Anthony Bradbury (talk | contribs) corrected tab |
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) m →[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]]: Refactoring oppose vote to correct section; people aren't noticing it and the count is often wrong as a result. |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]]=== |
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]]=== |
||
'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fuhghettaboutit|action=edit}} Voice your opinion]''' |
'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fuhghettaboutit|action=edit}} Voice your opinion]''' |
||
'''(28/ |
'''(28/1/0); Scheduled to end 01:55, [[13 April]] [[2007]] (UTC)''' |
||
{{User|Fuhghettaboutit}} - I'm proud to present a prolific Wikipedian, Fuhghettaboutit, who has racked up 13180 edits in mainspace, 3642 in user talk, and 2527 in Wikipedia space. What caught my eyes, though, were some very good answers he gave on the [[WP:HD|help desk]]. I am surprised that he's not an admin already (yes, yes, I know), and this RfA is long overdue. fuhghettaboutit has contributed this project since 10 December 2005. A civil and helpful editor who readily admits when he makes a mistake, fuhghettaboutit is an active NP patroller and DYK participant, so he can really use some tools. I have no doubt that he will wield the tools responsibly. Let's give him the mop. [[User:Xiner|Xiner]] ([[User talk:Xiner|talk]]) 01:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
{{User|Fuhghettaboutit}} - I'm proud to present a prolific Wikipedian, Fuhghettaboutit, who has racked up 13180 edits in mainspace, 3642 in user talk, and 2527 in Wikipedia space. What caught my eyes, though, were some very good answers he gave on the [[WP:HD|help desk]]. I am surprised that he's not an admin already (yes, yes, I know), and this RfA is long overdue. fuhghettaboutit has contributed this project since 10 December 2005. A civil and helpful editor who readily admits when he makes a mistake, fuhghettaboutit is an active NP patroller and DYK participant, so he can really use some tools. I have no doubt that he will wield the tools responsibly. Let's give him the mop. [[User:Xiner|Xiner]] ([[User talk:Xiner|talk]]) 01:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
#'''Support''' Excellent candidate with an impressive range of contributions to the project. [[User:JavaTenor|JavaTenor]] 16:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' Excellent candidate with an impressive range of contributions to the project. [[User:JavaTenor|JavaTenor]] 16:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' I am getting annoyed by all the RfAs saying that they are "Amazed the user isn't an admin yet," but still, the user is definately good enough for adminship. [[User:Captain panda|<font color="orange" face="comic sans ms">Captain</font>]] [[User talk:Captain panda|<font color="red" face="Papyrus">panda</font>]] 17:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' I am getting annoyed by all the RfAs saying that they are "Amazed the user isn't an admin yet," but still, the user is definately good enough for adminship. [[User:Captain panda|<font color="orange" face="comic sans ms">Captain</font>]] [[User talk:Captain panda|<font color="red" face="Papyrus">panda</font>]] 17:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
⚫ | |||
#'''Support''' good one. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 18:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' good one. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 18:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' no problems whatsoever [[User:Scottydude|Scottydude]] <sub><small>[[User talk:Scottydude|talk]]</small></sub> 23:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' no problems whatsoever [[User:Scottydude|Scottydude]] <sub><small>[[User talk:Scottydude|talk]]</small></sub> 23:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' Seen him everywhere. (Been here much longer than me) Brilliant wikipedian.--[[User:Anthony.bradbury|Anthony.bradbury]] 00:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' Seen him everywhere. (Been here much longer than me) Brilliant wikipedian.--[[User:Anthony.bradbury|Anthony.bradbury]] 00:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
'''Oppose''' |
'''Oppose''' |
||
⚫ | |||
# |
|||
'''Neutral''' |
'''Neutral''' |
Revision as of 00:33, 7 April 2007
Fuhghettaboutit
(28/1/0); Scheduled to end 01:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit (talk · contribs) - I'm proud to present a prolific Wikipedian, Fuhghettaboutit, who has racked up 13180 edits in mainspace, 3642 in user talk, and 2527 in Wikipedia space. What caught my eyes, though, were some very good answers he gave on the help desk. I am surprised that he's not an admin already (yes, yes, I know), and this RfA is long overdue. fuhghettaboutit has contributed this project since 10 December 2005. A civil and helpful editor who readily admits when he makes a mistake, fuhghettaboutit is an active NP patroller and DYK participant, so he can really use some tools. I have no doubt that he will wield the tools responsibly. Let's give him the mop. Xiner (talk) 01:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Co-nomination: Fuhghettaboutit is a fantastic Wikipedian. He deeply understands that this is an encyclopedia. If he has to find references from 1887 newspapers, he does it. This is no gnome, either - Fuhghettaboutit spends most of his WP time actually writing articles, and has created quite a number of them, straight into B-Class or better. Yet somehow also had not only the time but the understanding of how Wikipedia works to be the main architect of the books notability guideline. I interact with him a lot in a WikiProject. Ever-civil, always uses edit summaries (that make sense), does not revert war, doesn't pick fights, just generally makes sense most of the time. He is quick to fix vandalism, knows templating, is helpful to newbies and experienced editors alike, and has a well-founded understanding of policy/guidelines, XfD, consensus building, and how to build really good articles. I think it's time he got a bucket. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 02:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept, and thank you Xiner and SmMcCandlish for the nominations.--Fuhghettaboutit 19:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
In the hope that no one will strain a typing muscle trying to avoid an improper pronoun, as I have seen in past nominations, please feel free to use he / him / his where appropriate.
- Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?
- A: I do a good deal of new pages patrol and contemplate continuing in that activity. The ability to delete clear WP:CSD candidates without a middle man would be immensely helpful in that enterprise, not to mention more efficient. Lending a hand at CAT:CSD would be a natural offshoot of this. I have participated in numerous afd debates (I would estimate over 500) and anticipate performing closes, though I would be leery of tackling controversial ones until gaining experience. I also anticipate assisting with requested moves, and at WP:ERRORS, where I have reported problems a number of times.
- I am strangely attracted to fixing page histories and though I have no experience in the actual methodology (how could I), I have reviewed WP:CPMV. I've had twelve self-nominated articles listed on DYK and two for other users, so I am familiar with process there and foresee adding my name to available updaters. Another prospect is helping out with copyright violations which I have some experience with in real life. I've been interested enough here that I created {{nothanks-drm}} after noting the ubiquitous failure of users to read the text of {{copyvio}} regarding creation of a temporary page. Finally, though until now I have sparingly contributed at WP:AN and its various subsections, I do monitor at times, and would assist where appropriate.
- I am a bit of a dilettante and it's a safe bet that I would expand into different roles over time. The rollback button may be occasionally useful, but I don’t think I will need it often. I dislike recent changes patrol so most simple vandalism I encounter is of the drive-by, rather than spree variety, and limited to my [ever-expanding] watchlist. Of course, there's no telling what the future may bring that will occasion more contact with vandals. I'm sure someone will note that I have only a few edits to WP:AIAV; this is the reason.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: This may come off as pollyanna, but I am pleased with most of my contributions. I don't do things if I don't think they’re worthwhile and doing things that I think are worthwhile pleases me. Okay, if you pin me down: I am most pleased with having written much of the non-stub billiard content on Wikipedia—numerous articles, including two GAs (carom billiards and Irving Crane); as well as balkline and straight rail (probably the article I am most proud of; a very difficult historical research project); cowboy pool; cushion caroms; bottle pool; kelly pool; the billiards glossary all these articles use and many others. I have two other GAs, Lope de Barrientos and Trabancos River, both translations of featured articles on the Spanish Wikipedia drafted with the collaboration of the Spanish language majority author (a real treat). I am also pleased by the promotion to guideline of Wikipedia:Notability (books) which I wrote with a good deal of help from Pascal.Tesson. I also enjoy helping out at the help desk, New contributors' help page, occasionally at various sections of the Reference desk and responding to {{help me}}.
- 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: Some minor conflicts—mostly shouting and hand waving because a user’s article that I tagged got deleted. There was this exchange at the help desk which led to this discussion. There was one rather unpleasant incident with an established user, now an admin, who accused me of tagging a user’s talk page with an improper blanking warning. After I pointed out the correctness of the tagging (the user was looking at the wrong article’s edit history because he didn't realize the blanked article had become a redirect in the interim), we had some words over his less than diplomatic manner and actions. I will provide further details with diffs if requested to, but I think it's of a let-sleeping-dogs-lie nature.
- I've had few content disputes. The only ones that come to mind are here, when I was a new user, and the heated discussion on the talk page of Wikipedia:Notability (books). I don’t find this stressful. I enjoy debate (and do my best not to climb large German senatorial buildings in costume). What I find stressful is making harmful mistakes. For example, this should not have been necessary. There are other edits I regret—a few harsh edit summaries, one afd where I should have been more civil, and one over-the-top post at the village pump—but these few incidents loom large in my memory and I try not to repeat past errors.
- Optional question 4 from ViridaeTalk
- 4. You stated you want to help out with CAT:CSD. Under what circumstances can an article be deleted for not being notable?
- A: To the extent prod may be considered a form of speedy deletion (though it is not speedy per se, it shares lack of debate on the merits of the article), a prodded article on the basis of notability could be deleted after running its course. Otherwise, there are no such circumstances—at least not as you have posed the question. There are no speedy deletion criteria on the basis of notability. The only notability-related criteria, A7, has to do with whether there is an assertion of notability. An article that asserts notability, though one may think it patently non-notable, is not a candidate for speedy deletion on that basis. Please see the edit history of this article, edited by me earlier today.
- Optional question by Gmaxwell
- 5. How would you describe, in your own words, the mission of the English Wikipedia and how does that mission fit into the overall mission of the Wikimedia Foundation? What actions have you taken as a community member to further these missions and what actions do you see yourself taking in the future to further these missions?
- A: Wikipedia is about free dissemination of knowledge. A database that is capable of near infinite expansion, and with the resource of all people (well, those with computers) given free access to collaborate in that process. It's a great model. There's a bit of devil in the details, but we're working on it. I really am not sure how to answer the second part of your question. A free encyclopedia is one aspect of the goal stated above. The Wikimedia Foundation also oversees other aspects, but it's all about the goal of free and open collaborative access to knowledge. A free dictionary, species directory, news service, library, etc. They are all about the same thing. As for the third question, why I've helped to increase that knowledge. Along the way I've been also pruning and debating improvements to the structure to achieve that goal. I value my time and wouldn't spend one more second creating articles and helping here if I didn't believe in the goal.
- 5(continued): Thank you for your answer, I like it but I would like to drill in a bit deeper into your thoughts on this stuff. Going purely hypothetical here, if the goal is about the free dissemination of knowledge, why are we writing instead of just copying Encyclopedia Britannica and trying to battle it out in court? or why aren't we instead using all our man power to raise money to use to pay publishers to allow us to display their books at no cost?
- A: I turned in my truncheon at the door. From a feasibility standpoint, we would never win either battle you've posed. The statement "free dissemination of knowledge" is not a mantra interpreted in a vacuum. We do have a structure; a particular type of software platform; particular policies that make this a tertiary source encyclopedia, and there is nothing about this that puts us at odds with intellectual property law; we are not a knowledge-at-any-cost-free-for-all-anarchy. In any case, why would we want to assimiliate Encyclopædia Britannica? It can't compete in breadth or in depth (certainly not in the long run). Regarding the second hypothetical, displaying books has nothing to do with an encyclopedia. Wikisource of course does function in that sphere, but once again we function within the bounds of society and its laws. I would be more worried if the Wikimedia foundation was run by Pinky and the Brain.
- 5(continued): Thank you for your answer, I like it but I would like to drill in a bit deeper into your thoughts on this stuff. Going purely hypothetical here, if the goal is about the free dissemination of knowledge, why are we writing instead of just copying Encyclopedia Britannica and trying to battle it out in court? or why aren't we instead using all our man power to raise money to use to pay publishers to allow us to display their books at no cost?
- Optional question from Kelly Martin
- 6. You have contributed 100 images to Wikipedia since January 2006 (and eight on Wikimedia Commons). Thirty-nine of these images have since been deleted. Could you please describe the circumstances surrounding the deletion of these contributions?
- A: Sure. All but 3 of the following 14 images, were fair use dvd/vhs covers replaced by more desirable original movie poster images. When the images became orphaned, I requested deletion under G7: (deletion log entries) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] (<--replaced by a commons image) and [12] (<--and two others images relating to the same movie under similar names because I was dissatisfied with the images).
- All 21 remaining deleted images were of dog breeds uploaded in one day (after a number of hours of work) my second month on Wikipedia. All contained fair use rationales but I learned from a kind user the problem with these images and fair use. Here is my response to learning all were to be deleted.
- General comments
- See Fuhghettaboutit's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
Please keep criticism constructive and polite.
Discussion
Support
- Support as co-nominator. Xiner (talk) 02:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support I don't even need to look at this user's answers to the questions. I know this user will make a great administrator, and I look forward to seeing him out there, making Wikipedia a better place. Chickyfuzz14(user talk) 02:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support as co-nominator of course! — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 02:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support well qualified, overdue HornandsoccerTalk 03:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support. He was one of the first Wikipedians I encountered here, and it was the kind of interaction that made me want to stick around. Looking at his more recent contributions confirms my impression that he would make an excellent admin.--Kubigula (talk) 03:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support - Everything looks good--$UIT 03:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Michael 04:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support - bumped into this guy many times. Great editor & will make an equally good admin - Alison☺ 05:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support per answers to all questions, paticuarly my optional one. That was the answer I was looking for~ ViridaeTalk 06:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Changing to Super duper strong support per answers to questions. Candidate is polite, level-headed and knows his policy. Whats not to like. Good luck! ViridaeTalk 06:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Kusma (talk) 07:04, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Terence 10:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support I see no problems here. (aeropagitica) 11:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support - long overdue. Addhoc 11:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 11:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support good, all-rounded user who can be very helpful with the tools in his hands. —Anas talk? 13:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support. He'll be a very good administrator. He's been looking out for me since I was a newbie, patiently and courteously answering my questions and correcting my errors, and I've been quietly admiring his work expanding the billiards articles. I've never seen him other than civil; he knows Wikipedia policy and contributes in a variety of different ways. -FisherQueen (Talk) 14:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support My collaboration with Fuhghettaboutit on WP:BK has convinced me that he/she is level-headed and I'm confident he will do well with the admin tools. Pascal.Tesson 14:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support Plenty of experience. If problems were going to surface they would have done so by now. DurovaCharge! 14:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support Excellent candidate; cliche moment. Xoloz 14:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support His mistakes with the fair use criteria seem only to have increased his knowledge of the policy, and I love the civil, thoughtful response. We don't need admins that never make mistakes, only ones that admit them civilly, deal with them, and learn from them. Dina 15:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support. Certainly. Retiono Virginian 15:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support looks good.-- danntm T C 15:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support - Trustworthy user who understands process. Q5 seems more of a test, which Fuhghettaboutit passed. Q6 answer shows learning from mistakes. -- Jreferee 16:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support Excellent candidate with an impressive range of contributions to the project. JavaTenor 16:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support I am getting annoyed by all the RfAs saying that they are "Amazed the user isn't an admin yet," but still, the user is definately good enough for adminship. Captain panda 17:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support good one. feydey 18:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support no problems whatsoever Scottydude talk 23:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Support Seen him everywhere. (Been here much longer than me) Brilliant wikipedian.--Anthony.bradbury 00:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose - user has not signed acceptance. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 18:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Neutral