Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Georgewilliamherbert

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Andypandy.UK (talk | contribs) at 15:24, 3 November 2006 (→‎[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Georgewilliamherbert|Georgewilliamherbert]]: op). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Georgewilliamherbert

Voice your opinion (12/2/3) Ending 00:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Georgewilliamherbert (talk · contribs) – Everyone's heard this one before, another user that we're suprised isn't an administrator yet. This user caught my eye because of his thoughtful contributions on the unblock-en-l and wiki-en-l Wikipedia mailing lists, and when I learned he wasn't an administrator, I started poking around his edit history and found, among other things, a valiant attempt to bring sanity to the school debate at Wikipedia talk:Schools and an impressive list of contributions, especially in the areas of modern weaponry, metallurgy, and other things I don't understand. So let's give him a mop and take up even more of his free time. Gamaliel 00:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination, as long as the mop isn't stuck in my face in the process. Georgewilliamherbert 01:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate statement

This is the third time someone asked me if I wanted to be an admin; I demurred the first two times for two reasons: one, I wanted to wait until I passed 2,500 edits before seriously thinking about accepting a nomination, and two, I wanted to convince myself that I would have useful thing to do with the mop if granted one.

Having reached that point, I have come to the conclusion that yes, I have some useful things I can contribute to the project as an administrator, and I am going ahead and accepting this nomination.

If this RFA passes, I will wield the admin bit in the manner I've urged others to do over the last year - boldly where called for, conservatively where controversial, and avoiding its abuse in situations I am personally involved in. I will strive to talk first and shoot last, particularly with othe admins. WP:CIVIL is always important.

I believe that administrators have a strong role to play in making Wikipedia work as a project and stronger as an encyclopedia, but I think it's important to avoid dragging the admin bit into arguments or personal disagreements.

I often energetically promote a point or cause I believe in, but I try and keep in mind that we're here to make an encyclopedia and that ultimately we need to get along with everyone who isn't vandalising or abusive. I try hard not to WP:BITE newbies. And keeping a sense of humor is important.

I believe in being accountable, and beyond the normal community feedback mechanisms I support adopting one of the eventual forms of WP:RECALL. If I turn out to be a bad administrator then the bit should be taken away.

Georgewilliamherbert 01:55, 3 November 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 do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I don't have a huge amount of time to devote to some of the core administrator efforts, but I do vandal fighting when it wanders into areas I pay attention to, and other cleanup work, some of which I would use admin powers directly rather than having to bring to someone else's attention as I do now. I've had to ask for help on fixing some article move issues before.
Admin powers would help some with the unblock-en-l response work I do now. Though most of that is just communicating (with the complaintant, and with blocking admins), there are occasional cases requiring admin intervention, such as switching an IP block to Anon-Only, that would go more smoothly and quickly if I could do it directly.
I have watched AN and ANI for most of the last year, and I'd make myself available to respond to requests for help posted there. I have always appreciated the admins who are willing to step in and help there, and joining those ranks seems like a good contribution.
My guess is that there are many more prolific mop-wielders out there, but I think that the stuff I've got in front of me already would be a good use of the admin bit, and I think Wikipedia benefits in general from having more good admins.
Georgewilliamherbert 01:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I don't have any featured articles, but a few of my favorite contributions are Washboarding, the steel and aluminum alloy articles linked from Structural steel and Aluminum alloy, Strength of ships and some related ship articles, and Alt.space related contributions. I added a lot of the content in List of nuclear weapons#United States section and the articles which are linked off that. I've lost count of how many other articles I created.
I've also tried to contribute "administratively" as an editor, cleaning up after vandals I come across, working to improve AFD when I have time, and watching ANI and other policy issues. Plus a lot of responses as a member of the unblock-en-l mailing list. I've participated in wikien-l, foundation-l, and other Wikimedia Foundation lists.
I helped in a small way catalyze the final rollout of the Anon-Only block level, which seems to have helped a lot with making vandal fighting more precise and less collateral-damage producing.
Georgewilliamherbert 01:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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: Most of the conflicts I have been involved in were policy rather than editing, though there was the amusing Conch Republic WP:LAME disagreement not that long ago, and the ignonimous attacks on Societal attitudes towards homosexuality which ended eventually in a Arbcom ruling against the troublemaker.
In terms of dealing with a problem, I firmly believe in communicating about it. Talk and discussion pages are important - and remaining civil and continuing to assume that people are acting in good faith gets you a long ways, even if there's a major content or policy issue disagreement. Not editing when you're angry helps.
I think the most important thing ultimately is understanding that consensus means getting other people's opinions and listening to them. It's hard to both be strongly opinionated and listen, but it's important, so I try hard.
Georgewilliamherbert 01:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Optional questions from Malber (talk · contribs)

4. What do the policy of WP:IAR and the essay WP:SNOW mean to you and how would you apply them?
A:
5. Is there ever a case where a punitive block should be applied?
A:
6. What would your thought process be to determine that a business article should be deleted using CSD:G11?
A:


General comments

Discussion

Support

  1. Of course. Gamaliel 00:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Happy to support, since the user's contributions show no red flags that I can see. The tools won't be misused here, so I see no problem with handing them over. Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 04:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. weak support - see no reason why not --T-rex 05:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. Good grief, yes. A frequent and thoughtful contributor to AN and AN/I and a prolific editor. Choess 05:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Is there any reason he isn't already one? – Chacor 06:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. A great contributor. utcursch | talk 06:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support per above.  Doctor Bruno  07:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. Georgewilliamherbert has been tremendously helpful on the unblock-en mailing list. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Everyking 07:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. - Mailer Diablo 08:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support --Terence Ong (T | C) 10:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. SupportDolive21 11:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. Turned down two suggestions to RFA, so respects the tools/doesn't have a god complex. Many sane contribs to important forums, as noted above. I trust Georgewilliamherbert with the mop. --Ling.Nut 13:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support thoughtful and mature editor, I think we will always need people like that reviewing blocks and available for more complicated problems on AN/ANI. --W.marsh 14:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose My general impression of Georgewilliamherbert is that he fails to support fellow admins who have had to endure prolonged and repeated attacks by an almost never-ending stream of trolls and harassers. This includes a misrepresentation of a "finding" on an arbcom case I was involved in and his reponse that it's a "another sad day" seemingly in defense of the person who was repeatedly asking me about encyclopedia dramatica. full thread. But that's not all, of course, as he also seems to not understand that administrators are charged with enforcing arbitration decisions and he misinterpreted the difference between in indefinite block and a permanent banning when he commented here "A link to the ED homepage is not a link to material that harrasses others", which is not true since that website has used their homepage to post attacks on many people that edit here. His argument here seems to indicate that he doesn't understand editors right to not have their personal information posted. "Posting someone's real life id info online is not a real life attack. A real life attack is being punched or having someone pull a gun or knife on you, or at the very least someone having made a real world information attack such as harrassing phone calls to you, your friends or relatives or employers"...I got news for you...I have had several death threats via email, so yeah, pretty close to real life.--MONGO 10:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose, per MONGO, also answer to Q1 says - "I don't have a huge amount of time to devote to some of the core administrator efforts" then goes on about fighting vandalism where I don't see huge amounts of vandal fighting (2 edits to AIV) which is what he wants to watch, and also says he wants to carryon taking part at WP:AN. User seems more like an editor than a mopper. More vandal fighting experience would tempt me to support.--Andeh 15:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral No major cons, but only 500 edits in more than two months and only sporadic vandal-fight/participation in XfD make be believe that you might not have great need for the admin tools.--Húsönd 04:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral. Needs more experience in main space to understand how the project works. --Ghirla -трёп- 09:47, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Neutral until MONGO's concerns have been answered. Thε Halo Θ 13:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Georgewilliamherbert&oldid=85482067"