Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Qst

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

Qst

FINAL (0/3/1); withdrawn by candidate 18:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Qst (talk · contribs) - Hello and thank you for taking the time to review me. I have been an editor of Wikipedia since October 2006 as Tellyaddict, however I decided it was time for a fresh start and I decided to create a new account and start from scratch at this account. I have been editing at this account for over two months now and have just under 8000 edits (9k inc. deleted edits) although I dont think this is really important – I think its more about quality of edits (Note: In total I have nine months experience plus the 13000 edis I had as Tellyaddict). I dont consider myself to be a deletionist or anything else although I do a lot of deletion work on Wikipedia, this is often work with images which do not not have a copyright tag or have other problems with what is on or more often than not what is missing. I understand that many users may say I'm not here to build the encyclopedia and I'm not going to argue because you have the right your opinion, I have wrote a total of fourteen articles and approximately 20 as Tellyaddict. When I first began here, I did lots of article work but generally moved more to RC patrolling and work with images, not because of the apparent "quick and easy way to get your edit count up" but because of the satisfaction of doing it. I am here to help and I dont particularly consider edit count to be the most important thing, its the actual ability to communicate well. Moving on to the more "admin like" work I have made 101 reports to AIV (plus 600 as Tellyaddict) and 243 to usernames for administrator attention. I regularly help out at changing username and usurpations as well as other editors and intend to continue my work there and to other places like article for creation whether or not this is successful.

I regularly contribute to articles for deletion and often miscellany for deletion, I sometimes close AfD's as keep which is acceptable but one should take care when closing these, I have seen several AfD's which need closing and consensus is clearly in favour of delete and I intend to give a hand there. I regularly contribute to other users requests for adminship and requests for bureaucratship and try to participate at the discussions at WT:RFA.

I would like to ask the community one thing, if someone opposes and doesn't explain why; please do not jump on them and begin to question them as I feel this would be unfair and would like to discuss it with them myself. Just so commenters know, I had two previous RfA's as Tellyaddict (1/2) however the last one of these was in early March and many of the opposes were based upon my regretful participation in several AfD's within an extremely short time. I eagerly await your comments here, whether this be support, oppose or neutral.

Thank you for your time and happy editing! Qst 16:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept my self-nom. Qst 17:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I understand that there are areas in which both editors and administrators have their places in which they enjoy most contributing too. As an admin, one of the main areas I would monitor is administrator intervention against vandalism as this is unavoidably backlogged on occassions so I intend to regularly monitor that. Although username violations are not always dealt with quickly, I intend on making this a thing of the past and regularly (trying) to keep everything in order there. CAT:CSD would also be a main focus of my intention, Category:Disputed non-free images is at an enormous backlog and I have experience in that field with tagging images so I intend to be a regular visitor there as well as the other image backlogs (including ones with no fair use rationale/source information/copyright tag after 7 days), as well as the general articles which meet the criteria for speedy deletion. I may now and then keep an eye on CAT:PROD but I'd say that this wouldn't be the main focus of my attention.

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

A: I'd say my contributions to Cheaper by the Dozen (2003 film) are the ones in which I am most proud of, although I cannot brag or say that I promoted it to a good article or featured article, but I have made major expansions to it. My other work I'm proud of is my work with images although I cannot say I have uploaded many I do try to work with them and to communicate in a positive way with the uploaders, although I use Howcheng's image tool for work with images. When I did more work with articles, I used to help out cleaning them up, wikifying them and categorising them, I am very proud of this as it gives you satisfaction with knowing you've helped out on maintenance.

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: Yes, regretfully I have been in one conflict, that was about my close of three AfD debates (see ANI discussion), these debates were Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Meehan III, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfhart Grote, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Echelon (warez). I will admit that I I was wrong in that, I apologised to the user in question about me being wrong about this and replied and it cam to an end. Two out of three articles for deletion debates were closed with the same result and the Wolfhart Grote article AfD was closed as delete after consensus was reached after my close. That is the only conflict I have ever been in. I have taken measures to help deal with any conflicts/disputes in the futures, one of these is my complaints dept. which should be used as a last resort then if it cannot be resolved on either my talk page or there I will begin the formal dispute resolution proccess.

4. Optional Question from Miranda ~~You had other RFAs under Tellyaddict. Could you please list them? Thanks.~~ Okay, on your page it says that you don't want to be an administrator. Why did you change your mind, recently? And, why do you have to change your name many times?

I had a feeling this question would pop up about my name change :-D When I registered as The Sunshine Man I liked my new name but over time I began to feel it was a little "girly" so I spent a few weeks trying to think of a new name, and then I thought of this and took a like to it and requested my rename. I can understand any confusion which may be caused and for this I apologise, as for the not wanting to be an admin userbox, this is because of real life and I didn't want to be nominated at that time, to be completely honest I completely forgot about that userbox -

. Qst 17:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You also said that you wanted to wait four months before beginning an RFA, can you please explain this? Miranda 17:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question from bainer (talk)

5. Under what circumstances should one ignore a rule?

In my opinion, WP:IAR should only be used in circumstances where it is really necessary, at the end of the day we have policies for a reason and although its good for newcomers to not be so stressed about editing, I think only in circumstances such as removing BLP violations but in the proccess violating 3RR, then you could argue that you were within you rights but there are in my view only exceptional circumstances when IAR should be applied. Qst 17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6. from Deskana You previously listed yourself as not being an administrator and not wishing to be one currently. You've explained that isn't your sentiment now. Why did you not want to be one, and why do you want to be one now? I do not mean "why do you want to be one" in the context of what you will do as an admin if you are promoted. --Deskana (talk) 17:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

See Qst's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Links for Qst: Qst (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Qst before commenting.

Discussion

Support

Oppose

Strongly. Some of the stuff here left me cringing in terror, as did this. Moreschi ^Talk 17:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your opinion but I did explain that in Q3 and did as much as I could to straighten that out, after all I cannot change the past but if I could I wouldn't have closed that AfD. Qst 17:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What? Sorry, this is the other thing: sometimes I cannot understand what you are saying, due to substandard grammar. Users have to be able to understand admins, at the least. It wasn't just one question; it was all of the replies that had me ducking. Moreschi ^Talk 17:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, you haven't mentioned yet your history as User:The Sunshine Man. You've changed account name twice. Why so much? Moreschi ^Talk 17:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I had, it does say on my userpage, them questions were "you related" so there is no right or wrong answers technically. Qst 17:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there fucking well is: or, at least, there are answers that are decent enough. Yours were miles off; far outside current practice and policy. They betrayed a massive lack of knowledge and understanding of how Wikipedia works. Moreschi ^Talk 17:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep all criticism constructive and polite, I'd appreiciate it if you wouldn't use bad language. Qst 17:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Qst, please be respectful. --w p k t sfs 17:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Super Strong Oppose, per below:
I can't decide

Whether you should live or die

Oh, you'll probably go to heaven <- suck-up

Please don't hang your head and cry

No wonder why

My heart feels dead inside <- lack of actual edits

It's cold and hard and petrified <- see above

Lock the doors and close the blinds

We're going for a ride Matthew 17:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Striking weird poem until Matthew can come back and give an actual explanation. --Cyde Weys 17:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And the award for most bizarrely phrased oppose goes to.... The Rambling Man 17:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very regretful oppose - you're a great user, but you don't have a clue what the BLP policy is and the reasons we have it. My oppose is based on this quote from you "I think that all of the policies especially WP:RS and WP:NPOV blend into this policy as if an article contains information which is unsourced and is not verifiable then it can be safely removed per the BLP however such moves should generally be discussed on the article talk page (consensus), I believe that without BLP that Wikipedia's autobiography articles would be allowed to contain non-neutral and controversial information so I believe it benefits the encyclopedia and should be adhered too. The Sunshine Man 15:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)""[1] - I wish you'd have let Riana decide when you were ready to run. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral I have always had very pleasant experiences with you, however, many of the things Ryan talks about have a weight that can not be ignored. --w p k t sfs 17:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.