Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Josve05a

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

Josve05a

Final (0/8/3); ended 00:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC) - Withdrawn by candidate —John Cline (talk) 00:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination

Josve05a (talk · contribs) – This is a self-nomination. I withdraw my nomination! (t) Josve05a (c) 00:14, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

My username is Josve05a and I have been an editor on Wikipedia for a few years now, but you have probebly never heared of me befor. I started out on sv.wikipedia.org (my native language) due to the fact that I was facinated on how a user-generated encyclopedia could function so well.

My first edits where unde my IP adress I had back then, and I belive that this was my very first edit on wiki.

I once where blocked on sv.wikipedia.org for 30 minutes due to that I was "speeding", that is to do too many edits too fast. I have since then learned from my misstake, I have grown older and I have have read up on most guidlines.

After a while of editing I discovered tools like AWB, Huggle and soon enough I became a Wikignome.

I grow older and started to learn English and I remember that I looked up to the English Speaking Wikipedia, due to its huge numbers of articles.

My very first edit on en.wikipedia.org (enwp) was this one.

Since then I have started to fix syntax-errors with help of AWB and WPCleaner, revert vandalism using Huggle and reporting vandals to WP:AIV. I also report all error and bug that I can find using these tools to their respective developers.

That pretty much raps up who I am, and if you have any qustions about me or too me, don't hesitate to ask me. (t) Josve05a (c) 18:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

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: I would continue to protect Wikipedia from vandals and I would use the administrative-tools to block users wich has done enogh edits to warrant a block.

I would also use the aministrative-tools to delete clear copyright-violations wich has been tagged with a speedy-deletion tag.

I would of course double check every article tagged and user nominated, before before deleting a page/blocking a user.

(Note: I originaly wrote ban insted of block in this answer. I meant block, and have therefore changed the answer, to see the originally go to the history.)

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: My best contributions to Wikipedia according to me must be all the work I do to prevent vandalism using Huggle and my work with fixing syntax-errors.

I really can't decide wich is my best, since I think that both is required and nessisary to keep Wikipedia "healthy".

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: I have been in some conflicts before, most due to that I revert a persons edit. I have dealt with them calmly and tried to explain the guidlines to that person, and I will continue to handle them that way.

Additional question from MelanieN

4. Thank you for your interest in the English Wikipedia. I am wondering, are you an administrator at the Swedish Wikipedia, or have you ever considered becoming one? It seems like that would be a natural first step for you, so you could learn to use the administrator tools in a more comfortable language environment.

A: Thank you for your question. No, I am not an admin on the Swedeish speaking Wikipedia. I did nominate myself a few years ago, but got denied due to I was to un-experienced. I have since then joined English Wikipedia and stopped editing on Swedish Wikipedia (exept using my bot), not because I got denied, but because I find it more fun for me to edit on English Wikipedia, where I think my time is most valueble, due to the fact it is a bigger place. I do not plan to go back and start editing on svwp in the nearest feuture and I will therefor not nominate myself as an administrator there. (t) Josve05a (c) 18:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Additional question from Acather96

5. Regardless of the outcome of this RfA, you're obviously a big asset to the community, so thank-you for the hundreds of hours you must have volunteered for the project so far. One question from me: have you ever been involved in any content creation? If yes, what, and if no, why not?

General comments

• Links for Josve05a: Josve05a (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Josve05a can be found here. Link is dead!

---

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

Discussion

Oppose

1. Oppose Answer to the first question shows the user does not understand the difference between a ban and a block. --JamesMoose (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   Due to that English is not my native language plus that I have was in a little bit of hurry when I wrote this I wrote "ban", when I ment block. (t) Josve05a (c) 18:37, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

2. Oppose Way too young, as evidenced on User page. Leaky Caldron 19:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   We've had younger admins then 15, so I don't think age should be considered a problem. I won't be supporting this RfA, though. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 19:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   I consider it a BIG problem. That is the stated reason for my oppose. I could, had I been bothered, have identified probably a dozen other valid reasons. But for now, in an RfA doomed to fail within the next 24 hours, I'll stand by my age barrier. Okay? Leaky Caldron 20:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   Perhaps, but we've also had situations where a problematic admin who turned out to be a minor later admitted they thought they were promoted too early. There's also the matter of whether it's fair and reasonable to expect someone to perform admin duties when they (probably) are still in school. Age is not the only factor, but it's definitely a factor. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   Seems like you're disqualifying him for honesty. Most users don't reveal their age; why punish someone who is candid about it? --MelanieN (talk) 21:05, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   Where does punishment come into it? They self disclosed their age. To me age is a relevant factor. Kiddie Admins are a major issue for me, as are all immature candidates, whether through age or behaviour. It is a sign of immaturity to disclose one's age. So tough on the candidate, I'm afraid. Leaky Caldron 21:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

3. Oppose The age doesn't bother me, but the poor English skills do. Typos happen, but reading back through conversations he has had I find a lot of misspelled words and also misuse of words. I'd suggest the candidate work on content creation (probably in their sandbox, where then someone can proofread it before it gets published) which will hopefully help them with their English skills. I don't doubt that, given some time and more familiarity with the language, he could make a good administrator though.Chuy1530 (talk) 19:42, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
4. Oppose strong concerns about maturity and ability to communicate. Only a short time in and Josve05a has already played the "English is not my native language" card. It doesn't matter if it's your 100th language, the difference between blocks and bans is a very fundamental thing for a potential admin to know (for example, telling a user they're banned when they're actually just blocked would be serious). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
5. Oppose, Admins on en.wiki need to speak english otherwise there's no hope for anyone, (IE no good having a german editor wanting admin tools on an english wiki), and as above you should have a clear understanding between a block and a ban.... Good luck on future RFAs tho. - →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 20:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
6. Oppose - As I, and some others before me, said before: The last thing Wikipedia needs is another no-content-creating-vandal-fighter admin. Sorry. Kraxler (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   @Kraxler: The candidate states that he wants the sysop userright to help fix vandalism, clean-up copyvios and patrol CAT:CSD. Why is a volunteer who wishes to fix disruptive editing that harms the project the 'last thing Wikipedia needs'? Really, the last thing? I simply fail to understand how an administrator who mainly blocked vandals, speedily deleted pages and cleaned up copyright violations (of which we have a massive backlog) could in anyway hurt or even not help the project? I'd be very grateful if you could elaborate a little please. :) Acather96 (click here to contact me) 21:15, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

   Acather96. An administrator who blocks vandals when they may not be vandals, speedily deletes good faith contributions that should not be speedily deleted and mistakes mirrors of Wikipedia as copyright violations is not more help than harm. I'm not ascribing any of these to the candidate, of course, but you present a rather black and white view, which just ain't so - There is no reasonable demonstration in the candidates edit history to show they are competent in some of these areas. Pedro :  Chat  21:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

7. Thanks for offering to serve us as an admin, I'm not going to support at present though will be happy to reconsider in the future. You are already doing a lot of useful work and I don't question your commitment, but I'm of the opinion that admins here need to have demonstrated an ability to add sourced content. I'm not asking for FAs, GAs or even a DYK but someone who patrols AFCs and NPP should sometimes come across articles that are worth rescuing by adding a reference, may I suggest you try that? ϢereSpielChequers 21:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
8. Oppose for now - I agree with everything WereSpielChequers just said. What you do in vandal fighting, AFC reviewing and tidy-up is great, and your style of communication is friendly and collegiate, but I need to see broader experience in several areas of Wikipedia, better communication skills and more careful attention to detail, with less haste. WSC's suggestion to try adding some sources where needed is great, since you can do it without overstepping your language skills, which you need to keep developing. I could easily see myself supporting you some time in the future. --Stfg (talk) 22:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I'm going to land here on this RFA. On the one hand, Josve05a seems to be a valuable editor with nothing but the best of intentions. However, the communication barrier will become a problem in dealing with editors who might not understand site policies (and are confused already) as you carry out administrative actions and, inevitably, have to explain them. What I'd recommend is that you continue to hone your English-language skills while gaining well-rounded experience around the project and you'll continue to be an asset to the project. Good luck and happy editing. Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
2. Neutral mainly per Tyrol15 - great user who does great work, but I'm not sure adminship would be right for the candidate at this time. The foreign language issue is a little concerning too, if mistakes such as the difference between block and ban are common errors, this would not stand the candidate in good stead. Acather96 (click here to contact me) 21:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
3. Moral support, but the candidate (although enthusiastic and a good contributor) currently lacks the communication skills required for adminship on this WP. I'd also like to see them with the mop on sv.wikipedia (as mentioned by another editor; I hope their withdrawal from that wiki wasn't due to the unsuccessful RfA). Good luck, see you around and all the best, Miniapolis 22:04, 10 January 2014 (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.