Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:29, 9 May 2008

Zginder

Voice your opinion (talk page) (1/7/5); Scheduled to end 14:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Zginder (talk · contribs) - I have had an account since 2006-04-16T01:34:14, made my first logged in edit 2006-04-16T01:44:36, and have been a rollbacker since 2008-01-11T16:57:45. I have made 5,448 contributions (included deleted). I have never been blocked and never edit warred. If I think I may have been slightly too abrasive I always apologize on their user talk page. I am requesting adminship, because I am starting to request admins to do things a lot more than I used to. I am most active in Wikiprojects Time and Homeschooling. The pages I have edited the most are 12-hour clock (my work there convinced me in the virtue of ISO 8601 and the standardized test articles ACT (examination), SAT, and SAT Subject Tests. Zginder 2008-05-09T02:02Z (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Zginder 2008-05-09T14:18Z (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: I already have Requests for page protection, In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates, Cut and paste move repair holding pen, and Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism on my watch list. I will also handle speedy delete, prod deletes, and image relative speedy deletion. Zginder 2008-05-09T14:11Z (UTC)

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

A: Why best contributions are to the 12-hour clock article, and at featured sounds. I have the most personal connection with 12-hour clock, it is where i first really got in to editing. Zginder 2008-05-09T14:16Z (UTC)

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 have never been under great stress in a conflict with editing. I have sometimes given up instead of edit-waring and congratulate others when they do the same. Zginder 2008-05-09T14:16Z (UTC)

Questions from ArcAngel

4. Do you see yourself remaining objective/neutral on the 12-hour clock article when vandalism occurs, or would you defer judgment to another administrator?

A. I actuary come to that article to make it neutral. I have made it much more neutral as I edited it. I used to support its use, but not anymore, and can, therefore, see both sides of the issue. Zginder 2008-05-09T14:48Z (UTC)

5. What is the difference between a ban and a block?

A.

6. What is your thoughts on CAT:AOR and will you add yourself to it? Why or why not?

A.

7. When should cool down blocks be used and why?

A.

Optional questions from TravisTX

8. When patrolling speedy deletion nominations, I find that many articles are tagged incorrectly for speedy deletion. Below are copies of some actual articles. Has each article been tagged correctly? If not, please explain how you would handle it. (The names and titles may have been changed for BLP concerns.)

a. Sam Jones

A:

b. Rob smith

A:

c. Aliens on earth

A:

General comments

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

• Links for Zginder: Zginder (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/Zginder before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support I looked through the deleted contributions as well as Zginder's talk page and contributions and this looks like a reasonable editor who has progressed to the point where they can clearly use the mop. Hiberniantears (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak Oppose for now, I may change after I continue to look through the candidate's contribs. Just wanted to get down what I had so far. Candidate wants to work with CSD, and has tagged a fair number of articles for deletion, but only a few in the last couple of weeks. Thise included a couple that would a little disconcerting: this and this definitely shouldn't have been tagged as nonsense, especially the first one. Also, candidate wants to work at AIV, but has only 3 reports there. I'm going to keep looking through his contribs to try to find evidence that convinces me that he'd be fine with the blocking tools. Useight (talk) 15:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   I also want to add that of his last 1000 edits, 205 were via AWB, 161 were via Twinkle, and 34 were through Friendly, which happens to add up to exactly 400, so his edit count might be a little bloated. I went through my own contribs and realized that 275 of my last 1000 were via Huggle, so I can't really knock him too much for using scripts, but I didn't start using Huggle until I had made over 10,000 manual edits and had become an admin. Now I'm rambling, what I'm trying to say is it's not a really big deal, but it's not great. See my admin criteria for more info. Useight (talk) 15:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

2. Weak Oppose Lots to like here, but seems to me an unpolished diamond in this candidate at the moment. This was not spam. and - wow ! 1 whole minute before slapping a speedy tag? This mystifies me - why do you need to point out that a comment is not an attack? In addition I think you could have made a clearer job of communication in your answers to the questions above. It's not one big problem, it's a host of little things that make me concerned. Sorry, and good luck. Pedro :  Chat  15:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
3. Oppose - Good edit count, but opposed as per Pedro. asenine 16:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose I have strong issues with an admin-candidate who would support admins being able to delete biographies on request. MBisanz 16:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   How is this even relevant to becoming an administrator? It's a statement of what he prefers policy to be and has nothing to do with how he would deal with established policy or with the tools. --Philosopher  17:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   I second Philosopher on this. I think that the WP:OPTOUT idea is horrendous. However, I think that a person's stance on policy should be a separate issue from their qualifications to be an administrator. Should the nominee become an admin, it doesn't suddenly give him any more power in consensus than he had as an editor. Again, it comes back to the idea that if we only promote people to sysop status who have the exact same opinions and beliefs as we have, that would be far more dangerous than giving the mop to people who hold minority opinions. Trusilver 17:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

5. Oppose - Not bad, but there are a some things that make me feel extremely uncomfortable, Pedro's diffs for example. Wisdom89 _{(T / )} 16:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   And just as an addendum, yes edit count doesn't matter, but, experience does. In the answer to question1, the user mentions WP:RFPP and WP:AIV being watched list, which I will interpret as areas of interest and areas that he/she plans to work if granted the bit. The former has about 8 edits, while the latter has about 4. Wisdom89 _{(T / )} 16:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

6. Oppose - Sorry, you know when you get that odd feeling that you just can't trust someone despite there being little evidence to support those feelings? This is one of those situations for me. Also, Pedro's diffs are a little worrying. Good luck in the future and happy editing. Regards, CycloneNimrod 16:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
7. Oppose. The candidate has potential but isn't quite ready. Majoreditor (talk) 16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
8. Oppose per MBisanz. --CapitalR (talk) 17:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
9. Oppose — I view self-noms as prima facie evidence of power hunger. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 17:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Moral support Don't get discouraged, and best of luck in the future. xenocidic (talk) 17:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Neutral for now, as candidate didn't fully read the self-nom instructions. xenocidic (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   What did I miss? Zginder 2008-05-09T14:50Z (UTC)

   You didn't delete the acceptance line. Don't worry, I'll likely change this as the RFA progresses. xenocidic (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   Many self noms do that. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 14:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   My concern is that someone who does not fully read and understand a process to nominate oneself for adminship might not fully read and understand a policy before enforcing it. but, as it is a minor issue, neutral. xenocidic (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   I don't see the problem - he is nominating himself...and then accepting his nomination. If anything, it provides clarity for those who may not have noticed it was a self-nom and are therefore wondering if he's accepted. --Philosopher  17:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

   Kindof a moot point now, but I stand by my reasoning. xenocidic (talk) 17:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

2. Neutral. I can't see a huge fault with this users article editing, but little to no involvement in XfD discussions, poor edit summary usage and no real need for the tools indicated, I can't support now. Sorry. (PS: The last one isn't a big issue.) weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 14:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
3. Neutral pending answers to the questions, but I have to agree with WBOSITG. I’d like to see a lot more involvement with the admin-related areas, particularly XfD, and a bit of work at the help desk wouldn’t hurt, either. —Travis 15:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
4. Neutral per Pedro's diffs. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 16:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
5. Neutral per weburiedoursecrets -- --Cameron (t|p|c) 16:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
6. Neutral per WBOSITG with the exception of that last qualifier. I don't feel that need for tools should be a prerequisite to getting the tools. However, A lot of harm can be done by admins who don't really have a solid foundation in admin-related functions. As such, I would be happy to support you a few months down the road after you have a more all-encompassing experience in project space. Good luck. Trusilver 17:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)