Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tarheel95 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Tarheel95

[edit]

Final (0/5/1); ended 02:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC) - Withdrawn CharlieEchoTango (contact) 02:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

[edit]

Tarheel95 (talk · contribs) – I would like to nominate myself for the mop a second time. WP:CSD and Vandalism combat are my main two areas of expertise, and I feel I need the tools to further my work in these two areas. Tarheel95 (Sprechen) 23:18, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

[edit]

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 plan to specifically work with WP:CSD using the Delete tool to delete pages that are obvious violations of the CSD criteria. I feel I am somewhat limited in my work there, in that I can only nominate the candidates for deletion. I feel that I have enough experience with CSD work to be trusted with the task of deleting the pages that qualify as candidates. Secondly, I will use the Block tool to block Users and IP addresses that consistently vandalize pages on the mainspace. I have used Huggle in the past to combat vandalism, and feel I have ample experience in vandalism fighting.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I feel that my best contributions include my vandalism fighting, new page patrolling and AFD discussion. Performing these tasks over time has given me the chance to familiarize myself with all aspects of both the CSD and Notability guidelines, and I believe that I have enough experience to make the best judgement when deleting pages and blocking users.
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 received a message recently from a user complaining that I issued a warning for an edit which he did not constitute as vandalism. I replied by linking to the diff of the edit in question, explained why I had reverted the edit, and explained that, if indeed I was wrong in this situation, that my edit was made in good faith, intended to benefit the encyclopedia.
Additional question from ErikHaugen
4. Were the edits you referenced in your answer to Q3([1]) vandalism? Why or why not?
A: I initially saw the edits as vandalism. However,upon review of the revision and policy on vandalism, I now believe the user was editing in good faith. Vandalism is defined as "'deliberately' comprising the integrity of Wikipedia. While the user violated WP:NPOV, he may not have done so deliberately.


General comments

[edit]
RfAs for this user:

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

Discussion

[edit]
Support
[edit]


Oppose
[edit]
  1. Oppose For the following reasons: (1) Lack of content creation. User has only created one article. (2) The low number of logged speedy nomination in the last 6 months. Although the tagings appear to be accurate, I think there should be more from a user, who wants to handle speedy deletion of articles. (3) User has a low activity at AIV, 21 reports to AIV and only 2 this year. How come an user actively engaging in vandal-fighting only reports two vandals in a year? I'm not even do it, but made 3 reports this year. Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview 00:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    To be fair, it looks like they've done a fairly substantial amount of CSD work compared to what is in their log. Swarm X 01:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Amended. Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview 01:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Really, but having ~4000 edits, asking for OTRS access, a second RFA, that smells like a collection of user rights. You have made ~1000 of your edits in the last 3 months, you want to work in the CSD area, but 21 articles tagged for CSD and 2 survived - that don't sound like having a great experience in the CSD area. "I have used Huggle in the past to combat vandalism, and feel I have ample experience in vandalism fighting." - That (full) 1000 edits you made in three months, are easily made within a half a week with vandalism fighting.mabdul 00:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose See [2] (not blatant spam); lack of experience in general. HurricaneFan25 00:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose I think this user has a lot of great thinking but I really think that the user doesn't have enough but he has improved better than the 2009 RfA per WP:NOTNOW but he has made just a few hundred edits in 3 years and only 5,000 edits. --Katarighe (talk) 01:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose. I'm not a strict edit counter by a long way, but trundling along with just a few tens of edits per month for two years (apart from a sudden burst just ahead of RfA) suggests to me you can't really have a sufficient level of intimacy with the project. I'd suggest you should try to manage a significantly higher level of contribution on a regular basis over the next 6-12 months, focusing on areas related to the admin work you would like to do, and perhaps try again then - I wish you luck -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm just going to point out that the behavior of "sudden burst before RfA" also happened in 2009. To the candidate: Do stick around, and give us a good, steady edit history to look at. --Izno (talk) 02:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
[edit]
Neutral -- I think this user has a lot of great thinking but I really think that the user doesn't have enough but he has improved better than the 2009 RfA per WP:NOTNOW but he has made just a few hundred edits in 3 years and only 5,000 edits. --Katarighe (talk) 00:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC) Moved to oppose[reply]
  1. Neutral Some good work on NPP, but would prefer candidate to accumulate more experience before getting the mop. Some of his/her CSD taggings are on the cusp of being a bit bitey... A7 for the owner of a motorcycle business purportedly worth $10M? Within 1 minute of the page being created? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 01:07, 8 December 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Tarheel95_2&oldid=1142572872"