Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Seicer

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by A man of honour (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 21 February 2008 (→‎Support: Support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Seicer

Voice your opinion (talk page) (28/0/0); Scheduled to end 04:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Seicer (talk · contribs) - I'd like to put Seicer forward for your consideration. He's been around a while now (May 2006) and he's gained over 11,000 edits in this time. He's a member of the mediation committee where I've seen his excellent level head in some contentious mediations, and through both on wiki and off wiki (vis the mailing list) discussion he's always a very neutral party in disputes. Seicer has some great mainspace contributions, mostly centred around Kentucky articles (Most notably University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky, Ashland, Kentucky and Cityscape of Lexington, Kentucky). One of the main reasons he was asked to put forward a nomination for the mediation committee was because of his calm head when responding in threads on AN, AN/I and WQA - he's neutral, yet gives sound advice to all parties. I expect as an adminstrator he would be able to go even further in these discussions. He's a good vandal fighter as well, with many accurate reports to AIV - it would be of great benefit for him to have the block button, where I am certain he would use it effectively. One key thing I like to see in an administrator is accountability for past mistakes - He has created User:Seicer/Open (which I encourage you to read) to acknowledge his previous errors so he, and other users can learn from past mistakes. It's only fair I bring to your attention that he was blocked in September for a violation of the 3RR rule, but I am sure this is firmly in that past and he understands the judgement error made at this point in time. All in all, he's a very trusted user, and I fully expect him to make a fine administrator. Ryan Postlethwaite 04:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:


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 first came onto Wikipedia a little over a year and a half ago (I lurked for ~6 months prior), I was very much mesmerized by the wealth of information available at my fingertips. I began editing in earnest, beginning with articles that were local to my region and state -- Kentucky, primarily, and focused on topics of interest, such as those relating to bridges, urban exploration, cities and buildings. Over the course of time, my edits began to take on more janitorial role. It was not for a lack of interest in Wikipedia, but that I had recused myself from editing numerous articles due to possible conflicts of interest between Wikipedia and my four web-sites, which are a reflection of not only my interests, but my obsessions, which focus on bridges, urban scenes, abandonments and travel.
I found that I actually enjoyed the janitorial role. I limited myself to basic duties at first, doing vandalism reverts, applying warning notices, and making minor comments at ANI. I later expanded that to WP:WQA, where I was allowed to become more involved in dispute resolution and found myself to be very much wanted in an area of Wikipedia that is often left by the wayside. Although I haven't contributed as much there lately, I still consider it to be my old stomping grounds, and I learned a lot regarding dispute resolution/conflict resolution and methods to solve issues in an amicable manner. In the future, I would like to take a greater role at not only WQA, but WP:DR in general, lending an extra hand to where it is needed.
I expanded to WP:3O, where I mediated two discussions. Although I was limited in my participation due to an extended illness in January and part of February, I would love to take on more mediations in that regard. I also applied for Mediation Committee and was accepted due to, in part, my prior contributions at WQA. I jumped in with what is arguably one of my most difficult conflicts to handle in regards to Cold Fusion, and although I am not handling it conventionally with a regular tally and decision, I do believe that working with the editors, handing disputes firmly, and being proactive in encouraging other editors to join in on the discussion will result in an article that could easily pass GA. While it may take considerably longer, I feel that quality trumps a rushed decision. Through it, I've fielded some nasty complaints and some rather hostile messages, but I hold nothing against any editor and look forward to working with them in the future.
Further, I have ANI watchlisted, since I am an active contributor there -- mainly for support or for minor comments.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I find it quite hard to describe my best contributions to the project. One of my earlier forays into editing was Cityscape of Ashland, Kentucky which was later promoted to GA. I have a love for history and for cities, and my personal research into both led me to not only contribute to my web-sites and writings, but to Wikipedia. I am also very proud of Pullman Square, which is a downtown revitalization project whose history is extraordinarily complex and complicated, and which was later promoted to GA status. The same can be said about my other GA appointee, Ashland Community and Technical College. I am also working on the University of Kentucky article, the university I attend currently, in an effort to promote it to GA status.
I am also currently attempting to get Bernie Ward to GA status. I came across the article while mediating a dispute at WP:WQA, and upon first glance at the article, I made the internal mention that required an almost complete rewrite. It was obviously full of BLP vios., featured numerous grammatical errors, and was almost entirely unsourced or sourced with mere external links. I initiated a complete rewrite over the period of a week (IIRC) and completely restructured the article to satisfy BLP requirements, and completed enough work that, while it failed GA nomination, I feel is substantially better than when I first began.
I am also proud of my contributions to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/CompScientist, which came about of my involvement with WP:WQA. A user commented in regards to Nissan GT-R and the term supercar, both topics which I was wholly unfamiliar with. I mediated an extended discussion, which involved the disruption of numerous sock puppets, to which I later connected with the assistance of Daniel Case (talk · contribs). It's still an "open" case, although due to the diligence of editors in keeping a watch over his old haunts, we have limited his capacity to disrupt the project in the future.
There are probably countless other contributions which I can claim to be proud of, but those are the most recent or those that I can actually remember.
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: Conflicts? Yes. I tend to jump into the middle of discussions or conflicts, partially because I am active at WQA, ANI, 3O, MC, etc., but also because I enjoy the spirit of debate and resolve. Have they caused me stress? At times, yes.
Take for instance CompScientist (talk · contribs) and his varying socks. Being accused of various infractions, being slammed in discussion by what I thought were numerous separate accounts and individuals, and being lobbed left and right wasn't fun or constructive to discussion. Or Cculber007 (talk · contribs), where I was accused of discrimination on the basis that he was deaf. I noted that he had a long-term pattern of editing abuse and legal threats, and has had a series of blocks. I was an uninvolved editor in the whole deal, coming from a WQA report, and only escalated it to ANI after receiving several e-mails that threatened to have me blocked and removed from MC. I handled most of the dispute via e-mail and while the offending editor never recused his comments or edits, he has scaled back his edits and has become much less disruptive/incivil.
I was also accused of external link discrimination by Carl Rogers. Almost comical, he still trolls through my posts at various newsgroups to this day and occasionally includes the case in discussion.
I've dealt with it as amicably as possible. That's not to say that I wasn't a pain-in-the-rear long ago about it though, and two that I should mention involve citation templates which I completely blew out of proportion (I apologized for the incident) and for being overzealous at an AFD.
I've kept a short log, with a description of some of the incidents, at User:Seicer/Open. I believe that every editor and administrator should be held accountable for their prior actions, and should be as forthcoming as much as possible in regards to incidents. Plus, it's good for me to look back on and point out mistakes or how I should have handled a situation differently. Reviewing my old cases and being involved in various disputes has made me deal with conflicts in a vastly different manner than say... a year ago. You still learn how to deal with conflicts all the time, and it's something that you cannot fully learn or experience as each case is specific and rubber-stamping a resolution is not always the method that produces the best result. However, I primarily go with the dispute resolution process if extended discussions or private e-mails fail to produce an agreeable result. As for obvious vandals, which I hold a zero-tolerance policy towards, it includes warnings and DR, AIV, ANI or 3RR (depending on the case). I'm quite familiar with all four and participate in discussions regularly across the board.

General comments

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

Discussion

Support
  1. Would be a fantastic administrator. Willing to deal with difficult inter-personal disputes and has shown a great ability in resolving them. Experience with mainspace disputes via mediation, no evidence to suggest he won't know how to use the administrator tools in this respect if he gets them. Stable user who can take on criticism and learn from his experiences. Kind, friendly and trustworthy user. Strong support. Daniel (talk) 05:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support as nom - Best of luck! Ryan Postlethwaite 06:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Interacted with this editor for over 2 years - a great editor, professional, knowledgable. --Rschen7754 (T C) 06:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. —Dark (talk) 06:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Per previous interactions. John Reaves 06:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support - of course! - Alison ❤ 06:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - experienced and skilled with resolving conflicts, disputes, etc. Highly mopworthy. --Cheeser1 (talk) 06:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support No problems here. MBisanz talk 07:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong support. Spebi 07:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 08:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oh wow...I was amazed to see this considering what I've seen from this user, especially around MedCom. Very, very impressive, and I'm sure he'll go far. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 08:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Your answers were too long to read so I'll just take Ryan's word for it ;) --Stephen 09:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Jmlk17 09:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - Superb track record - extremely impressed. Will make a trustworthy admin. Wisdom89 (T / C) 09:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Not one yet? Make it so! Majorly (talk) 11:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Aye Nick (talk) 11:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - trustworthy editor. Addhoc (talk) 11:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Yup! RT | Talk 11:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support great contributions! Will use the mop well. SpencerT♦C 12:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. Already has experience in dispute resolution. Good luck. Malinaccier Public (talk) 13:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. Majoreditor (talk) 13:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Will not abuse thee tools. Good luck. I also hope you learned from breaking the 3RR rule back in September. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 13:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Good experience in dispute resolution, will serve him well on his journey with the mop. Twenty Years 14:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support - With all the DR experience under the belt, I think Seicer will make an excellent admin. —Travistalk 15:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support - Yes, quite clearly ready for the mop. Ronnotel (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support - Give em' the mop. Tiptoety talk 15:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support I did an editor review for him last year. He's a good writer and a good communicator. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 17:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Resolution of disputes and all the other contributions Seicer has done are simply outstanding. I hopefully recognised this when I added my opinion to his request to be a mediator a few weeks back. Sincerely the strongest support in a long time. Rudget. 17:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Very civil and productive editor. You'll make a great addition to the janitors! Icestorm815 • Talk 17:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Seems good to me! Good luck! A man of honour (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Seicer&oldid=193090951"