Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Ibaranoff24: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:28, 24 December 2007 editCool Hand Luke (talk | contribs)14,522 editsm now 3/9/9← Previous edit Revision as of 12:02, 24 December 2007 edit undoSugar Bear (talk | contribs)36,906 edits →Neutral: commentNext edit →
Line 83: Line 83:
#'''Neutral''' to avoid pile-on the oppose. I would suggest nomination withdrawal per SNOW. ]] 06:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC) #'''Neutral''' to avoid pile-on the oppose. I would suggest nomination withdrawal per SNOW. ]] 06:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
#'''Neutral''', with a question. Why is your use of edit summaries so low? ] (]) 08:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC) #'''Neutral''', with a question. Why is your use of edit summaries so low? ] (]) 08:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
#*'''Comment''' — Because I often don't need them. (] (]) 12:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC))

Revision as of 12:02, 24 December 2007

Ibaranoff24

Voice your opinion (talk page) (3/9/9); Scheduled to end 15:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Ibaranoff24 (talk · contribs) - I won't pretend to be the most qualified candidate for adminship, but I'm a fairly good editor, I've been on here for two years and have made over 15000 edits, if that's any importance. I've also been commended for my "valued contibutions to the Films WikiProject". Ibaranoff24 (talk) 15:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: (Self-nominated. Ibaranoff24 (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC))

I'm sorry I spotted this self-nomination only after a negative (5) and neutral (4) pile-on had already begun. I second the nomination. Please consider me Ibaranoff24's nominator. I've gone over his contributions carefully, and I'm impressed. He's had a great deal of experience in the good articles and featured article candidates departments and has had plenty of exposure to Misplaced Pages's content policies and quality standards. He has improved steadily in how he handles others since he started editing here, and his past six months of contribs show that he gets along with others well. I believe he would not abuse the admin tools, and feel confident that we can trust him with them. He stated what he would use them for (in answer to question #1), and I think that's a good idea. Misplaced Pages could use additional competent editors on its protected pages and with page moving. I'm sure he'll expand his use of the tools beyond those activities carefully. The only reservation I have is that he has filled in only about half his edit summaries. Edit summaries help others understand what you are doing more easily, and are pretty important (admins need to set a good example for others to follow). But if Ibaranoff24 were to pledge that he will fill-in edit summaries from now on, I would take his word for it. The Transhumanist 00:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: My main reason for applying here is that I've found myself at ends with attempting to make needed edits when I do not have the ability to do so - for instance, fixing major errors on protected templates, or moving articles to their correct names when that article name is already being used as a redirect, etc. I need something. And if you don't think that adminship isn't what I'm looking for, can you point me towards the right area to sign up for? Otherwise, voice your support or opposition to my request.
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: Film and music articles, based on knowledge of subjects discussed.
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: None of any real importance.

General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Ibaranoff24 before commenting.

Discussion

Apparently they are, but everyon answers them.--Phoenix-wiki  15:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Conversation where a user strangely advocates performing cut-and-past moves. Please don't.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • You don't need to be an admin to create redirects. Just click on the name you were directed from, copy and paste the real content into there, then create a redirect from the former aticle title. Other than that, you just crave power. │here 15:42, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  • That's what I was trying to explain.. see if I input David Batista, I get redirected to 'Dave Bautista' - if I click on the link where it says "Redirected from David Batista" (just under the article name), I get taken to a page with an arrow pointing to 'Dave Bautista'. Just edit the dab on the page, or grab the content from Dave Bautista, place it on David Bautista, then replace the content on Dave Bautista with the redirect coding (#REDIRECT ]). Adminship is not what you should look for in this case, but to ask for help on the appropriate pages, be it the help desk or a administator's (or some other helpful user's) talkpage. │here 15:42, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Also, doing cut-and-paste moves like this is a pretty good way to get yourself blocked for disruption if you make a habit of it - they take forever to fix. — iridescent 15:55, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  • No they don't. As for getting yourself blocked, well that's just standard for conflicts, such as 3RR. │here 16:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Can we please move this away from the RFA? Regards, Rt. 16:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
As a last comment, ignore this thread. See Misplaced Pages:Moving guidelines for administrators and related pages. –Pomte 17:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Excellent editor, underappreciated like most, and I'm glad he's on Misplaced Pages's side, but there hasn't been a lot of experience at AfD. Good luck to him anyway. 24.64.165.129 (talk) 20:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Support
  1. Support. I have seen this candidate around frequently, way back when I used to participate in WP:FAC. I believe that this candidate is more than qualified and that the precision work he or she is used to in Featured Article work - which the candidate has extensive experience in - ensures that the candidate can be trusted to stay within the areas they state they will specialize in. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 18:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Weak Support I see no reason why this user's adminship would be a negative thing for the project. I am not incredibly impressed with his work but just because an editor is not super duper extra perfect is no reason to deny him the mop. -Icewedge (talk) 23:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. I trust him. - The Transhumanist 01:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose per the answers to questions not doing anything for me and per Soxred's neutral. Jack?! 19:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose I'm sorry, but I don't think your ready for adminship. First, you need to provide a little bit more detailed answers to demonstrate that you have an interest in becoming an admin. Second, I didn't see much contributions to things such as WP:AIV in your edit summary. I feel that those things are necessary to become an admin, and not so much the article writing (that's merely my opinion though). Lastly, a small detail, but an important one nonetheless, I feel that your edit summary usage is way too low. All users should explain the reasons why they made the actions they did in their summaries. Consider going into your preferences and checking the box that sets a reminder for edit summaries. No hard feelings, I just feel that you're almost ready, but not quite there. Icestorm815 (talk) 20:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Oppose per Icestorm815. Answers to questions don't prove a sufficient knowledge of policies. Rt. 21:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
    You Fail per above. 74.62.155.45 (talk) 21:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
    IP's can't comment. --Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 21:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
    They can comment, but cannot vote. the_undertow 01:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Sorry, but the answers to your questions don't really make clear how you would use the tools. Maybe more experience in AfD would be good as well and possibly more edit summary usage. Otherwise, you're almost there. Cheers, --Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 21:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Poor edit summary usage and one-line answers to questions. Sorry.   jj137 00:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose — I view self-noms as prima facie evidence of power hunger. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 03:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Sampling the nom's contributions to the mainspace, I do not find enough sourcing of the information put forward - much of the editing appears to be based on personal knowledge of the subjects. If I missed consistent sourcing by the nom, please provide us with a handful, or two handfuls, of articles showing the opposite, so I can re-consider. Thank you. -- Iterator12n 04:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
    Dude, he has something like three featured articles. He's added lots of references to Misplaced Pages. 24.64.165.129 (talk) 04:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. Oppose per all the above concerns. --Siva1979 05:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  9. Oppose You're lacking in communication skills, and I believe communication is a vital part of Misplaced Pages. Also, your edit summary usage is less than ideal. Please consider addressing these and other concerns. Thanks! Master of Puppets 06:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Neutral. Even though you have quite good edits, 25% edit summary usage and not as specific as could be on answering questions bumps my decision to Neutral. Soxred93 has a boring sig 18:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  2. Neutral While the questions are optional, if you're going to give one-liner answers you need to sell yourself in the essay. While there's nothing in your edit history I can see to oppose on, the combination of the lack of answers and the edit summary usage don't give me enough to support on. If you expand the answers and/or statement, I could be swung to support on this one. — iridescent 21:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  3. Neutral I agree with the above, so I can't support, but I won't oppose this. <DREAMAFTER> 00:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  4. Neutral Pretty weak answers to questions, and edit summary usage. Jmlk17 00:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
    I suggest perhaps trying a coach. Jmlk17 00:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  5. Neutral, not the most convincing answers to the questions, and as above, weak edit summary usage. Admins need to be able to communicate well, and I'm not sure you can do that. I second the suggestion of finding a coach, because otherwise you seem a pretty solid editor. Lankiveil (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC).
  6. Neutral. Per the oppose section. Won't oppose you for that, however. Think it through a little more next time, sorry. Happy Holidays!! Malinaccier (talk) 01:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  7. Neutral Good editor, but poor edit summaries and answers to questions 2 and 3 are a concern. I can't decide whether to support or oppose. But I will support if you improve your edit summaries. NHRHS2010 Happy Holidays 03:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  8. Neutral to avoid pile-on the oppose. I would suggest nomination withdrawal per SNOW. OhanaUnited 06:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
  9. Neutral, with a question. Why is your use of edit summaries so low? Unschool (talk) 08:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Ibaranoff24: Difference between revisions Add topic