User:Xoloz

I am Xoloz (talk • contribs • count • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). I am an administrator on the English Wikipedia, so if you need any help, I am at your service.

I am older than Stewie Griffin and younger than Jeanne Calment. To clear up pronoun worries, I disclose that I am male. Notwithstanding this, I am a longtime member of the National Organization for Women, and a dedicated feminist.

I was born in the American South, but don't like it very much. This is because I am a flaming liberal. Since the matter arises occasionally in discussions, I disclose also that I am a person of color: I'd call myself African-American, but only dad was one, so my "race" is complex. Spiritually, I tend toward Buddhism, with great regard for the teachings of Jesus as well, mixed with strong distaste for organized religions of every kind.

I have an AB from Harvard College, and an MA from the University of Massachusetts, both in History. I recently earned my JD from Georgetown University. This valuable education has left me with a personal debt of approximately one zillion United States Dollars. For this reason, I now work as a legal monkey in Vermont.

I consider myself fat, ugly, and smelly, not unlike Jabba the Hutt. I am also physically disabled.

Besides the topics obvious from the above, I might edit articles on classical music, Star Trek, and sexual fetishes. I am very odd.

I think I speak French, but native speakers have disagreed. I am reasonably fluent in Latin and pathetically unskilled with Ancient Greek. I am slowly learning Hebrew.

I have a pet cat, Harmonious, and a pet mouse, Insane, who get along quite well together. My brand new fish is named for fellow Wikipedian, User:Splash.

That's me. Feel free to talk to me.

Userboxes and the controversy surrounding them

As my page makes plain, I don't care much for userboxes. If I have an opinion to express that I believe is relevant to my edits here (and my biases are relevant -- I want others to be able to honestly assess my edits for inadvertent opinionated slips), I type a few words about it. Generally, I think this is good form for everyone; though, if some folks wish to highlight their views with multi-colored squares, I don't object. I understand that Mr. Wales (who owns this little encyclopedia) wishes to avoid making these boxes as templates, for various reasons, and I support his desire. Subst'ing is an amicable solution, and it is for this reason that I endorse the current compromise proposal on userboxes.

However, as always, I encourage thoughtful deliberation before hasty action. Certain partisans have taken to the summary deletion of these templates, and have defied calls for discussion, patience, and oversight-by-process (through Deletion Review, for example.) Userboxes are, for the most part, not incredibly pernicious; their continued existence, for an interim period as their advocates adjust to subst'ing, is reasonable and does more good than harm. While I support the addition of the new CSD T1, I read it more narrowly than its most fervent friends. A userbox declaring, "X must die!" is speediable; one saying merely "I oppose (or support) X" is generally not. By deleting all and sundry userboxes in a decisive purge, certain hasty actors have needlessly aggravated this issue, and have done damage to civility and goodwill in the community at large. Though userboxes are, in the end, probably "unprofessional" (and hence, unneeded), those who have created them and used in the past are not criminals or miscreants: like all Wikipedians, they are sincere contributors worthy of high respect. Simply put, these summary deletions were acts of disrespect and (however well-intentioned), they should cease, with appropriate apologies in many cases.

In sum, I don't like userboxes, and I don't use them; I support their eventual removal, through compromise and subst'ing. That said, userbox partisans, who have been subjected to often thoughtless, overzealous removal of their valued content, have my full sympathy. On behalf of my Wikipedia colleagues who fail to see the error in "acting before discussing," I apologize to all offended.

Schools

Lately, I find myself interjecting into many contentious school AfD debates. I consider myself a moderate -- I don't know whether I really think schools are notable, but I will vote keep for real high schools because I believe a "default consensus" for keep has been reached among others. For deeper explication of my thoughts on this matter (which were fleshed out with the aid of Ryan Norton as an interlocutor), see here.

Adminship votes

Recently, I have also begun to vote more often at Requests for Adminship. Please note that I feel little choice but to assume a "conservative" position in this area (though, in most modern political contexts, I detest that word.) Some have expressed the view that Admins should be relatively free to employ WP:IAR in adminstrative action. This is a view I oppose, as I feel it violates the spirit of Consensus, which I hold to be the highest policy regarding the practical operation of this project. My opposition to WP:IAR in adminstrative action makes me a much more skeptical voter in RfA than many. I will oppose anyone with any demonstrated past tendency toward anti-consensus unilateralism; I will weakly oppose those nominations where great uncertainty exists on this question. I will not generally vote to support unless I know the nominee to be circumspect and deliberative in nature, or can find clear evidence of such in the record.

For this reason, please do not take personally a vote in opposition to a nomination. I'm a "better-safe-than-sorry" voter on this matter, and my standard is relatively high.

Note, in passing, that my standards for adminship nominees are not relaxed with respect to myself; it is almost impossible I will ever aspire to that role, largely because I know "real-life" obligations leave me without the time to do the job properly.

Ahem... I did say almost! :) I became an administrator on May 17, 2006. This will in no way alter my view on RfA, except that I must be even harsher in assessing myself than in assessing others (being well aware of my own stupidity, together with myriad other failings.)

Xoloz Hearts the Public Domain

All my contributions at Wikipedia are released into the public domain.

Personally, I think templates make user pages really cluttered, so I don't use them (no offense to those who do, of course.) However, since it has been suggested I should add this important template, I will:

	Released into public domain
	I agree to release my text and image contributions, unless otherwise stated, into the public domain. Please be aware that other contributors might not do the same, so if you want to use my contributions under public domain terms, please check the multi-licensing guide.

and this more important template, as well:

This user opposes George W. Bush and supports his impeachment.

Committed identity: 5b8edf63ddbd1aef9380a976984b952494b7ddd0 is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.