Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:54, 9 December 2008

NuclearWarfare

Voice your opinion (talk page) (26/8/2); Scheduled to end 00:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

NuclearWarfare (talk · contribs) – NuclearWarfare is a user who has been around for a while now, and I was just coming to wonder, why isn't he an admin yet? He has over 20000 edits, engaging mainly in anti-vandal work and other maintenance work. When I see him, I see a clueful user, a user who is friendly, a user who people can get along with.

NW is an active contributor to the Avatar WikiProject, improving multiple lists to FL status. He has improved List of Avatar: The Last Airbender episodes, Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 1), and Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 2) all to FL status. In addition to working for the Avatar Wikiproject, NW is also a prolific vandal fighter, reporting well over 200 users to AIV. Many other times has he (correctly) reported new articles for CSD. If NuclearWarfare becomes an admin, his work in CSD, anti-vandal work, and RFPP will be very beneficial.

He does not get into much drama, as much of his work is gnomey. If anyone is mad at him, NW remains civil, and never holds it as a grudge. In addition, looking over his talk page, I see many users thanking for his help, in all aspects of WP. The only issues I can see with this candidate has to do with his vandal work vs. article work. He has about 8000 Huggle edits, and has "only" 3 FLs. I don't see this as much of a concern, however, as 3 different featured content is actually very good for an editor who is mainly "behind the scenes".

NuclearWarfare is a user who is friendly, helpful, and easy to get along with. I see NuclearWarfare as a great admin. Xclamation point 04:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Co-nom by bibliomaniac15: "Only three FLs"? Man, I'm getting wiki-old. I was pleased to coach NuclearWarfare, which can be seen here. I believe that he has developed into someone who is very well-rounded: civil, skilled in both maintenance and writing, and helpful in answering other's questions. I am convinced he will make a good addition into our ranks as an administrator, along with X!. bibliomaniac15 05:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I would like to take this oppurtunity to thank X! for nominating me (without warning ;) ) and Biblio for graciously helping me out these last few months. I accept their nomination. - NuclearWarfare _{My work} 00:20, 9 December 2008 (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 areas do you intend to work in?

A. Primarily, I intend to focus on the areas of admin-related activities that I know best, specifically AIV and Page Protection, as they both need constant attention; especially the second, as sometimes requests can lie there for hours at a time. Also, I intend to continue my work with new page patrolling. I intend to work there, both by doing frontline vandalism deletion and deleting pages tagged for deletion. I would not, however, delete any page that did not clearly fit under G3, G7, or G10, as the rest definitely necessitate another user’s eyes over the article before deletion.

I would also be available for any user who needed my help in editing a protected page, and in other such requests, like userfying a copy of a deleted article.

2. What conflicts have caused you stress and how have you dealt with them? How have you learned from them?

A. Well, any vandal fighter can tell you of the horror stories, but honestly, not much has happened to me that has caused me great amounts of stress. Issues with some of my wikifriends have caused me stress, but those are unrelated to RfA. Since people will want to (and should) look more deeply into this, here are my archives.

To go on a little side tangent here, offering apologies is something that I believe should happen more often, because it sadly happens too little after confrontations. It is something I always try to do when I make a mistake, and I think Misplaced Pages would be a better place if more people did the same.

I can't recall any more confrontations with Misplaced Pages-related projects; my work at Misplaced Pages has most been in the background, so most of the people that get angry are new editors, who often diffuse after I simply explain something or help out a little with what they need to do.

3. What do you believe are your best contributions?

A. There are several areas of the encyclopedia at which I believe I have excelled. Vandalism patrol something that I am very proud of. In addition to the normal vandal whacking that so many people kindly do, I have also done quite a bit of new page patrolling, and I even helped improve some of the criteria.

Several RfA regulars also like to see solid article work. Writing is not my strong suit, but I have made several forays in the world of article writing. Currently, I am 3/5 of the way to a Featured Topic, with three pieces of featured content and two more hopefully on the way. For my best accomplishments, please see User:NuclearWarfare/Accomplishments.

Also, for some niche things: I have spent quite some time in the account creation process.

For the past few months, I have been hanging out in IRC. For those who frequent the public channels, let me assure you that I don’t partake and will not expect to partake in the drama that occasionally is posted. Instead, I would continue what I have always done, helping out new users who wander into the help channel every so often or help handle {{helpme}} requests.

Questions that I want to get out of the way

4. Recall process?

A. Yes, I plan to have one if I'm elected, likely one based off of either this or this.

5. As an administrator, you will come across some extremely vulgar language and often come under attack for your actions. You will most likely have to deal with some fairly troublesome users. The users you block will sometimes ask to be unblocked. Please review the very NSFW scenario outlined at User:Xenocidic/RFAQ and describe how you would respond to the IP's request to be unblocked.

A. I would either unblock the IP and very carefully monitor its edits, or use the {{2nd chance}} template.

Optional questions from Skomorokh

6. I see you have done some commendable work in the realm of fiction. What are your thoughts on the issue of articles about fictional topics that are extensive and informative but have scant secondary sourcing?

A. Thanks for your question. My heart truly goes out to the authors of the article-types that you have mentioned. The information in them is usually highly useful, but unfortunately, ILIKEIT isn't enough to keep them in Misplaced Pages. Usually, these topics fail both WP:N and WP:V. We shouldn't rush to delete them, but we should keep them, attempt to source them, and if that fails, we should try to transwiki them to Wikia or merge them into larger articles. In fact, I myself ran into this quandary a few days ago with Azulon, where I found an article that I really liked, but was ultimately nominated for AfD. Now, my heart told me to vote Strong Keep, but the outcome, merge and redirect was truly the correct one.

Hmmm. I seem to have no clue what I just wrote. Hopefully, you can understand that. If not, I can attempt to clarify.

No that's quite alright, I am quite happy with your response, thank you. Skomorokh 00:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

7. Some editors may have reservations about supporting the RfA candidacy of someone without extensive article writing experience. In what ways do you think lacking such experience can sometimes lead to problematic administrator behaviour?

A. I'm going to decline to give my full view of this, because I have some rather strong feelings on this subject and I don't want to divert the focus of this RfA. If you contact me offwiki, I shall be happy to explain what I think. But I will give a short explanation:

I believe that one of the main reasons that a person would oppose someone who isn't an article writer is because of the delete button. A user who is experienced with building up content is far less likely to make an easy call to delete material. But that's my own personal opinion/idea, and I have no idea if it right or not

Additional (optional) question from Toddst1:

8. If you came across a user talk page from a newly registered user that said something to the effect of "I am thinking of killing myself." what would you do and why? (Note: Misplaced Pages:SUICIDE is an essay).

AFollow WP:SUICIDE to the letter. I've read it before, and I see no harm with it. At worst, I lose 20 minutes of my time. At best, I save a life. Pretty easy call.

Additional questions from RockManQ

9. What do you think of WP:IAR? Have you ever had to invoke it, and when do you think it would be an appropriate time for an administrator to use it?

A. I've been asked this question before by Biblio, so I'm going to point to my answer here.

10. What is your own personal criteria for granting rights at WP:PERM; such as rollback, AWB, and NPWatcher? (please explain all three, if possible)

A. I would grant out rollback to any user who has been here both a fair amount of time and done at least a little bit of anti-vandal work. I really have to research this one though, and I obviously wouldn't grant out Rollback until I had done some research.

I would grant out the Account Creator tool to anyone in ACC who needed it. I work pretty often in ACC, so I know who is active and who isn't.

AWB - Follow the guidelines listed

NewPage Watcher - I honestly don't know why you would ever use this one (seriously, patrolling via Huggle or simple Javascript is much better), so I'd actually give this out pretty freely to anyone who had done some New Page Patrol, as not that much damage could be done with this one.

11. Are there any polices/guidelines you disagree with? If so, please explain why and what you would do as an administrator to change them?

A. Hmmm. Well, I can't really think of any policies or guidelines that I disagree with, besides some minor MoS stuff. As an administrator, I would do nothing to change this. As an editor, if I cared enough, I'd start a discussion on the relavent talk page

Optional question from Protonk (talk)

12 What are your thoughts about the current IWF image controversy, of which you appear to be aware. Are we doing the right thing? The wrong thing? Would you block someone who exceeded 3RR in removing the image from the Virgin Killer page? (Pre-emptive comment: this question is just meant to gauge the candidate's decision making process, not say "oh you think it is child porn==>I will oppose".) Thank you.

A. The current IMF controversy is a mess, but so far, we have done everything "correctly", I believe. We have not caved in to the British government and we have upheld our core beliefs. We have discussed the problem on AN/ANI (whichever) and attempted to find technical workarounds (on Bugzilla). And I believe that the Foundation's Legal Counsel is discussing the situation with the IMF.

For the second part, yes I would block someone for violating 3RR on Virgin Killer. There is no reason to IAR that many times, especially with a clear consensus to keep the image and let the Foundation deal with everything.

In short, we have done all that we should have done. It is really a Foundation issue, as it goes beyond a simple content issue and more to the point of the influence of government on Misplaced Pages.

Thank you. Protonk (talk) 04:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Optional questions from Tennis expert

13. In your administrative coaching thread, you were asked, "If you could change any one thing about Misplaced Pages without any opposition, what would it be?" One of your responses was, "That whole thing with date unlinking and AWB goes away and is resolved in my favor." What did you mean by that and, more particularly, by "in my favor"?

14. Concerning AWB, what is your opinion about the AWB rules of use, one of which specifically says, "Don't do anything controversial with it" and how do your date delinking activities with AWB satisfy that rule? Is it permissible to use AWB to edit several articles per minute as you did on December 7? One of the AWB rules of use says, "Don't edit too fast; consider opening a bot account if you are regularly making more than a few edits a minute."

15. Is it possible for an RFC that has not yet closed to "show strong consensus" about a particular issue? If you answer is "yes", then what is the purpose of an RFC having a specified ending date?

General comments

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

• Links for NuclearWarfare:
• NuclearWarfare (talk · message · contribs · global contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · user creation · block user · block log · count · total · logs · summary · email | lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · spi · socks | rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp | current rights · rights log (local) · rights log (global/meta) | rights · renames · blocks · protects · deletions · rollback · admin · logs | UHx · AfD · UtHx · UtE)
• People may want to see User:NuclearWarfare/Admin Coaching. In any case, I'm posting it for transparency, as it may be gone if I decide to redesign my userpage. - NuclearWarfare _{My work} 05:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

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

Discussion

• You have my full support when this goes live. –Juliancolton 20:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
• Is date-delinking really controversial enough to restrain NW from adminship? DARTH PANDA 15:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. SuperDuperUberEpic"ThisUserIsNotAlreadyAnAdmin!?"StrongSupport ayematthew ✡ 00:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
2. Support per previous comment. –Juliancolton 00:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
3. Support - good janitor. // roux   00:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
4. Support Looks great. LittleMountain5 00:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
5. Support. How the hell were you not already an admin? Ironholds (talk) 00:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
6. Support See him around often, trust his judgment. faithless () 01:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
7. Strong Support You deserve it! I was shocked that you were not an admin in the first place. Good Luck! K50 DUDE_{LOOK AT ME!}
8. Strong Support. I was going to vote "Moral Oppose" because he's too perfect, but was convinced not to do so. Anyways, on to my reasoning. In my year (or two) of knowing this user, he has shown both maturity and a clear head, two absolutely key requirements for an admin. As my confident, he has seen most of my bad sides, and has surprising retained his good judgment even when faced with an extremely stressed out and moderately insane friend. I have never seen NW angry. While I've seen him moderately annoyed, he somehow manages to pass off his annoyance with jokes and a smile, an ability I would very much like to gain from him. As for his actual contributions, he does, or has done, a bit of everything. I've seen him helpdesk'ing, in discussions, doing content creation, and battling vandals. This isn't even a net positive case, I'm sure that NW will be a superb admin. Note: I am a good friend of this user. (I just editconflicted twice >_<) DARTH PANDA 01:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

   They say the people you know best are your enemies, and this seems to be strangely true here. I've sat here and read every single oppose and every single comment (which I've never done before on an RfA), and the points brought up by the opposes have drastically changed my views on NuclearWarfare. I'd have to say that he is far from perfect, and in fact, seems quite flawed. However, the issues brought up by the opposes have not yet convinced me that he is unfit for adminship; they have merely shown me that he is imperfect, as all humans must be. DARTH PANDA 04:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

9. Strong as a Bodybuilder Support FUCK yes. Sam 01:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

   Is that a reference to something? - NuclearWarfare _{My work} 01:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

   A support as strong as a bodybuilder! Sam 01:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

   Hah. –Juliancolton 02:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

10. Support. Fully qualified candidate. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
11. Support. Hell, yeah. J.delanoy_adds 01:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
12. Support As per Newyorkbrad and Darth Panda.Outstanding candidate.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
13. Support - yes, please. Additional comment: Having read the oppose from Ecoleetage and having looked through the diffs he provides, I am entirely convinced to maintain my support. NuclearWarfare shows a level head and a very reasonable attitude. - Richard Cavell (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
14. Daniel (talk) 02:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
15. —macy 02:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
16. I've seen his name pop up many times, and I'm pretty sure he'll be a fantastic administrator. Very dedicated and pleasant to have around. Master&Expert (Talk) 03:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
17. While I disagree that NPWatcher can't cause damage (Newcomer articles come to mind) you did a good job of dodging the bullet (Q11), and I hope you become an admin. RockManQ 04:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

    Perhaps it is just my experience, but I have found that NPW is slower than both Huggle and just using Firefox and a few scripts to browse through Special:NewPages. - NuclearWarfare _{My work} 04:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

    Who said NPWatcher was useful? I was merely stating that I think some damage can be caused by it. For the record, I like Huggle better though :) RockManQ 04:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

18. Support I am, actually, floored that NukeWar (rawr) isn't already an admin. I came here expecting to make some absurd oh wow I thought you were... sort of support, but decided not to. The points made by the opposes and the neutral are largely compelling to me. In order of concern I would consider Skomorokh's the most troubling, then Icewedge, then Eco's comments. I won't go so far as to attach as many adverbs and adjectives as Skomorokh does to that edit, but it is troubling. Icewedge makes the good (though vague) point that the candidate doesn't resist the 'bandwagon' enough. If substantiated, that is a troubling accusation. I'm left with some dim memory (and feeling from the questions) that this is true about the candidate but without some more substantial evidence (e.g. diffs of the candidate reversing support as the mood changes and so forth), I can't oppose based on that. Eco brought the most concerns to the table but they are least troubling to me. WP:DTTR, taken in isolation, is not a compelling reason for me to feel that a candidate is not qualified. It is my opinion that NW is right: lvl 1 templates serve as an easy means to inform people of something and are not just for new users and vandals. But even setting that opinion aside I can't see how it represents poor judgment. I object strongly to the characterization of his AfD closures as 'inept' (a word that Fram never uses). The word would be "hasty" and I see no evidence that NW continued to close AfDs early following that discussion. Eco's comment about editing other user's posts and then getting touchy about it gets pretty close to the mark. It does appear that NW bolded that vote (uncool) and then invoked IAR when asked about it (puzzling). Eco's summary is also worth listening to. The specific points are not compelling but his 'feel' on NW is valuable. If this RfA is successful I encourage NW to take that feedback 'onboard' as it were. But I have confidence in this candidate. Protonk (talk) 04:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

    Number of sentences devoted to citing the specific and memorable Wiki-related contributions of NW: 0. Number of sentences devoted to challenging the input of Icewedge, Skomorokh and me: 15. "I would like to say thank you on behalf of the group and ourselves and I hope we've passed the audition!" :) Ecoleetage (talk) 05:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

    This isn't hard for me. I'm inclined to support candidates by default. I'm especially inclined to support candidates with experience and some clue. When some challenge is made as to why I shouldn't support them, I try to take that challenge seriously and present an argument why I feel the candidate deserves my support notwithstanding the credible claims of the opposition. Consequently, it feels ineffective for me to address specific claims by raising unrelated good points (and among 13000 edits I am liable to find many laudable actions). Rather I should directly and seriously address concerns raised. I'm sorry if you feel that was inappropriate or that I should have proportioned my sentences differently. Protonk (talk) 05:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

19. Support I've seen him around, and after reviewing the stats on his activity, I am immensely impressed by the energy and dedication NuclearWarfare has put into Misplaced Pages. Some of the opposing opinions raise some concerns about his style, but they don't come close to suggesting that he'd abuse admin tools. After all, the question is about whether he'd use administrative tools properly, and all the available evidence suggests he cares deeply about the project, has a clear sense of the role he wishes to play as an admin, and will be a benefit to Misplaced Pages as an admin. Ray (talk) 07:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
20. Support I have had good experiences with this editor and trust him. FlyingToaster 08:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
21. Support I always thought NWF a CLUEful editor (not only because he copied my (old) UBX layout ;-) who should be an admin. I do understand the concerns by the opposing users and I trust their judgment usually (especially template-warning a seasoned editor like Ecoleetage is very stupid) but I am confident that NWF is mature enough to admit his mistakes and to learn from them. SoWhy 10:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
22. Support Good editor. —αἰτίας •discussion• 11:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
23. The opposes are either unconvincing or else actual reasons to support. This was a good, common sense edit. THE GROOVE 13:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
24. Support Every time I've run across NW's edits, they've been helpful and/or informative. Would be a net plus. TN‑X-Man 14:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
25. Strong Support, Is very friendly and civil. A very good and trustworthy editor. He would make a very good administrator here on Misplaced Pages. V D on a public PC (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
26. Strong Support: Articulate, friendly, civil and has the common sense we need in admins. No doubt in my mind whatsoever that this individual would be an strong asset to the community as an admin. Toddst1 (talk) 15:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)