Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Athaenara

Athaenara

Voice your opinion (talk page) (25/1/0); Scheduled to end 09:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Athaenara (talk · contribs) - Athaenara has been with us since October last year, making over 11,000 quality edits. By providing third opinions, resolving BLP and COI disputes at WP:BLPN and WP:COIN respectively and other quality mainspace contributions, Athaenara has demonstrated dedication towards the project. She has proven that she can deal with the stress of imparting clue with respect to WP:BLP and WP:COI. Has clue and will not abuse the tools. MER-C 09:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept, thank you. — Athaenara ✉ 10:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: When I was first asked to consider it (see User talk:Athaenara/Archive 1#Adminship) six months ago, I thought the prod backlog needed some attention; it still does. I'm not eager to protect articles or block users, but the need for people with the tools to fulfill such duties is obvious. I don't use bots or scripts, and I don't intend to.

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

A: I participate here in the vocation of amateur scholarship. I simply try to do my best and let what I create become part of the community editorial process. I've written some articles (which I try to remember to log in Athaenara/Entries—I think this, this, this, and this aren't half bad). A year ago, I thought inline citation format was too much trouble—not only to add but to read!—but I do a lot of that now. I've been part of the third opinion project since January. I helped out a lot on COI/N and BLP/N until some computer issues slowed me down enough to notice that I'd been overdosing on the characteristic antagonism of some users with conflicts of interest.

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 don't find it stressful to disagree with other editors who do as I do: read, understand and comply with this encyclopedia's policies and guidelines, and observe wikiquette. I do find disruptive editing and violations of civility, no personal attacks and ownership of articles policies very stressful, however. Helpful venues include BLP/N, COI/N, RS/N, AN/I, AIV, RFC and RFC/USER.

A half-dozen examples of conflict/stress/deal:

• Aliweb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (talk archive) came to my attention via EdJohnston. The article, plagued by a few rather nasty socks, was eventually posted on COI/N; the socks have popped in only once or twice since January. (Note: I was new and more long-winded then.)
• Jim Bob Duggar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)(talk archives 2 & 3) came to my attention via BLP/N . I was an outsider when it went to mediation. I still watch over it.
• Subtlety (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) — one editor was rather possessive; I was one of the other editors who simply backed away from it.
• Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazagham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) came to my attention via WP:3O. I don't consider it resolved, unless full article protection to stop one editor from padding the article with stuff from the organisation's webpages is resolution, and maybe it is: the currently protected version is at least neutral.
• Requests for comment/Badmonkey — another which appeared on the WP:3O radar; in stasis.
• Requests for comment/Geoeg — WP:3O again; current; needs additional outside input.

Optional question from User:Justanother

4. Athaenara, I would like to draw your attention to a rather interesting, IMO, example of your behavior under conflict. I refer to your accusing me of being mentally ill for nominating an article for deletion, a nomination that garnered quite a bit of support, I might add, although it did close as "Keep". I found that quite an insulting and totally unwarranted personal attack. I invite the community to look at your post and my reply on this thread as they evaluate your response to my query: Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Barbara Schwarz (4th nomination)#Munchausen syndrome. Athaenara, I would like you to explain your behavior in that instance and, if you defend it still, how such behavior is consistent with the qualities we look for in an admin on this project. --Justanother 16:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I drew an analogy [in logic, “a process of arguing from similarity in known respects to similarity in other respects”(New Oxford American Dictionary)] about activities which I viewed as wp:point-ish.

It was not a personal accusation. — Athaenara ✉ 06:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Optional question from User:Jehochman

5. What would you do in a case where a user made improper or foolish edits, and then became the object of bullying by other editors?

General comments

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

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

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Athaenara before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support - Sure. --Tikiwont 10:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
2. Support Per your excellent answers to the questions. I particularly like the fact that you don't use bots and intend to work "old-school style". A review of contribs looks all good to me. Best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  10:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
3. Support - flicking through the contributions, I can find absolutely nothing to oppose. Good answers to questions, and although it would be wrong of me to base my support on edit count, 11,000 edits has undoubtedly changed this user's interpretation of Wikipedia and the effect they've had on the community, which has been excellent. Well done. Rudget _{Contributions} 11:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
4. Why the hell not? Good luck, have fun. Moreschi ^Talk 11:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
5. Support - of course. Addhoc 11:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
6. Support - looks like a very good candidate, --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
7. Support - I have had only positive experiences in all my interactions with Athaenara, I know of no one else so clearly deserving of the mop. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
8. Support, yep. Neil ☎ 11:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
9. Smile, I've waited a long time for Athaenara to accept. Her dilligency, fairness, and thoroughness are legendary. - Jehochman ^Talk 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
10. Support, I think I'm ready to be, and you're a great deal more ready than I am. All the best! --lincalinca 13:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
11. Support I know Athaenara's work at the WIkipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. She has helped clean up many unbalanced problem articles by simply rewriting them so they are shorter and more neutral. She's also a regular at Wikipedia:Third opinion where she has helped to moderate disputes. Take a look at the article she created on the American architect Martin Stern, Jr. as evidence of her abilities as an article-writer. I have no concerns at all about her becoming an admin and believe it is a well-deserved step. EdJohnston 13:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
12. Support An excellent candidate. It is time to give her the mop. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 15:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
13. Clearly a decent candidate. Acalamari 17:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
14. Support trustworthy, experienced, good answers. No doubts you need the tools. Carlosguitar 18:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
15. This vote is NOT an oppose Good user. NHRHS2010 talk 19:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
16. Support a fine candidate. Good luck. IrishGuy ^talk 19:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
17. Support - A large amount of experience, doubt will abuse the tools. Tiddly-Tom 20:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
18. Support More than qualified. --Sharkface217 03:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
19. Support why not?? Pat^{Politics rule!} 03:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
20. Better late than never. MER-C 03:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
21. Support I had actually thought you already had the mop. No worries here: Athaenara's got strong contributions, knows policy, and I've only had positive encounters with this editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfigura (talk • contribs) 06:13, 27 Oct 2007
22. 'Support, fine with me. Stifle (talk) 10:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
23. Support with enthusiasm. Superb contributor, especially on WP:BLP-related articles. Having the mop can only make her an even better contributor, to the great advantage of the project. CWC 11:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
24. Support One of the best editors I've encountered. I'm sure she will make a great admin. Avb 12:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
25. Support My first encounter with this user was troubling, but it was the result of manipulation by a now permabanned sockpuppeteer, and she was a noob, so I set that aside and watched/waited for some other misbehavior upon which to pounce. None ever occurred. She has proven herself to be hard working, dedicated, and willing to do the tedious and time-consuming chores on BLPN and COIN. No reservations here. I do disagree with her about the Barbara Schwarz article, but a lot of people disagree with me on that one. (In fact, now that I am reminded, I may nom that one yet again.) - Crockspot 12:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose - I had hoped that Athaenara would have had the grace to apologize for her graceless "analogy" but she apparently does not. By her own admission, she finds dealing with what strikes her as problematic "very stressful, however." In my case I found that she attacked me without having, as far as I could see, any previous interaction with me, any familiarity with my editing, and no great experience with the article or the subject area, a complex one (Scientology) fraught with POV and other problems. I had hoped that she had the ability to make peace when it would cost little to make peace. Instead she acted the pedant . . . again. To put it colloquially, she is wound too tight and too quick on the trigger to be trusted with the admin powers. Based on my experience and her response here, I must oppose. I had actually hoped to do otherwise. --Justanother 12:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Justanother, you certainly have been involved in many controversies due to your desire to protect Wikipedia from anti-Scientology POV pushing. Athaenara is extremely reasonable and doesn't get excited. Even though she criticized you, perhaps deservedly, you should realize that she would also protect you from the unfair abuse you have experienced from time to time. She represents what Wikipedia is supposed to be.- Jehochman ^Talk 14:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Justanother, do you have an example of a page or talk page (a specific edit would be even better) to substantiate this? I'm not denying you, but I want to know the gravity of your claims before I continue my support, and whether I believe there's enough weight in your argument. --lincalinca 14:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see my optional question (or here is the link). She floated this mental illness analogy on WP:BLPN and I tried to defuse it there by making light in a friendly fashion as I had very little, if any, contact with her previously and did not suppose that she was going to start insulting me but then she repeated it in the midst of a very contentious AfD, effectively drawing attention away from the subject at hand and putting it on me personally. That sort of activity has a chilling effect and is something I would expect from a POV-pusher, not an experienced and supposedly "reasonable and intelligent" editor and admin-hopeful. It is of note that her "Munchausen syndrome" insult was picked up and continued (here) by a POV-pushing WP:SPA, User:Orsini, in what I can only liken to schoolyard bullying where one bully comes up with a "really good put-down" and the other bullies take up the chant, complete with calling me and others that supported the AfD "the Munchies" in true schoolyard fashion (here). Athaenara was involved in that Orsini talk page thread and so was aware of what use her words were being put to yet she made no effort to moderate. I gave her the opportunity here to make peace with me here as I was obviously insulted and concerned but she chose to be obstinate. I do not think we need more obstinate self-righteous admins around here. --Justanother 15:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you go directly to her and make her aware of how her words had been taken up to bully you? I think that if you had, she would have told the other editor to knock it off. Consider that as an editor with 10,000 edits, she does a lot of editing and may not remember each and every word she uses, so she might not have recognized things as well as you did. - Jehochman ^Talk 15:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot about this: I actually extended an olive branch to her after the AfD was over (here) but she refused my peace offering here. Speaks very succinctly to my concerns about her. Self-righteous. Obstinate. --Justanother 15:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)