Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CharlieEchoTango: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Questions for the candidate: additional question
HuskyHuskie (talk | contribs)
Line 34: Line 34:
:'''6.''' You say that you intend to work on CSD admin, which is great as it frequently becomes backlogged. The most frequently used speedy deletion category is [[WP:CSD A7]]... it's also the most frequently misused and a fairly large proportion of CSD A7 nominations inevitably need to be declined. Can you outline how you would go about assessing an A7 nomination?
:'''6.''' You say that you intend to work on CSD admin, which is great as it frequently becomes backlogged. The most frequently used speedy deletion category is [[WP:CSD A7]]... it's also the most frequently misused and a fairly large proportion of CSD A7 nominations inevitably need to be declined. Can you outline how you would go about assessing an A7 nomination?


;Additional question from {{u|HuskyHuskie}}
:'''7.''' Have you regularly spent time here at RfA? If so, aren't you nervous as hell that your good intentions might be of little consequence next to a mistep or two that you've made in the past, and that you could be ripped apart by these other editors when all you want to do is help? [[User:HuskyHuskie|HuskyHuskie]] ([[User talk:HuskyHuskie|talk]]) 08:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
<!-- {{subst:Rfa-question|Number of question|Question}} -->
<!-- {{subst:Rfa-question|Number of question|Question}} -->



Revision as of 08:44, 23 November 2011

CharlieEchoTango

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (3/0/0); Scheduled to end 06:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)}}

Nomination

CharlieEchoTango (talk · contribs) – Hello all. For a while I didn't think I would have a need or a "want" for the tools. But times change and ideas evolve, and I now stand ready to request the mop, simply because I see how the extra buttons could come in handy at various times and I see no reason why not to have them, nor do I see a reason why I should fear the community process, given that I don't have much to lose by stepping forward.

I am a generally clueful editor, with a fair amount of experience, a good and balanced record (though not stellar nor consistent), a clean block log (not technically, but in spirit), and an appropriate use of the buttons I am already entrusted with. Areas in which I feel more clueful in are copyright matters, NPOV matters, image and licensing work, content cleanup, deletion and its much more positive counterpart Articles for Creation, anti-vandalism work, and some level of original content work. Areas where I'm less experienced in, or simply less comfortable in, are conflict management, policy discussions, and the "drama boards". The comfort disparity is likely due to a) me not being a native English speaker b) me not being much of a people's person, both of which may result in possible awkwardness at times, and consequently generates some lack of wiki-confidence when it comes to getting involved in these areas. As someone who values integrity and personal responsibility, I fully acknowledge these shortcomings, but I am always willing to learn, adapt, and do the right thing.

If entrusted with the mop by the community, I intend to generally keep to the areas I've been working so far and to stay the course. I do not intend to work the more controversial areas of the wiki, but if ever I land there by misfortune, I think I can be trusted to do the right thing and use due diligence, perhaps seeking advice from more experienced fellow editors and administrators. That, in my book, is A Good Thing™.

Simply put, I think I am ready to be a trusted member of this community. Thank you for your time. CharlieEchoTango (talk) 06:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: From a purely administrative perspective, AIV, UAA, AFD, CSD, PROD, RFPP, RM. That's pretty much it as far as my intentions go, but of course I may pop up elsewhere, who knows!
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Without hesitation, my mainspace work. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a great content creator or contributor, but I did improve several articles (whether from a backlog, from random browsing, or from a personal project), written a particularly neutral DYK/GA on a controversial book and idea (though the article is yet to be complete) and I have several articles in the making. Why are these my best contributions? Because for everything we do here, content work is by far the most visible and impacting. When I improved PPCLI, though it was far from perfect and rather gramatically suck-ish, I knew I helped provide a better knowledge of the topic for the readers. And that, to me, is far more important than all the endless bickering that goes on in the various inner venues of this big project. I only wish I had more time, competence and courage to contribute more from a content perspective; on the other hand, as a volunteer contributor I do not feel pressured into working a specific area, which is a good thing because everybody has something to contribute, from brilliant content work to simple maintenance tasks.
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: Quite frankly, I cannot think of an actual confict I've been in. Sure I've had disagreements, discussions, and frustrations. But a conflict? The closest thing that could come to a conflict was a misunderstanding that happened on IRC a year ago. Surely no stress was caused from that. Am I stressed? To some extent, yes, but all of it comes from real life, and quite honestly, while I value my participation here, I am not emotionally involved enough that any "wiki-stress" could affect my "IRL-stress". When real-life stress becomes more serious, I'm smart enough to back away from less important commitments. And if actual wiki-stress happens, as it may in the future (who knows!), I would be quick to temporarily go away, because I have far more important and challenging priorities that I would never let anything affect : my real life aspirations.
Additional question from Surajt88
4. Just curious about your userbox. What's your take on WP:IAR?
A: Their is no perfect answer to that question, but the overall philosophy I believe in and which is conveyed by the userbox is that when one is not a dick and does not behave as an activist (e.g. NPOV), they already meet the general spirit of the rules. That certainly does not exclude one from following the written or unwritten community guidelines nor does it entitle someone to violate the key policies and pillars our project is built upon. Simply put, one should use common sense and due diligence, but also be bold and not worry to much about the rest if they feel, in good faith, they are Doing the Right Thing™.
Additional question from Sven Manguard
5. A look at your monthly edit count shows that you fluctuate wildly between the 2000s, the lower hundreds, and 0. Do you mind explaining why? Do you predict it happening again? Do you believe disappearing for months at a time will have any effects on your ability to serve as an admin?
A: (e/c) Sure: I'm not a consistent editor, and I have a rather varied schedule in real life. When I have more free time and less stress, as happened at the beginning of the year, then again at the end of the summer, I may devote a significant amount of effort to Articles for Creation, which translates in a significantly higher number of edits (2 edits per declined submission, 4-5 per approved submission). At other times, I'm more stressed and busy with my studies and training IRL, and may not want to deal with the commitment AfC brings, so I choose to merely monitor my watchlist for things to revert (vandalism, etc) or help with (WP:HD, WP:NCHP/Q, etc), or simply work in other areas (articles, etc) that require less commitment in time and effort. No, I do not think my inconsistency would affect my ability to serve as an admin. Why would it? So long as the on-wiki business (e.g. outstanding personal requests, ongoing mopping) has been taken care of, the temporary availability of administrators shouldn't matter, because sysops are volunteers like everyone else. I hope this answers your question! :)
Additional question from Catfish Jim and the soapdish
6. You say that you intend to work on CSD admin, which is great as it frequently becomes backlogged. The most frequently used speedy deletion category is WP:CSD A7... it's also the most frequently misused and a fairly large proportion of CSD A7 nominations inevitably need to be declined. Can you outline how you would go about assessing an A7 nomination?
Additional question from HuskyHuskie
7. Have you regularly spent time here at RfA? If so, aren't you nervous as hell that your good intentions might be of little consequence next to a mistep or two that you've made in the past, and that you could be ripped apart by these other editors when all you want to do is help? HuskyHuskie (talk) 08:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General comments


Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.

Discussion

Support
  1. SupportAnyone who can do that many AFCs without cracking shouldn't have too many problems with adminship.©Geni 06:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Sure. 10k edits, clean backlog, decent article work. We need admins. I don't think this user will go nuts with the tools. Net positive. You have my support. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 06:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. I see no problems. James500 (talk) 06:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Oppose


Neutral