Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bobherry

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a permissions request that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

• Result: Unsuccessful. (4/5) --Ferien (talk) 20:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Bobherry

Bobherry (talk · contribs · count)

End date: 20:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello everyone!

I am pleased to be nominating user Bobherry for consideration of the position of administrator. He has been an editor here for some three years and during that time has come to be known as a daily fixture. In preparation for this RfA I have been mentoring Bobherry for over two months. This has included me asking him for opinions on matters such as the length of blocks, adequate warnings, page protections and many other daily admin tasks. I have also been researching his editing here and his need for the tools. During the beginning of his nominating articles for quick deletion he started off with having most of his nominations being accepted by administrators but a considerable number being turned down. Nowadays, however, almost all of his nominations are being accepted showing a great increase in understanding of what should and what should not be quickly deleted. He takes part in discussions at RfD and shows considered reasoning in his comments there. He also is very active at VIP where he reposts vandals and open proxies almost daily and in discussions on WP:AN and WP:ST. He is furthermore an active editor in the mainspace of the project which is very important to us all and has many edits to userspace where he uses Twinkle to properly warn problem users and notify them of quick deletion nominations. Please take your time in considering Bobherry for the mop and take some time to look at his actions, particularly those in the last few months. I have found him to be a pleasure to mentor and very friendly on Discord chat. Thanks for considering this RfA. Yours, fr33kman 20:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)TC)

Candidate's acceptance: I happily accept. Thank you. Bobherry Talk My Changes 20:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. Support as nom. fr33kman 21:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support. He is very driven and dedicated to the Simple English Wikipedia. I think that his changes to the Simple English Wikipedia speak for themselves. He has my support. Red-tailed hawk (talk) 01:16, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support Kk.urban (talk) 17:31, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

   Support Dont know this guy, but seems pretty legit, Oh you guessed it (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

   Administrator note: This user is a sock and globally locked fr33kman 19:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

    Bureaucrat note: Vote struck, account was not registered prior to RfA so does not count. --Ferien (talk) 19:30, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

4. Support I've seen enough of his work here on simplewiki and I think he could be trusted with these tools. Arguments about DENY are not solid enough to me. Everyone can have their views and offwiki actions should not be included.--A09 (talk) 21:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Support I have no reason to believe that they will abuse their power as an admin or will end up an inactive editor.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 13:40, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. I'm here because Bobherry has been quite open in the Wikimedia Discord about their desire to run for adminship, and so I have had this page watchlisted for quite some time to make sure that I could share my thoughts. I'll start out by acknowledging that I am an enwiki tourist and that most of my interaction with Bobherry has been via Discord (where I am one of the server admins), so if either of those is a deal-breaker then please feel free to discount this vote. With that said...
   Bobherry, in my experience, simply does not have the maturity or self-reflection to be an administrator. His behavior was consistent with what I would expect from a newbie antivandalism patroller – lots of excited "look how many vandals I reverted today," an overeager "I'm fighting vandals and Defending The Wiki!" mentality, and the like. I expect more from someone with his experience who is considering running for adminship. Further, moderators of the Wikimedia Discord had to remind him on many, many occasions about the importance of WP:DENY. Even after Bobherry himself added a line about "don't talk about vandals on the Discord server" to your version of DENY in this edit, he was failing to observe DENY a couple weeks later. I'm not talking about cases of asking for help, like "there's a vandal on my talk page and I'm on my phone, could someone help me revert it?" I'm talking about posting links to/images of "funny" vandalism, posting infodumps on things LTAs like GRP do, that sort of thing, even after repeated warnings (ranging from polite requests to formal warnings). Also, number of admins told him over the past year to stop seeing adminship as a goal to be reached (and to stop dropping hints about wanting to be one), but those hints went ignored as well. And since Bob's nominator brought it up, he was removed from the aforementioned Discord last month for taking pictures while driving, posting them to Discord, and bragging about how careful a driver he was. This was the second time he had done this, and was the last straw for the moderation team.
   The problem, for me, isn't that Bobherry made mistakes. We all make them, and any sysop who tells you they haven't done something wrong with the tools is lying to you. What matters to me is listening when someone tells you you're making a mistake, and learning from those mistakes. My experience has been that Bob doesn't listen and doesn't learn, or at least that suggestions, advice, and warnings have to be given to him repeatedly before he makes any effort to change. These are not behaviors that are suitable for adminship, and therefore I do not believe he is qualified for the role. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:43, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

   Firstly, Discord is NOT Wikipedia! In my view a person should be judged by their onwiki presence alone when it comes to elections. Bobherry might be hard to deal with in a real-time text system but that's not how he is onwiki. I've mentored him for almost three months now and I've witnessed a big change in his actions and how he thinks. He has shown a real need for the tools in his day-to-day life onwiki. I don't see him getting into arguments here nor do I think he'll misuse the tools. On the contrary I think he knows what he is doing. I find it slightly creepy that you have been stalking this page just waiting for an opportunity to jump all over him the second he pops his nose up. I think that says more about your personality than it does his. fr33kman 17:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

   I'd like to publically apologize for questioning your personality, that was wrong and frankly not like me. fr33kman 17:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   I have some thoughts.

   1. Firstly, Discord is NOT Wikipedia! In my view a person should be judged by their onwiki presence alone when it comes to elections

      Why? If it is the same person behind all of the actions, why does it matter what is on-wiki and what is on a official off-wiki communication platform like Discord or IRC.

   2. Bobherry might be hard to deal with in a real-time text system but that's not how he is onwiki

      It’s the same person behind both things. If one of them is reckless and irresponsible (ie driving while texting), they both are. If one repeatedly fails to comply with warnings, they both do. If one repeatedly fails to respect DENY, they both do. See my point?

   3. He has shown a real need for the tools in his day-to-day life onwiki.

      He’s been talking about wanting adminship for many, many months. When people told him to slow down, gain experience, and wait, he threw himself a pity party. None of this is admin behavior. While we need more admins, I don’t think this is it.

   4. I find it slightly creepy that you have been stalking this page just waiting for an opportunity to jump all over him the second he pops his nose up. I think that says more about your personality than it does his.

      Now this is way out of line. Attacking a voter’s personality is never the answer, no matter how much you disagree.

   Sincerely,

   Illusion Flame (talk) 01:28, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   1) Why? If it is the same person behind all of the actions, why does it matter what is on-wiki and what is on a official off-wiki communication platform like Discord or IRC.

   This is a problem I've seen often with Wikipedia. I've always advocated that nothing should be decided offwiki and made to stick onwiki. Back in my steward days I saw "community" consensus be decided on IRC and then just posted to Wikipedia without anyone onwiki having the opportunity to be included. That's wrong. I strongly feel that Wikipedia only exists onwiki. Anything offwiki is opinion at best. It's not official WMF even if the channels are sponsored by the foundation. Many, many editors do not take part in offwiki channels and it's wrong to not include them.

   2) It’s the same person behind both things. If one of them is reckless and irresponsible (ie driving while texting), they both are. If one repeatedly fails to comply with warnings, they both do. If one repeatedly fails to respect DENY, they both do. See my point?

   Yes, I see your point. However, a real live forum is often used without thinking. Onwiki Bobherry has the opportunity to think before acting and has the policies and guidelines to guide his actions. Where are the policies for Discord written down? Who made them? Bobherry has Asperger Syndrome, that can often make people hard to deal with in a face-to-face situation. I've known many people with it and I've found that when given the chance to think about their actions they often "get it" and do things better than face-to-face. I've been using Discord to mentor Bobherry for a couple of months now, I know how difficult it can be to talk to him. I also know that when I advise him he listens.

   3) He’s been talking about wanting adminship for many, many months. When people told him to slow down, gain experience, and wait, he threw himself a pity party. None of this is admin behavior. While we need more admins, I don’t think this is it.

   Lot's of people want to be admins, and for varied reasons. Hat collecting is wrong and if I see someone going from project to project asking for hats without putting in the work on that project I'll be the first to call it out. I've known many admins who advertised their desire to become an admin. It's a noble goal when it's for the right reasons. You can't tell me Bobherry doesn't need the tools because the amount of QDs, VIPs, warnings and other tasks he does show he does need the mop. Once I had perhaps the crown jewels of hats. I was a global sysop, CU, OS, crat and steward. No one accused me of hat collecting because I put in the work and did the jobs I was elected to do.

   4) Now this is way out of line. Attacking a voter’s personality is never the answer, no matter how much you disagree.

   Perhaps it was a little bit personal but I feel GeneralNotability made it personal by stalking the page just waiting for an RfA to go up. If someone were to invest this much overlook in real life we'd call it a stalker.

   Yours, fr33kman 01:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   1. Back in my steward days I saw "community" consensus be decided on IRC and then just posted to Wikipedia without anyone onwiki having the opportunity to be included. That's wrong.

      I agree that is wrong. But there’s a difference between deciding a consensus off-wiki where people who aren’t on those platforms can’t comment and an individual simply repeatedly breaking the rules off-wiki and getting banned. The two aren’t remotely connected.

   I'm simply pointing out that it my personal belief that anything offwiki is not official and should have no effect onwiki. I once saw a user get blocked on enwiki for something they said on IRC. fr33kman 04:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   1. Anything offwiki is opinion at best.

      I’d disagree. Putting others lives at risks by driving distracted and then talking about it, definitely a fact.

   You are totally correct, there is no valid excuse for that. fr33kman 04:02, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   1. Onwiki Bobherry has the opportunity to think before acting and has the policies and guidelines to guide his actions

      You can think before you post on an online chat forum too. And here are the guidelines and rules that guide his actions too.

   It's more difficult for someone with Asperger's to think on the fly; emotions take over. (Asperger's is not an excuse but could be a contributing factor) fr33kman 04:02, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   1. Your response to point #3

      My point was mainly his failure to listen to feedback. I remember when he was talking about wanting admin tools, as happened quite often before the ban, I responded advising him to wait. If I remember correctly, 13 people reacted to it with “⬆️ this”.

   Illusion Flame (talk) 02:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

2. Oppose While I'm sure you're dedicated to the wiki, GeneralNotability raises significant concerns about the temperament needed to serve as an administrator and their views on adminship. --DannyS712 (talk) 11:56, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Oppose Sorry, my opinions leans on this side. Adminship, in my opinion, shouldn't be a goal in editing a project.--BRP ^ever 00:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   Why not? If your goal is to help protect the project then adminship should be a goal as it gives you the most tools to do the job. Jimbo is on record as saying that he wanted a project where everyone would have the mop and use it. Bobherry's majority of edits are in the mainspace. That, to me, shows an editor who works on the encyclopaedia but also keeps an eye out for damaging behaviour. imho :) fr33kman 01:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   Because most just stop being active once that's achieved. However, I can reconsider my position after asking a few questions. BRP ^ever 05:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

4. Oppose: Per my replies above. Illusion Flame (talk) 01:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Weak oppose I'm kinda sided on this one, we do need more admins on simplewiki, but according to them, he's not the best person to be a sysop. So, for now. I'll weak oppose. RiggedMint 15:46, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   I agree we need more admins. Thank you for your consideration either way and voicing your opinion. Bobherry Talk My Changes 23:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments

(Full disclosure: I am an en.wp editor who is quite active on the Wikipedia Discord server who sometimes does some work with antivandalism on Simple English Wikipedia)

For now, I am neutral. On one hand, Bobherry is an excellent contributor to Simple English Wikipedia in terms of countervandalism, and giving him the mop and bucket will help se.wp's VIP backlogs reduce substantially. On the other hand, as GeneralNotability stated I have some concerns about judgement and temperament - not changing one's past poor behavior despite having multiple people give feedback frankly shows a lack of self awareness, IMHO. Regarding "seeing adminship as a goal to be reached", my personal view is that it really depends on what specifically the aforementioned "goal" is about - if one wishes to be an admin for helping maintain the project, making constructive contributions and/or reducing Wikipedia's backlogs and not for any sort of personal gain I am completely fine; however, if one wishes to be an administrator for "status" and "power" it is an obvious no-no for me. So, that being said, I will support this if and only if Bobherry sufficiently demonstrates that he will be receptive to feedback at all times and improve his behavior when concerns are raised by others and will not feed the trolls if he ever becomes an administrator. #prodraxis ^connect 05:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello thank you for your response. I can promise you that I can and have changed compared to who I used to be and I am ashamed for who I used to be. And I am sure I speak for everyone when I say that wanting to be an admin isn’t bad, that is why most people will ultimately become one. I do not see admins as having more power or being more senior then a normal user or IP and I simplify want to be able to fight vandalism more effectively. I would listen to what others say as well. Should I fail as an admin I am also open to recall. Thank you again and I hope you are doing well since we last spoke. Bobherry Talk My Changes 17:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I think Bobherry is open to listening to comments and advice. One of the first interactions I had with him was negative; he reverted an edit he made on my talk page. After talking with him he recognized his mistake and apologized for it. That shows a user open to feedback. If elected I think Bobherry would make very good admin. He certainly has need of the mop. He is constantly finding things for me to do, lol ... :) fr33kman 18:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

@Fr33kman, thank you for your explanation. I just have a few more questions to ask @Bobherry which will determine if I will change my !vote or not:

1. What is a recent instance (within 2-3 months at least) where you have received constructive criticism about your editing and have worked actively to improve the way you edit in a long-lasting manner?

2. What should you do and not do when dealing with LTA's to avoid feeding the trolls?

#prodraxis ^connect 21:17, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

@Prodraxis: Thank you, to answer your questions,

1. Several times lately I have been given advise and changed my ways In one since I was told by an admin that one of our cleanup categories is made differently which I now follow and at the same time was told that cleanup categories are not created by default. These days I will now look when I add cleanup tags to a page and will look at the hidden categories and if they are redlinked, will make them then. [1] Another instance I was told to avoid "drive by tagging" I now only will apply tags to new pages after I have done several edits myself including linking them to Wikidata, attempting to categorize them, and possibly doing a CE/MOS fix. [2] Another time before that I was told to be careful with using the phrase America instead of United States and have fixed that on a few pages myself now. [3]

2. When dealing with LTAs you should revert block ignore or RBI. In some cases, it is also better to Block Revert Ignore and DENY them recognition as that is what they will normally be seeking. LTAs are also reported to a steward or on SRG so they can be globally locked. I also personally will check their xwiki edits and revert on other projects if needed as well.

Bobherry Talk My Changes 22:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Bobherry for your response - for now, I will remain neutral as I think that the response to Queston #2 is a bit too boilerplate. I am still open to having my opinions changed, though. #prodraxis ^connect 19:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

@Fr33kman: according to WP:CfA, voting normally runs for a week. Any reason to make this two weeks?— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

No, sorry simple maths error on my part. I must have been thinking something else. I'll fix it now. Thanks for nudging me! :) fr33kman 01:01, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Why do you want to be an admin here at simple english wiki? What primary differences do you see between other wikis and simple english wikipedia? What changes do you think are necessary to improve the overall functioning of this wiki? Do you think we need to add, remove or change any of our processes?--BRP ^ever 05:55, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your questions @BRPever: I hope you are doing well. To answer your questions:

  1. Why do you want to be an admin here at simple english wiki?

  I would like to be an admin here to help support the project on the WP:VIP page as well as QDs and our WP:RFD backlog. As of right now we have currently have 32 pages listed under RFD. I would like to also "take us into the future" by working on some of our own policy pages (with community input of course) instead of just redirecting to the enwiki and falling back on WP:FOLLOW. My work also involves working with new articles to "set them up" categorizing them, cleanup and MOS adjustments, and connecting them to Wikidata. During this I often come across many pages that should be QDed and often have created my own QD backlog. I also atleast once a day will go through all the likely bad faith edits in the RC feed and will check for open proxies. Often times I will find many per day that skipped by undetected.

  2. What primary differences do you see between other wikis and simple english wikipedia

  The Simple English Wikipedia is wrote in Basic English and is aimed towards people learning English such as ESL students. Slang and other "common" English terms are normally avoided here to try and prevent confusing people.

  3. What changes do you think are necessary to improve the overall functioning of this wiki?

  I would like to see our own policy pages and the current ones more clearly defined instead of always falling back on WP:FOLLOW every time we aren't sure what to do. Yes, we are like the main English Wikipedia but at the same time we should be different and have our own identity. FOLLOW is a good thing to have but at the same time we should have our own material. According to Special:Statistics we have had 9,167,639 changes since the project was started.

  4. Do you think we need to add, remove or change any of our processes?

  As states above I would like to see our own policy pages. I would also like to personally see more WikiProjects who can focus on improving one subject. We have had 1,248 active users in the last 30 days. I have noticed on the RC feed page that there tends to be some users who focus on a certain subject such as animation and they may not realize that WikiProjects are a thing. I also think we should introduce pending changes protection on the project as doing an edit request may be confusing to some people.

  Let me know if you have any more questions. Bobherry Talk My Changes 12:21, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.