Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:28, 12 June 2008

Kevin

Voice your opinion (talk page) (15/1/0); Scheduled to end 03:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Kevin (talk · contribs) - After some thought, I've decided to nominate myself for adminship. I've begun to feel that I would be more useful performing administrative actions than creating work for administrators. I've been around for about 2 years now, and have about 6500 non-deleted edits. I have worked in a fair number of areas throughout the encyclopedia, and feel that I have gained plenty of experience suited to this role. I have deliberately given fairly brief answers below, in the hope that opinions will be given based on my contribution history, which I think is a better indicator of how I would likely act as an admin. Kevin (talk) 02:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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: Initially I will work mostly in CAT:CSD, because it's where I have the most experience. I have about 500 deleted edits, most of which would be speedy deletion noms, and it's been fairly rare that an admin has disagreed with my judgment. I have lately begun working there untagging articles that don't meet the criteria as well. I will also help out at WP:AIV where I have been active in the past. Later, I'm not sure where my interests might take me.

2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: I'm more of a wikignome than an article writer, so I think my most useful contribution is the sum of all the little things. More recently, I have started offering 3rd opinions, and trying to mediate disputes. Something I have tried to put more effort into is helping new editors get through their first editing experience, by giving expanded reasons for actions, rather than just add templates.

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've been involved in disagreements and content disputes, but nothing that has caused me stress. I'm more inclined to use the talk page than keep reverting in article space.

Additional questions the candidate feels should be answered

4. Your edit history shows long periods of editing, followed by long breaks. Could you explain?

A: I'm asking/answering this because I'm sure it will come up. My work in real life tends to come in cycles, so at the moment I am not so busy, hence a few months of activity. At other times I have large projects that tend to take up most of my time. I don't believe that this will be a problem, as I always have a good look around when I return to see what has changed and what is going on. I also foresee that I will be here more regularly, at least for the next year. I'm always contactable by email if needed anyway. If I do foresee a break, I'll put up the wikibreak notice and back off from admin activities for a bit beforehand.

Optional questions from RyRy5 (talk)

5. If you see two or three different IPs repeatedly vandalizing the same article, what steps will you take to ensure that it stops?

A: These 2 or 3 IPs should be blocked to stop their vandalising, short periods initially, then longer if they persist. If more come out of the woodwork then I would consider semi-protecting the article.

6. You find an admin account that hasn't been active for many months starting to vandalize. What would you do?

A: The first requirement is to prevent further damage by blocking the account. Several seconds later I would be posting at AN/I because it would seem that either the account is compromised, or the admin has gone off the rails. Then I would ask the admin what is going on.

Optional question from Gazimoff

7. Which do you feel is the most important process on Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: I was going to think about this for a bit before answering, but I think I would come to the same (non)answer. I think that most of the processes here form an overall system, where each is an important part. This process, and WP:AFD are possibly the most visible.

General comments

• See Kevin's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Kevin: Kevin (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

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

Discussion

Support

1. Support. I often notice this editor doing good work. --Kaaveh (talk) 03:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Support Meets my standards as a specialist admin. Looks likey to constructively use tools.

   • More than 1,000 deleted articles.
   • I veiw self noms as having the confidence needed to be an admin.
   • Found where he notified creators of speedy deletion noms. communication is important for an admin.
   • Talk page reveals patient, courteous, knowledgeable user who can disagree without being disagreeable.
   • Makes correct reports to AIV. (sorry about not putting in the links. too tired for that.) Dlohcierekim 03:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

3. Support -- knowledgeable about policy, level-headed, and has already been helpful in admin areas. He's ready for the mop. --Elkman 03:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
4. Support. Has over 2 years experiance. Why not give him the tools? –BuickCenturyDriver (talk) 04:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
5. dorftrottel (talk)
6. Support per Elkman, and Dlohcierekim. Can definitely help out with the tools; WTHN? --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 05:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
7. Support all seems reasonable, although I am always wary of users who just use their first names. --Stephen 05:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
8. Support You'll suit fine, nice contributions and talk page history. Bonus points for me having never heard of you. Also what Stephen said as far as concerns about using a first name. Keep up the good work. Keegan 06:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
9. Support per Dlohcierekim. A good degree of confidence despite his brevity. Vishnava _talk 07:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
10. Support Particularly impressive ability to spot the bad content and tag accordingly, as evidenced by the deleted contributions. As you have clearly stated you wish to help out at C:CSD, which "enjoys" a regularly high backlog, I'm more than convinced you'd be a net positive. Good luck. Pedro :  Chat  09:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
11. Support I have looked very closely at his CSD related edits and I could find nothing problematic. Jon513 (talk) 09:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
12. Support A fine candidate. --Ecoleetage (talk) 09:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
13. Daniel (talk) 10:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
14. Support. Ironholds has made a fair point in the "oppose" section, and I'd recommend to the candidate to give article writing a higher priority. (For one thing, it is fun, and a good way of reducing stress levels when tensions grow.) However, my look through his mainspace contributions shows that Kevin has a good record of dealing with sourcing issues, so he is not empty in that department, and I think he has a good enough grip on the encyclopedia aspects as well. Since his contributions in vandal-fighting and tag cleanup (especially removing incorrectly placed speedy tags) have been helpful, and the candidate has shown consistently good judgment in executing those tasks, I am supporting this candidacy with pleasure. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
15. Support - no issues at all. Completely trustworthy to have the tools - Peripitus (Talk) 12:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. Kevin does fulfill most of my standards of what i'd consider good admin material; he's established, has made good contributions, few of which have been contested or reverted. However, there are several things that concern me. Firstly, his contributions seem very narrow; much of it is counter-vandalism or deletion action. This is absolutely fine, and an arena where admin tools will come particularly in handy, but i'd prefer well-rounded admins. I can't find any created or majorly edited pages in the last 1000 edits (again, it's mainly anti-vandalism work). He seems a mature, good editor, and i do like his work, but I cant justify giving administrative tools to someone who is inexperienced in one of the most important (if not the most important) aspects of wikipedia. It's a case of "not right now" more than anything else (which i feel bad about using, since you're a long-established editor) and in a few months (assuming this doesn't pass) if you've started making more mainspace edits i'll be happy to change my next vote to support. Ironholds 03:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying mainspace ("majorly edited pages") is the most important area of wiki? Or just what are you talking about here? Sumoeagle179 (talk) 10:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that, although it isn't the be all and end all of contributions, i'd like to see some page creation/serious contribution. My apologies if I expressed it badly. Ironholds 10:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. It is my policy to oppose people who don't read the self-nom instructions properly (because it may indicate inattention to detail) but because of his other contributions, I'll stay neutral for now. xenocidic (talk) 12:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)