Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WAvegetarian

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Reggae Sanderz (talk | contribs) at 20:25, 23 July 2006 (→‎[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WAvegetarian|WAvegetarian]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WAvegetarian

Discuss here (20/0/2) Ending 15:03, 2006-07-30 (UTC)

WAvegetarian (talk · contribs) – WAvegetarian is a veteran Wikipedia user who has been editing Wikipedia since 31st May 2005, and has more than 4200 edits. He has been very active on new pages patrol and has more than 1000 deleted edits to this day. He shows a good grasp of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and actively participates in AfDs. Connor is also an active RC Patroller and has a keen eye for vandalism. He is also very active on the Help Desk and always offers a helping hand to newcomers. This rational, intelligent and civil user would not abuse the responsibilty bestowed to administrators, and should be provided with the appropriate tools. Nearly Headless Nick 11:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 15:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support
  1. I-beat-the-nominator-support :) — FireFox 15:15, 23 July '06
  2. Support This Fire Burns Always 15:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support as nominator. --Nearly Headless Nick 15:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC) 15:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Meaty Support, excellent user. High points definitely make up for Yanksox's concern in my opinion (but please do take that criticism into account after this RfA). RandyWang (raves/review me!) 15:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support No red flags as far as I can see. WAvegetarian appears to take part in a wide range of activities on Wikipedia. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 15:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Naconkantari 16:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Yes, please. Misza13 T C 17:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Weak support per neutral section. Look quite good otherwise. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Things seemed a lot better until I saw those edits in the neutral section. Everything else is in order, though, and nobody can be perfect. Alphachimp talk 17:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support: I've seen this user around and there's nothing worrisome for me. Catamorphism 18:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Seivad 18:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. He'll make good use of the admin tools. Canderson7 (talk) 18:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support I agree with Neutral 1 and 2, but it still looks to me like this user could use the admin tools, and those examples don't really show anything that would suggest he would misuse them. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 19:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support I've had...quite an experience with WAvegetarian when I was first starting out here. Obviously, I've changed. He is an excellent vandal fighter; I've had first hand experience! (In fact, I was planning to nominate him, darn!) Thistheman 19:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. That's so hot. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Merovingian - Talk 20:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. good user, his reputation proceeds him. Highway Return to Oz... 20:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Edit conflict Support This editor seems to have a sensible grasp of the fundamentals of Wikipedia, judging by the spread of edits and the answers below.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  20:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Yeah, support. JohnnyDemon 20:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support per nominator. Reggae Sanderz 20:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
  1. Neutral Seems like a good user, but I'm little worried about this considering that the candidate listed this as being an article that he is proud of. This may seem ridiculous, but that section seems unencylopedic and intended for people that go to/did go to/will go to the school. Yanksox 15:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per Yanksox. I don't think the candidate actually wrote that section or should be opposed over it, but one would hope that a Wikipedia admin would know that kind of speculation about random school employees and people and so on is utterly unencyclopedic and needs to go. --W.marsh 16:17, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: I have removed the two really troubling items, see [1] for the earlier version. --W.marsh 16:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Username	WAvegetarian
Total edits	4311
Distinct pages edited	2057
Average edits/page	2.096
First edit	05:08, 31 May 2005
	
(main)	1557
Talk	224
User	253
User talk	1257
Image	43
Image talk	1
Template	11
Template talk	3
Category	3
Category talk	2
Wikipedia	929
Wikipedia talk	28

Taken from Interiot's Tool2. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 15:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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?
A: I have found that much of my time on Wikipedia is spent doing new page patrol. As it is now, I can tag articles for speedy deletion, but that just adds to the back log. I would like to be able to lessen that backlog. I also have gotten fairly good at recognizing copyright violations. I have tagged many articles as such, but would like to work on the other end to reduce this massive backlog. I have experience with images having uploaded a number of main illustrations myself and would probably help out at the image csd backlog as well. I also have been active working on countervandalism through computer assisted recent changes patrol. Having the rollback button would make my vandalism patrolling easier and more efficient. I also would be able to block persistent vandals rather than trying to figure out what {{test4.2}} is while I wait for someone else deal with my alerts on WP:AIV or IRC. Instead, I could be working on that backlog. There is lots written here about "the backlog" because we have a lot of it and I know I helped to create it. It is especially noticeable to me when doing new page patrol and it takes forever for attack articles to be deleted. In my work on the help desk/{{helpme}} patrol I have come across instances where admin assisted page moving/history merging was necessary to fix a duplicate article, someone needed to have the text of a deleted article to rewrite to an acceptable state and other instances where I had to refer them to someone else. I have a background in establishing consensus in discussions in real life. I was elected to the position of a consensus discussion moderator/arbiter at my cooperative, which is a part of the Oberlin Student Cooperative Association (the third largest student cooperative association in N. America). I would make use of this and my experience with Wikipedia to close XfDs.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I know that there are users who will hold it against me, but the single article I have contributed to the most is Garfield High School (Seattle). The early history of the article got corrupted during a string of page moves, but you can see most (I think) of my uncorrupted changes by looking at my early contributions. This article wasn’t even a legitimate stub when I found it. Since I’m not of the opinion that every accredited educational institution teaching people age 14 and up is notable, I probably would have marked it as having no claim of notability and sent it to VfD, however this article is about ‘‘my’’ high school. I got involved with Wikipedia because User:CAPS LOCK told me to one day in our high school philosophy class. Having grown up in the neighborhood and spent four years there, I figured I was well qualified to write about it. Garfield is by no means ready to be featured article, but it is quite good, IMO. I didn’t create it, but I’m fairly certain the majority of the content is mine. The source research was by me, at least. The best start to an article I’ve made is at Power Pete. Other than some mention of a community of Power Pete players, which did/doesn’t exist AFAIK, I think the article covers everything it should/could.
Most of my contributions haven’t been creating content but instead new page and recent change patrolling and answering on Ref desk, Help desk and helpdesk-l before it closed in February. As it was a mailing list, my contributions to helpdesk-l don’t show up in Special:Contributions/WAvegetarian or my edit count. I would refer you to the archives, but the link on the meta info site doesn’t work. It seems that the only record I was there are the BJAODN I added to the helpdesk page.
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: Of course. Most recently (today) while responding to {{helpme}}s on #wikipedia-bootcamp I ran into a disgruntled newbie who wanted help figuring out where his article had been moved to after it stopped being at Credit Card in favor of a redirect to Credit card. I patiently worked resolving his problems while removing helpme templates over and over. It was pointed out to me by another editor trying to help the author that the article was likely to be deleted as it was related to a current AfD. I agreed with them, but continued to help the author. It was at this point that the author decided we were conspiring against them and proceeded to have a fit across my talk page, the other helper’s talk page, their own talk page, the AfD, and the talk page of at least one person from the AfD. This included personal attacks, gross civility violations and blackmail using threats to troll if I didn’t make sure the article got kept. I responded in a calm, civil and collected manner. I pointed out the relevant policies, explained my actions and tried to deescalate the situation. The calmed down significantly after my first message in response to their rant and left a civil question for me on their talk page. I answered it, giving the reasoning behind my actions. I feel that open communication and civil discussion are the best ways to deescalate conflict and stress. If stress is cumulative rather than stemming from an individual conflict I find that short wikibreaks can be very rejuvenative.
I flipped out once in what I feel is the distant past during the AfD for REMAGINE. I felt that the author was being bitten for not understanding Wikipedia policies. I was out of line and have not had anything even close to that occur since. JzG gave a great example of deescalation technique and a lesson I took to heart [2]: clear and early communication avoids problems. In general my wikistress levels have been relatively low other than during the time I was involved in this dispute. I did get into it with User:Mike Nobody over edits to the George W. Bush article and the addition of a 238 pixel wide image to his signature. It eventually became clear to him that the insertion of his POV using out of context photos was unacceptable as was the oversize fair use image in his signature. I explained how to avoid inserting your own POV into articles and explained the fair use criteria. I finished the exchange with a compliment and didn't have any problems there after.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/WAvegetarian&oldid=65428035"