitude?

~~A.:~~

A friend has just alerted me to the fact that this motto came from the daily motto template. Oops. DGG (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

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

Links for Giggy: Giggy (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/Giggy before commenting.

Discussion

Support

Beat-the-noms Support- Excellent user. Good work with WikiProject Powderfinger and WP:AFD. I wish, however, he would not use GHits so much in AfD discussions, but the rest of his edits are OK. I really like how carefully analyzed his last RfA and effectively addressed all the concerns raised at his last RfA. Good luck! --Boricuaeddie 02:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Edit conflicted "Beat both co-noms support" This guy should have been sysopped a long time ago... —« ANIMUM » 02:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per noms... amg edit conflict!(twice) Dureo 02:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nom and oppose the above guys who were probably refreshing this page 50 times a minute. :-P Húsönd 02:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was more :-P --Boricuaeddie 02:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. Just 3 times per minute for me. :-) —« ANIMUM » 02:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's why you came second. Not good enough. Giggy _U^CP 02:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, guys. I think I had this page watchlisted before it was even created :-) --Boricuaeddie 02:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support I have supported him before and I support him now. Great editor with lots of edits and good work on several articles. Totally trustworthy (would never abuse of tools) civil, and very friendly. I have witnessed him build his way up in editing and I think he is totally ready now; Good luck, Giggy! ♠TomasBat 02:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've run across him a lot lately, in different contexts. Seems well rounded, hard working, and pleasant. - Crockspot 02:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support, as gonna nom him myself in a couple weeks. Wizardman 03:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[Edit conflict] strong support Participation in the Wikipedia namespace (XFD, RFA, etc.) is a huge plus. With good judgment as I've already seen, there is absolutely no way we can't trust this user with the tools. Good luck, (→O - R L Y?) 03:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously? You weren't already? I thought you were an admin, and a good one at that! J-stan ^Talk 03:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's gonna be a long week - try not to break the watchlist button. Haha! You're patience and positive attitude, as well as regard for policy sit well with me. the_undertow ^talk 03:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support as the co-nominator. One of these days, I will make sure I am the first person to support my own nominee/co-nominee. Last time I missed it because it started while I was having lunch, this time dinner was the reason I wasn't first! :) Acalamari 03:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I responded to comments here whilst having lunch. You guys just aren't dedicated enough. Giggy _U^CP 03:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Giggy has done great things for wikipedia. We met through WP:GA which he is a reviewer on and he adopted me shortly after. He is a great editor and wikipedia would benefit hugely from having him as an admin. Good luck Alex! XAndreWx 03:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I see Giggy all over WP; he shows a great deal of experience and dedication in many areas of the project. Krimpet 03:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - a lot of water has gone under the bridge since the last RfA. Excellent & hard-working candidate. Knows the rules well and gets involved in many areas. Mop time! - Alison ☺ 03:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Giggy has the knowledge, the will, the energy and the touch to be an excellent admin. I'm very, very glad to see this RfA up and running. Best of luck, Giggy! :) Phaedriel - 03:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support I can definitely trust Giggy as an admin. I have no concerns. Captain panda 03:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- good candidate. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nat Tang ^{ta | co | em} 05:42, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit conflict] Strong support - I've worked with Giggy for some time in the GA project and was recently surprised to find that he wasn't a sysop. I think he'll be a great admin! Lara ♥Love 05:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support pending response to Q7. (A well-worded answer will get the "weak" stricken) Will ^(talk) 05:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support What a waste to have him not an admin. --H irohisat ^Talk 05:53, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support It is time to give him the mop. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 06:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per AFD interactions Corpx 06:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support You know why. Dfrg.msc 07:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support Although I ought to oppose you for maiciously bringing this to RFA when some of us are in bed. !. Anyway, against usual line of reasoning strong personal interaction and the nominators said it. Best of luck mate! Pedro | Chat 07:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 09:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. No reason not to - a great candidate I thought was an admin! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 09:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very Strong Support - I was Neutral last time due to his lack of experience but since then he has grown mature considerably well and now I believe he can use the tools ..Good Luck..--Comet styles 09:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support a good candidate, who has learnt and grown from his last RfA --Stephen^1-800-STEVE 10:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest Oppose. Sebi _[talk] 09:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from the support section. Care to elaborate at all? --Stephen^1-800-STEVE 10:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reading Spebi's talk page, this may in fact be a joke oppose, but really a support (as where it was originally placed). I would appreciate a clarification on this matter. Daniel 10:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a support. It doesn't matter what is placed in bold text, it matters what subsection it is placed under – in future, Steve, please ask before you move, instead of move, then ask. I tend to do this to users who I strongly support, and hopefully the candidate sees the joke. Sebi _[talk] 10:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - hahnch e n 10:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great user, you should think yourself lucky that Kurt Weber cant oppose! Rlest 10:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Neutral. I have serious concerns from reading the last RfA - in particular the comment that "IAR will apply heavily to BLP" [2]. Some time has passed but I want to see a pretty good answer to Q.6 before I would be comfortable supporting. WjBscribe 04:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong neutral per Special:Undelete/User:G1ggy/Chatlog Majorly. Rather than ask a leading question in the questions section, I would like Giggy to make a general statement about this entire chat logs issue, and include what he feels important. Both what he includes and his opinion on such will determine where I cast my hat in this RfA. Per principles confirmed by the Arbitration Committee only this month and given how recent this incident was (late last month), I feel it is highly relevant and important to this RfA. Daniel 07:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since the page can only be seen by administrators, could you please give me the basic details of what happened? Thanks. --Dark Falls ^talk 07:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, it's a private chat log published between Giggy and Majorly, who were in a dispute about a couple of RfA's. I think it would defeat the purpose of deleting it if I started explaining the details of the private discussion. I want to hear what Giggy has to say, so hopefully we'll all be more illuminated after that :) Daniel 07:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you answered my question precisely. I was trying to find out what type of content the log was, not the content. Thanks. --Dark Falls ^talk 07:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Per principles confirmed by the Arbitration Committee" What principles confirmed by ArbCom? daveh4h 07:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2.1) In the absence of permission from the author (including of any included prior correspondence) or their lapse into public domain, the contents of private correspondence, including e-mails, should not be posted on-wiki. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. Chat logs fall into that. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hkelkar 2, July 11, 2007. Daniel 08:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Giggy|Giggy]]===
 <span class="plainlinks">'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Giggy|action=edit&section=4}} Voice your opinion]'''</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Giggy|talk page]])
-'''(31/0/2); Scheduled to end 2:33, [[4 August]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''
+'''(32/0/2); Scheduled to end 2:33, [[4 August]] [[2007]] (UTC)'''
 {{User|Giggy}} - It is with great anticipation that I submit Giggy for your consideration, a user whom I believe has remarkably exceeded any conceivable requirements to become an administrator. Giggy was extremely [[User:Giggy/Coach|easy to coach]], he always promptly responded to any concerns and swiftly improved to overcome and master those worries. Giggy learns with his mistakes, and fast. Communicating with him couldn't be any better, he's always very civil, polite and attentive. Giggy is an experienced and trustworthy user, a very efficient vandalfighter with tens of reports to [[WP:AIV]] and a wide participation in a vast array of areas, such as [[WP:XFD]], [[WP:GAC]], [[WP:RFA]], etc.. Wikipedia would undoubtedly benefit with Giggy as an admin, so I now ask my fellow Wikipedians to give him the support he certainly deserves for his hard work and dedication. <strong><font style="color: #082567">[[User:Husond|Hús]]</font>[[User:Husond/Esperanza|<font color="green">ö</font>]]<font style="color: #082567">[[User talk:Husond|nd]]</font></strong> 15:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
@@ Line 105: / Line 105: @@
 #:::Yes, it is a support. It doesn't matter what is placed in bold text, it matters what subsection it is placed under &ndash; in future, Steve, please ''ask'' before you move, instead of move, then ask. I tend to do this to users who I strongly support, and hopefully the candidate sees the joke. [[User:Spebi|<span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; color: #002BB8">Sebi</span>]]&nbsp;<sub style="color: darkgreen;">&#91;[[User talk:Spebi|<span style="color:darkgreen">talk</span>]]&#93;</sub> 10:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 #'''Support''' - [[User:Hahnchen|hahnch]][[User:Hahnchen/E|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Hahnchen|n]] 10:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
+# Great user, you should think yourself lucky that Kurt Weber cant oppose! [[User:Rlest|Rlest]] 10:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 '''Oppose'''
 #