Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cholmes75

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vilerage (talk | contribs) at 08:06, 2 July 2006 (→‎[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cholmes75|Cholmes75]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Cholmes75

Discuss here (11/2/1) ending 23:10, July 8, 2006 (UTC)

Cholmes75 (talk · contribs) – As I'm coming up on the first anniversary of my first Wikipedia edit, now is as good a time as any to throw my hat into the Admin ring. In my time here, I have contributed a great deal to the project as an editor (creating and editing many articles as well as toiling away at the less glamorous but no less important admin-esque tasks), and am ready to contribute constructively as an administrator. While I don't pretend to have an all-encompassing knowledge of Wiki policy, I have a firm enough understanding of policy to further the project in a number of areas (details provided in the questions below) immediately. Finally, I know some within the community view self-noms as rather tacky or as a thinly veiled power grab—nevertheless I hope I will be judged on the merits of my contributions to the project, and my aptitude for adminship. cholmes75 (chit chat) 22:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I, of course, accept. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 23:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support
  1. Strong support Rama's Arrow 23:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - Yes. Iolakana|T 23:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support ForestH2 | + | √+ | √ | √- | - 23:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. SushiGeek 23:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support great work in deletion and kudos for having the patience to dig through the wasteland that is WP:DEAD. Opabinia regalis 00:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Orane (talk • cont.) 00:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. DarthVader 01:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Weak Support been here for nearly a year now, looks like they've contributed a lot. Weak support due to the reasons under the oppose votes.--Andeh 01:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Glad to hear someone wants to deal with backlogs. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Weak Support. I like your answers, but this is a weak support considering CanadianCaesar's comment. Roy A.A. 03:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Unfortunately Weak Oppose per your "warning" to Kappa. Kudos on you extensive contributions and your 2GA achievement. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak Support I've been too harsh - CrazyRussian talk/email 06:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support I see no real reason not to --08:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose per [1] We do not need administrators who treat inclusionism as vandalism, reverting deproddings and sending test messages for it, claiming to give "official warnings" to good, outstanding, well-established Wikipedians like Kappa. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - This, unfortunately, was as a result in a lack of understanding regarding the prod process. I have since taken it upon myself to learn the proper procedure involved with prodding/deprodding articles. Mea culpa. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 23:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose per CanadianCaesar; incident was only 6/52 ago -- Samir धर्म 01:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Neutral
  1. Neutral - The resume looks good but Caesar's diff shows a willingness to dive into processes before you fully understand them, which I see as a red flag for someone we are considering giving more tools. (ESkog)(Talk) 23:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment. Do you care to give some examples? Orane (talk • cont.) 00:46, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think ESkog means the diff link above provided by CanadianCaesar. --WinHunter (talk) 01:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Username	Cholmes75
Total edits	8747
Distinct pages edited	5473
Average edits/page	1.598
First edit	23:47, 6 July 2005
	
(main)	4836
Talk	263
User	227
User talk	1852
Image	848
Image talk	5
Template	41
Template talk	4
Category	49
Wikipedia	550
Wikipedia talk	71
Portal	1
Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: Three words—backlogs, backlogs, backlogs. I have a lot of experience in adding to backlogs (tagging images, adding copyvio tags, prodding articles, tagging articles for speedy deletion, etc.) and look forward to actually reducing them as an admin. I would be particularly active in image backlogs, as I know that improperly tagged/obtained images are a thorn in Wikipedia's side currently. Another big area I wish to contribute in is vandal fighting. I participate in RC patrolling and have reverted vandalism/warned vandals a bunch of times (I will admit that my activity here was greatly helped once I got VandalBot). So I would welcome the opportunity to be able to get involved in WP:AIV from the admin side. I also anticipate helping out with closing xFD discussions and taking the appropriate actions (in accordance with community consensus). I try to be well-rounded as an editor, and I anticipate being well-rounded as an admin.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: Most recently, I was able to bring Peace Dollar and Winfield Scott (ship) to WP:GA status. I hope to do the same for other articles, and help get others up to WP:FA status. I am also pleased that I have helped make some serious dents in the backlog at WP:DEAD in the past. That's one of those "backwater" areas that doesn't seem to get its due attention. I have also tagged more unsourced/unlicensed images than I care to count, and I have flagged a number of articles with copyright issues.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Unfortunately, yes. Most recently, I was embroiled in a dispute over the Mark Chadbourne article. Here's the story in a nutshell—I came across the article while helping out on WP:DEAD. I did some investigation and discovered what I considered to be a copyright violation. So I tagged and listed the article appropriately, as well as advised the article creator. Another user left a note on the article page stating they were the copyright holder and it was OK to use the text, and removed the copyright tag. Knowing this is not the way the process works, I replaced the tag but left a note on the editor's talk page [2]. Next thing I know, I start receiving attack notes on my talk page. That's nothing new, but this person went one step further and used their own website to attack me personally (that version isn't up anymore). I explained why I did what I did (feeling that my actions had been perfectly justified), but was again attacked. I will admit that I perhaps got a bit snippy, I might add. The end result is that the text was confirmed as permissible, and the article was revived. I was stressed by the fact that I believe I was attacked most unfairly, but also feel that I didn't do anything outside the bounds of policy. The one action I regret from this incident was that in making some snippy comments I allowed myself to be affected personally by the attacks (I am human, after all). I try not to take things like that personally, and expect to not react similarly in the future.
One other incident (in the interest of full disclosure) involved what almost became an edit war involving the KISS discography article (as well as other related KISS articles), in what I felt was inappropriate removal of correct information. I did end up taking this to the article's talk page. Again, my main regret here is that I did allow some emotion to creep in, as reflected in some of the edit summaries on the articles. But were I an admin in this situation, I can say with 100% certainty that I would not have taken any unilateral action without consultation with other admins (to avoid any potential issues of bias).

Optional question from Goldom

1. In your opinion, what attributes make someone a good admin?
A: The key thing that makes someone a good admin, I think, is a sincere desire to do right by the project. If an admin has that, it doesn't mean they won't ever make mistakes–but it does mean that they are willing to correct those mistakes and to find ways to prevent them from happening again. No editor works in a vacuum, and it shouldn't be that way for an admin. Another one is a willingness take responsibility for your actions. That doesn't just mean owning up to mistakes, but it also means to stand firm by your decisions when what you did was right. And lastly, I think a good admin looks for multiple ways to help out. I've not necessarily seen this myself, but I can envision a scenario where an admin might get into a comfort zone and just work on one area of the project (AfD, AIV, etc.). There's just so much to do here, an admin would be doing a disservice to themself and Wikipedia if they didn't get out and contribute in as many ways as possible.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Cholmes75&oldid=61658823"