Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:45, 6 July 2008

Red Phoenix

Voice your opinion (talk page) (0/2/0); Scheduled to end 01:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) - This fine American gentleman is indeed a lasting asset to Misplaced Pages. Firstly, I must say that he is what Misplaced Pages needs more of -- an admin with a firm grasp of article editing. He has taken countless articles to GA and FA status, perhaps the most since User:Giano. This user is always futhermore willing to lend his learned ear or a helping hand to young users. His foreign language skills also would help in his duties, as he could communicate with editors in need of assistance, or vandals in need of admonition, in both Spanish and English. (I dont know about you, but I am concerned with the lack of foreign-language skills in the current corpus of admins). This gentleman also has been trusted with authority before...as you see he is a "rollbacker" already. Trust this man, he is a strong young strapping buck and just what[REDACTED] needs going into the next decade of growth! I give you, ladies and gentlemen, User:Red Phoenix!!!! JeanLatore (talk) 01:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept. Thanks for the nomination. Red Phoenix 01:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Candidate opening statement

It was a rather unexpected pleasure to be nominated for RFA by User:JeanLatore, but I'm glad he wanted to nominate me nonetheless. He's exaggerating a little bit on the GA-FA statement, as I've only taken two GAs and one FL to their respective status, but still I believe I've done some significant work. To all of the Wikipedians who wish to comment on this RFA, I would like you to know when you search my edit history that I used to be known as User:Redphoenix526, but I had it changed by a usurpation request. I also want to say thank you to User:JeanLatore for the nomination and I want to thank everyone who comments on this RFA, even those who oppose, in advance for their comments. Red Phoenix 01:50, 6 July 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 work do you intend to take part in?

A: I think I would like to work in a little bit of everything eventually, but I'd like to start at WP:XFD managing deletions. I've done quite a bit of discussion at WP:AFD and I would like to help with the backlog there. Eventually, after I have learned how to use all of the admin functions and the appropriate times to use them, I want to work in all areas of admin work and help out all across Misplaced Pages, but for now, I have plans to work at WP:XFD.

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

A: My best contributions, in my opinion, are comprised of three articles and a WikiProject. The first is the article that actually brought me to Misplaced Pages, Crush 40. Because of my help at the AFD for the article and my further work, the article came from the edge of deletion to GA status. The second one is Sega Mega Drive, which, after helping to push and work with other users, also made it to GA status. I often think of it as my best work that I've done as part of a team. The third article is a list, List of Sega 32X games, which is my first featured content. Also, I take pride in WikiProject Sega, which I have helped to develop.

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 can't say I've been in any actual "edit wars", which I consider myself lucky for. I've had some debates with User:TTN (though that was a while ago, nothing recent) and a few other light disputes, but nothing major. In these cases, I kept a clear head, did not edit war with anybody, and made my points on the respective talk page and talked with the users making the edits I disagreed with. I will deal with it in the same way in the future.

Optional question from User:Darkspots

4. What, in your view, is the role of administrators?

A.

General comments

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

• Links for Red Phoenix: Red Phoenix (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/Red Phoenix before commenting.

Discussion

• I'm, um, not sure what to make of this, since the nomination is blatantly untrue. Nousernamesleft (talk) 02:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  I suppose we ought judge the candidate on the candidate and not the nominator. –xenocidic (talk) 02:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  True - I was just going to add that I had missed the candidate statement and also how odd the whole thing was. By the way, Giano hasn't written the most current FAs - far from it. Hurricanehink has the most current, I think, and Mike Christie, Worldtraveller, and Cla68 are also somewhere near the top of the list. Nousernamesleft (talk) 02:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• Red Phoenix, could you expand a bit on your intentions for the tools? It would be nice if you could give us some specific activities for us to judge you on. --cremepuff222 (talk) 02:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
• I do have to agree with Cremepuff. Question 1 does not explain what you want to do with the tools. America69 (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

GIve me a few minutes, I guess I'll clarify a little bit. Red Phoenix 02:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. :-) Please take your time. --cremepuff222 (talk) 02:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• Red Phoenix, I suggest you remove the original nomination and either put up a self nom, or get someone else to nominate (I'd be happy to as I've worked with you around WP:VG). (Or withdraw, obviously.) —Giggy 02:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
• I concur with Giggy. America69 (talk) 02:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  I've got to leave shortly, Giggy, so can you do it for me? Thank you so much. Now that I see all the comments up, it's become rather apparent what the case is. I thought this was a little fishy to start, but I've been considering an RFA lately and I thought, "might as well give it a try", so I let JL do it. I don't know if that's supposed to be a mistake or not, but hey, I guess we live and learn. Red Phoenix 02:42, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. I support this user, though I oppose the blatant mistruths in the nomination and condem Jean for the harm (s)he's doing to the candidate. I suggest withdrawl/wiping that nom and starting fresh. —Giggy 02:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
2. Support - I'd like to echo what giggy has said above. Jean, your unique brand of humour is probably best left out of the RFA-nomination arena. Oh, and because we need moar admins who (almost exclusively) edit video game articles. Deleted contribs look spot-on as well. –xenocidic (talk) 02:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose I would like to tell you about JeanLatore nomination. I looked through her talk page and found several issues. This user has asked several users if they want to be nominated for adminship, and all have declined. and . Red Phoenix has even admitted that this nomination was "unexpected".in this link, Red Phoenix says "Pleasure to meet you" suggesting there was no interaction before. With the nominator randolely going around and asking saying he or she will nominate them for adminship makes me wonder. I am sorry I am opposing on this condition, but I honestly can't support in this position. Sorry. I also have noticed a lack of mainspace contributions, and at the beginning of your joining us at Misplaced Pages, a lack of edit summary. Also the noms account of this user has been distorted, as User:Nousernamesleft pointed out above in the disscussion column. America69 (talk) 02:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   As I suggested above, we really ought judge the candidate on their merits. As to JL nominating people they don't know... while they might not be the ideal person to have as a nominator, there's nothing wrong in theory with the practice of seeking out potential candidates for RFA. (preceding was written before your addition, ec's x2) As far as lack of edit summaries in fledgling edits... didn't we all? –xenocidic (talk) 02:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   Agree with Xenocidic. Two GAs (I don't really count lists as article writing) is actually above mediocrity, I would think, though I personally couldn't support someone with only two. The lack of edit summaries some four months ago is a bit of a silly reason to oppose. Nousernamesleft (talk) 02:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   Xenocidic and Nousernamesleft, both of you do have a point, but I feel something is not right with this whole RFA discussion. I honestly can't support. America69 (talk) 02:26, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   I can give another reason. I really feel like question 1 is not great. The opening sentence to Q1 does not make me feel right. America69 (talk) 02:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   Fair enough. As long as you are opposing the candidate and not the nominator. –xenocidic (talk) 02:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

   If the dude nomming doesn't feel the need to really review the candidate in depth, that doesn't mean we shouldn't.--Koji†Dude 02:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

2. Per not having sufficient judgement to refuse this nomination. Friday (talk) 02:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutral