Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Aervanath
Edit count for Aervanath
[edit]User:Aervanath
run at Sat Nov 8 12:50:40 2008 GMT
Category talk: 3
Category: 23
Image talk: 3
Image: 5
Mainspace 2316
MediaWiki talk: 11
Portal talk: 3
Talk: 393
Template talk: 92
Template: 227
User talk: 561
User: 171
Wikipedia talk: 343
Wikipedia: 936
avg edits per page 1.81
earliest 16:27, 10 November 2006
number of unique pages 2811
total 5087
2006/11 25
2006/12 2
2007/1 159
2007/2 127
2007/3 0
2007/4 0
2007/5 0
2007/6 0
2007/7 0
2007/8 0
2007/9 0
2007/10 0
2007/11 0
2007/12 5
2008/1 1
2008/2 9
2008/3 114
2008/4 401
2008/5 504
2008/6 819
2008/7 906
2008/8 391
2008/9 440
2008/10 891
2008/11 293
(green denotes edits with an edit summary (even an automatic one), red
denotes edits without an edit summary)
Mainspace
14 [2]Ted Stevens
13 [3]Jesus
10 [4]Okichitaw
9 [5]Modesto Varischetti
9 [6]Victoria Theatre
8 [7]President of the United States
8 [8]David A. Wood (pathologist)
8 [9]Don VandenBerg
8 [10]Derrick Wright
7 [11]Anno Domini
6 [12]Paper Trail
6 [13]Ibrahim Hj Yaacob
6 [14]Oliver Farm Equipment Company
6 [15]107.3 Abbey FM
6 [16]Taipei
Talk:
35 [17]New York
14 [18]Ted Stevens
8 [19]New York City
6 [20]President of the United States
5 [21]Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008
5 [22]Methoxypropane
4 [23]Calendar era
4 [24]List of ethnic slurs
4 [25]Tea (poem)
4 [26]Halloween
4 [27]Russia-United States relations
4 [28]Funhouse (Pink album)
4 [29]Pandemic (South Park)
3 [30]Coffee
3 [31]Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest
Category talk:
3 [32]Orphaned articles
Category:
6 [33]Orphaned articles
4 [34]Orphaned articles from July 2006
3 [35]Attempted de-orphan
3 [36]Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests
2 [37]Dead-end pages
Image talk:
2 [38]Male Lion and Cub Chitwa South Africa Luca Galuzzi 2004.JPG
MediaWiki talk:
7 [39]Watchlist-details
3 [40]Antispoof-name-conflict
Template:
40 [41]X3
22 [42]Articleissues/doc
21 [43]X2
18 [44]Articleissues
17 [45]Welcome de-orphaner
14 [46]Do-attempt
9 [47]Articleissues/doc/Fulltext
7 [48]Please see/doc
6 [49]Welcome de-orphaner2
4 [50]TfD top
3 [51]Tahiti and Society Islands mythology
3 [52]Underconstruction
3 [53]X4
3 [54]Geo-orphan
3 [55]Please see
Template talk:
37 [56]Articleissues
16 [57]Orphan
8 [58]Asia topic
5 [59]Please see
3 [60]GeoTemplate
3 [61]StrategyWiki
3 [62]Uncategorized
3 [63]Details
2 [64]Citations missing
2 [65]Archive list
2 [66]Underconstruction
User:
43 [67]Aervanath/Sandbox
43 [68]Aervanath/monobook.js
38 [69]Aervanath
14 [70]Aervanath/Sandbox 2
13 [71]Aervanath/Status
3 [72]Kanata Kid/Katimavik Elementary School
2 [73]Aervanath/de-orphan.js
2 [74]Pupkinvassily/Svoy
User talk:
124 [75]Aervanath
15 [76]Shoombooly
9 [77]JL-Bot
9 [78]Aervanath/Archive 1
8 [79]Retro Agnostic
8 [80]Addshore
6 [81]Balloonman
6 [82]Evenmadderjon
6 [83]X!
5 [84]Mazca
4 [85]Eclecticology
4 [86]Dbachmann
4 [87]Kmweber
4 [88]Pupkinvassily
4 [89]A Nobody
Wikipedia:
49 [90]WikiProject Orphanage
41 [91]Village pump (policy)
40 [92]Requested moves
30 [93]Sandbox
22 [94]Village pump (proposals)/Persistent proposals
17 [95]Requests for page protection
17 [96]Templates for deletion/Log/2008 April 5
15 [97]Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot
15 [98]Articles for deletion/Old/Open AfDs
13 [99]WikiProject Orphanage/Orphaned Articles
12 [100]Build the web
12 [101]Tutorial (Keep in mind)/sandbox
11 [102]Articles for deletion/Thong in the news
11 [103]Only make links that are relevant to the context
10 [104]Bot requests
Wikipedia talk:
68 [105]WikiProject Orphanage
48 [106]Only make links that are relevant to the context
31 [107]Manual of Style (dates and numbers)
18 [108]Manual of Style (links)
15 [109]Build the web
14 [110]Disambiguation
14 [111]Text of the GNU Free Documentation License
9 [112]Consensus
9 [113]WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Friendly
8 [114]Notability/RFC:compromise
8 [115]Request an account
8 [116]Templates for deletion
7 [117]Deletion process
5 [118]Requested moves
5 [119]Notability
If there were any problems, please [120]email Interiot or post at
[121]User talk:Interiot.
- The edit count was retrieved from this link at 12:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC).
copied from RfA page
[edit]- I find opposes based on a lack of article writing to be of interest. In recent times I've come round to the idea that our best admins are largely disengaged from articles. Yes, they need a WP:CLUE level that article writing can demonstrate. However I note that there are a small(ish - sadly) number of admins out there who are POV pushing bullies focused on their own agenda and their own articles. My mind is that admins who are disengaged from writing (assuming they've demonstrated some clue as above) are actually far more of an asset than some of the current sysops who use the tools to protect "their" work and their beliefs. Pedro : Chat 18:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Evidence? Sure there are POV pushers on wikipedia - and admins should not use their tools anywhere near articles in which they contribute - but that leaves them the other 97% of the project. Every one of our best admins, with no exceptions I can see, are at least moderate content creators. Many are mainly process janitors - but almost none exclusively so. In fact, if you examine all the admins that the community gave support to in arbcom elections, all have serious content contributions. (Indeed all of our present arbs have done major content work). The problem is that people who do content a lot, seldom have the time to hang about here, and so it is the people who do who set the criteria, based on their own interests. I'd frankly like to ban anyone who has not some limited level of content experience from being an admin - the project would certainly benefit. Editor first, janitor second.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 18:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have to agree with Pedro, I saw such behavior as well. I do not see any correlation between article writing and admin-y jobs - it might be a indication for WP:CLUE, but not the only one. I experienced similar opposes on my own RfA, so I may be biased in my point of view. But as there are different kinds of people, some just like supporting more than creating and we should not deprive us of such people; they are the ones willing to do those things the others (the article writers) have not the time to do. We should consider whether or not the candidate is likely to help the project with the tools, not whether they did so by article writing in the past. I hope this RfA does not turn into another discussion about whether admins have or have not to be article writers. Regards SoWhy 19:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- But you are overstating my point. "Some just like supporting more than creating" - absolutely fine my me. But not participating in content contributions at all, or almost at all, is not. Admins need clue, an ability to communicate in English, a grasp of NPOV, an ability to recognise what's good content from what's not. Now tell me why on earth would anyone possess all those skills, and hang about an encyclopedia for months on end, and never contribute content????? Now, maybe there could be the odd person who has those skills and doesn't ever use them to build content, but we are constantly seeing such candidates at RfA (and we are seeing them all support one another). I find this strange and worrying. Now again note, I am only looking for very minimal content building, the sort of thing most people with the skill base needed to be an admin would find themselves doing almost accidentally if they spent months on this project. How can you view thousands of articles and never once use want to your skillset to substantially build the content of at least one? I find the easiest explanation to be that the user does not, in fact, possess the skills needed to be a good admin.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have to agree with Pedro, I saw such behavior as well. I do not see any correlation between article writing and admin-y jobs - it might be a indication for WP:CLUE, but not the only one. I experienced similar opposes on my own RfA, so I may be biased in my point of view. But as there are different kinds of people, some just like supporting more than creating and we should not deprive us of such people; they are the ones willing to do those things the others (the article writers) have not the time to do. We should consider whether or not the candidate is likely to help the project with the tools, not whether they did so by article writing in the past. I hope this RfA does not turn into another discussion about whether admins have or have not to be article writers. Regards SoWhy 19:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- Evidence? Sure there are POV pushers on wikipedia - and admins should not use their tools anywhere near articles in which they contribute - but that leaves them the other 97% of the project. Every one of our best admins, with no exceptions I can see, are at least moderate content creators. Many are mainly process janitors - but almost none exclusively so. In fact, if you examine all the admins that the community gave support to in arbcom elections, all have serious content contributions. (Indeed all of our present arbs have done major content work). The problem is that people who do content a lot, seldom have the time to hang about here, and so it is the people who do who set the criteria, based on their own interests. I'd frankly like to ban anyone who has not some limited level of content experience from being an admin - the project would certainly benefit. Editor first, janitor second.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 18:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- With the expection of one DYK I have made virtually no content contributions since becoming an admin. I have however made over 450 uncontested blocks and nearly 7,000 deletions with just 1 going to WP:DRV. I assume, therefore, you'd like to see me banned as per your comment above. A slightly harsh outcome for my work IMHO but maybe all I deserve. Pedro : Chat 20:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- And shouldn't this be on the RFA's talk page, not the general one? Pedro : Chat 20:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
- With the expection of one DYK I have made virtually no content contributions since becoming an admin. I have however made over 450 uncontested blocks and nearly 7,000 deletions with just 1 going to WP:DRV. I assume, therefore, you'd like to see me banned as per your comment above. A slightly harsh outcome for my work IMHO but maybe all I deserve. Pedro : Chat 20:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Please continue discussion on main RFA talk page, as it has wider ramifications than just this RfA. If it is related specifically to Aervanath's RfA, feel free to continue discussion here....---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 20:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)