Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/IMatthew 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Editing stats from X!'s tool at 14:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Username: IMatthew
User groups: autoreviewer, rollbacker
First edit: Jul 17, 2007 19:59:51
Unique articles edited: 2,653
Average edits per page: 6.36
Total edits (including deleted): 16,870
Deleted edits: 1,161
Live edits: 15,709
Namespace totals

Article	3294	20.97%
Talk	1015	6.46%
User	1816	11.56%
User talk	4306	27.41%
Wikipedia	3454	21.99%
Wikipedia talk	1641	10.45%
File	51	0.32%
Template	61	0.39%
Template talk	55	0.35%
Category	2	0.01%
Portal	14	0.09%
Month counts
2007/07	36	
2007/08	15	
2007/09	5	
2007/10	11	
2007/11	10	
2007/12	102	
2008/01	778	
2008/02	784	
2008/03	1924	
2008/04	1072	
2008/05	1194	
2008/06	853	
2008/07	1095	
2008/08	830	
2008/09	670	
2008/10	761	
2008/11	885	
2008/12	921	
2009/01	759	
2009/02	338	
2009/03	350	
2009/04	339	
2009/05	234	
2009/06	595	
2009/07	510	
2009/08	354	
2009/09	284	
Logs

Pages moved: 190
Pages patrolled: 92
Pages protected: 1
Files uploaded: 55
Top edited articles

Article

327 - List_of_World_Wrestling_Entertainment_employees
146 - The_Great_American_Bash_(2005)
102 - Armageddon_(2006)
83 - Night_of_Champions_(2008)
74 - WrestleMania_XXIV
63 - 2008_WWE_Draft
61 - New_York_Islanders
56 - Survivor:_Borneo
49 - Cy_Young_Award
48 - List_of_American_Idol_finalists

Talk

245 - List_of_World_Wrestling_Entertainment_employees
19 - Brian_Kendrick
17 - Judgment_Day_(2005)
16 - Survivor:_Borneo
16 - Backlash_(2006)
14 - Matt_Hardy
12 - 2008_WWE_Draft
12 - Bibliography_of_S._E._Hinton
11 - WrestleMania_XXIV
10 - Stacy_Keibler

User

402 - IMatthew/Userpage
189 - IMatthew
98 - IMatthew/Sandbox2
90 - IMatthew/Sandbox1
86 - IMatthew/Awards
78 - GlassCobra/Editor_for_deletion
76 - IMatthew/Sandbox5
75 - IMatthew/Signature
46 - IMatthew/Admin_coaching
42 - IMatthew/Userboxes

User talk

495 - ThinkBlue
424 - Truco
353 - LAX
326 - IMatthew
181 - NiciVampireHeart
109 - D.M.N.
108 - Steelerfan-94/Userpage
98 - Nikki311
86 - The_Hybrid
74 - VN503

Wikipedia

161 - WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Collaboration
99 - WikiProject_Professional_wrestling
86 - Motto_of_the_day/Nominations/In_review
84 - Good_article_nominations
77 - WikiCup/History/2009/Round_1
69 - Administrators'_noticeboard
61 - Requests_for_page_protection
59 - WikiCup
57 - Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents
52 - Peer_review/The_Great_American_Bash_(2005)/archive...

Wikipedia talk

1018 - WikiProject_Professional_wrestling
207 - WikiCup
99 - Requests_for_adminship
72 - Featured_list_candidates
51 - WikiProject_Ice_Hockey
29 - Good_article_nominations
22 - WikiCup/2010_Signups
18 - 2008_main_page_redesign_proposal
16 - Highly_Active_Users
12 - WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Newsletter

File

3 - NYI_Retired_numbers_2.JPG
3 - CJ_Papa.JPG
2 - NYI_Stanley_Cup_banners.JPG
2 - NVMC_2.JPG
2 - Diva's_Championship_match.JPG
2 - Lighthouse_at_LI_Logo.JPG
2 - Pens2009win.jpg
1 - Bailey_and_Pock.JPG
1 - NYI_Retired_numbers_1.JPG
1 - Mike_Iggulden.JPG

Template

14 - WP:PW-Nav
6 - WikiCup
5 - La_Familia_(professional_wrestling)
4 - World_Wrestling_Entertainment_employees
4 - Featured_list_log
2 - COTW_PW
2 - WWE_Draft
2 - TNA_Tournaments
2 - Current-PWEOTW
2 - Total_Nonstop_Action_Wrestling_employees

Template talk

50 - Did_you_know
1 - TNA_roster
1 - TFAempty
1 - Total_Nonstop_Action_Wrestling_employees
1 - WWE_roster
1 - World_Wrestling_Entertainment_employees

Category

1 - Future-Class_Professional_wrestling_articles
1 - Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Orieus

Portal

8 - Professional_wrestling/News
3 - Professional_wrestling/Intro
2 - Professional_wrestling
1 - Professional_wrestling/box-header

Oppose discussion

[edit]

Pulling over discussion that was getting lengthy in response to Dylan620. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully. I have a lot of respect for you, Matt, but I'm uneasy with the fact that you retired on August 30, and here you are seeking adminship only 3 weeks later. I'm sorry, Matt, but I don't think you have the prerequisite maturity for adminship. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 13:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I would like to hear what Julian (your coach) has to say. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 14:00, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just a curiosity for the future (as IMatthew should learn from the opposes) - how many weeks/months would you suggest someone wait after wanting to retire, temporarily retiring, and being convinced by a large group of people that he is absolutely necessary to stay so he undid the retirement and returned to his normal duties that he only left for a few hours? Ottava Rima (talk) 14:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um, a few weeks to calm down doesn't hurt before running for RFA. Why are we arguing this?Mitch32(The Password is... See here!) 14:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) 2x I would prefer at least 2 or 3 months between returning from retirement and seeking adminship. Seeking adminship only a couple weeks after retirement shows an unhealthy swing in dedication to Wikipedia, as evidenced by an old RfA nomination I did back in April (you can find it by looking through my project-space contribs for April 2009). --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 14:09, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eh? That's a bit much.Mitch32(The Password is... See here!) 14:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dylan - would you mind if this continues onto the talk page? I would suggest a cut after your response to "Um, a few weeks to calm down" with a link follow that. Is that acceptable? Ottava Rima (talk) 14:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's perfectly OK. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs)help us! 14:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now, based on what you stated above about a few months - is there a difference between say, someone who retired for a few hours or a day and someone who retired for a few months? Or do you see no difference between the two? Ottava Rima (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to intrude, I won't get involved in the actual discussion, but I'm curious to why you're questioning Dylan on this? He's got a legitimate reason to oppose, one which I can understand (although I don't take the same view), so surely it's just a 'leave-it-at-that' or 'agree-to-disagree' situation? Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  15:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So that IMatthew would have an answer as to when he should wait and not feel as if this will come up as a problem again. If this RfA fails, the opposes are very important to turn to in order to figure out why. Thus, such questioning would help keep perspective on what kinds of problems may exist. It appears that Dylan has a comfortability problem with the timing, so the question helps determine what he thinks would be appropriate. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough :) Thanks for replying. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  17:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Statement

[edit]

I had a feeling this would happen again. I'm clearly just not perfect, which is what you need to be to pass RfA today. I actually don't feel like going into detail about this, so I'm going to try and forget it ever happened. I don't think I'll be voting in RfA's anymore, though. I no longer wish to be a part of the RfA community. iMatthew talk at 22:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate. You are a good candidate for adminship, I find it shocking that people can't see that. Best of luck in what you do next. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  23:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Cyclonenim. In regards to what comes next, I believe it's called switching my homepage to Facebook, and giving up city life for a life on the farm. iMatthew talk at 23:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I think you are generally a good candidate. But given how recently you opposed UIS for retiring, coming back, and going for RfA, it seems highly hypocritical to do exactly the same thing yourself. And hypocrisy is the last thing the admin corps needs more of. → ROUX  02:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

However, that's not the case. The retirement was a personal issue, with myself feeling that I spend too much time on Wikipedia, and having a lot of negative feeling towards this place for occupying so damn much of my life. I decided that if I retire, I'll go back to my normal life, and should I ever have the desire, come back and edit some. I thought about it for a long time after, because I wasn't sure it's exactly what I wanted to do. After talking with some editors on IRC about the situation, they and I convinced myself to stick around, but balance out my schedule better, and spend a little less time on Wikipedia. I'm comfortable with the amount of time I now spend on here, and feel a lot better than I did a few weeks ago regarding the situation. My "retirement" was not supposed to attract a bunch of users screaming "oh my god, don't go, you're amazing, you rock, i love you." That seems to be what everyone expects you're getting at when you add the black box to your userpage, though that was not the case here. I infact was hoping that nobody was going to comment, and my exit would be made easily. But like I said, I didn't log out of IRC, and I chatted with some users on there for a while, who convinced me to stick around. With UIS's situation, I felt that between the way he left, and his conduct on IRC afterward, he was looking for some of those "oh my god, don't leave" comments, which I find undesirable in an administrator. iMatthew talk at 02:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough, but the point--your point--remains: how do we know you're not going to retire again? Sorry, I know RfA can be a shithole, but you have to see how that isn't okay. → ROUX  02:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]