Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Izzy007

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of arequest for adminshipthatdid not succeed.Please do not modify it.

Izzy007

[edit]

Final (2/12/6); Ended 20:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawn per thesnowclosure 'guideline'.Rudget.20:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Izzy007(talk·contribs) - I have been an editor on Wikipedia for over a year now and I have over 2,500 edits. Most of my edits have been on music related articles (such as bands, musical instruments, and record labels). I also revert any vandalism I find, I usually check recent changes several times a day. I also patrol new pages. I have created one WikiProject and I have knowledge of many of the templates. Like everyone, I have made a few mistakes which can be viewed on my talk page.Izzy007Talk01:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia 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:Mainly the deletion process. I have had a lot of experience in the patroling of new pages and nominating articles for deletion, I also have experience in AfD.
2.What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A:I think that my best contributions have been to music-related articles. I am knoledgable in the music area and have been able to change a lot of incorrect information and add references to articles.
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:Luckily, I have never been in any conflicts. If I ever get into one, I would handle it by explaining my side of it and then letting the other editor explain their side of it. After this, it is possible that we could come to an agreement.

Optional questions fromUser:Dlohcierekimthat he lifted formUser:Benonwho got them fromTawker,JoshuaZ,Rob Church,NSLE.They are100% optionalbut may help myself or other voters decide. Some of these are not specifically related to your areas of interest. If I have already voted please feel free to ignore these questions though other editors might find them to be of use. You can also remove the questions you don't want to touch if you like.

4.You find out that an editor, who's well-known and liked in the community, has been using sockpuppets abusively. What would you do?
A-I think that that editor should be banned from editing Wikipedia. Even if he is well-known and liked, they have no right to be able to use sockpuppets abusively.
5.An editor asks you to mediate in a dispute that has gone from being a content dispute to an edit war (but not necessarily a revert war), with hostile language in edit summaries (that are not personal attacks). One involved party welcomes the involvement of an admin, but the other seems to ignore you. They have both rejectedWP:RFCas they do not think it would solve anything. Just as you are about to approach the user ignoring you, another admin blocks them both for edit warring and sends the case toWP:RFARas a third party. Would you respect the other admin's decisions, or would you continue to engage in conversation (over email or IRC) and submit a comment/statement to the RFAR? Let's say the ArbCom rejects the case. What would you do then?
A-I would respect the other admin's decisions.
6.If you could change any one thing about Wikipedia what would it be?
A-I don't think there should be any changes to Wikipedia.
7.Under what circumstances would you indefinitely block a user without any prior direction from Arb Com?
A-If the user was ONLY using his editing for vandalism I would block them right away.
8.Suppose you are closing an AfD where it would bekeepif one counted certain votes that you suspect are sockpuppets/meatpuppets and would bedeleteotherwise. The RCU returns inconclusive, what do you do? Is your answer any different if the two possibilities are betweenno consensusanddelete?
A-
9.Do you believe there is a minimum number of people who need to express their opinions in order to reasonably close an AfD? If so, what is that number? What about RfDs and CfDs?
A-I think as many people who want to comment should do it. This way we would know if there are more references for an article that we would have not known about otherwise. This way we would not delete an article that should have been kept.
10.At times, administrators have experienced, or have been close to burnout due to a mixture of stress and conflict inherent in a collaborative web site of this nature. Do you feel able to justify yourself under pressure, and to not permit stress to become overwhelming and cause undesirable or confused behaviour?
A-I do not thik stress should be a part of being an admin. If an admin is to stressed, I think that user should take a break to get away from the stress that they are experiencing.
11.Why do you want to be an administrator?
AI want to be an administrator because I think that I could have a very good affect on Wikipedia. I think I could help out a lot.

General comments

[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive andcivil.If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly reviewSpecial:Contributions/Izzy007before commenting.

  • Initial review concerns--Wannabe Kateno vote as yet. 1) Troubling lack of edit summary usage-- an important aspect of communication. 2) Large drop off in activity since September to almost nihil. 3) I only noticed a handful in AfD discussions. 4) I did not see any talk page notifications of speedy deletion taggings. Will pose some questions.Dlohcierekim02:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A good point, and I don't. But sometimes the bots don't do the job. I would recommend using TWINKLE or one of the other tools. They help.Dlohcierekim03:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
Support
[edit]
  1. Support.Well, moral support, as this appears to be a good editor who needs only to branch out a bit to be successful next time. No reason to expect misuse of tools.Xymmax(talk)15:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support.I think they can be trusted with the tools, and I think that's what really matters here. Look at their edit history and decide for yourselves.Λua∫Wise(Operibus anteire)15:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
[edit]
  1. OpposeYou have participated in only three AfD's since July (looking at your last 1500 edits) despite this being the area you wish to focus in. Your edit summary usage is poor. Your answers are weak and vague. I don't see a great deal of interaction with other editors via talk pages, just a very narrow range of edits in the area of music with which you are no doubt familiar. Try to branch out a bit more, have a look atWP:ANfor ongoing admin discussions, participate in the deletion processes, and come back in three months. --Stephen02:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose- Need some more experience.Soxred93|talkbot03:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose- Sorry, I cannot support you. Very laconic nomination and answers to questions are terse and generic. You're a decent editor, I'll give you that, but I think 4-5 months of high activity in admin related spaces would benefit you. You should be alright the next time around.Wisdom89(T/C)03:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose– First, let me say, that the oppose opinion is not due to the fact I am aHagstromuser! Rather to the point, with only a little under 2,600 edits I feel that a little more experience would take you from a good editor to aGreateditor. The questionsDlohcierekimasked and your responses just demonstrated that. Though you are well intentioned, the experience is just not there yet. Come back in 3-6 months, with the same contribution record, and you will be welcomed with open arms.Shoessss|Chat03:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. OpposeUser should have a better grasp of the edit summary concept. What troubles me is that Q#8a (which I feel is a VERY important situation for any admin) was left unanswered - perhaps user is composing the answer to be posted later? Also answers to questions were very short as if they weren't very thought out.ArcAngel(talk)05:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose,brusque answers to questions, spotty edit summary usage, and lack of actual admin-related tasks so far. Happy to support you a bit further down the track once you have more experience.Lankiveil(speak to me)10:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  7. Opposeper the above reasons. --Siva1979Talk to me12:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Opposelack ofedit summariesand lack of demonstrated guideline knowledge (in AFDs). Build up a track record of participating in admin type work and come on back. See Balloonman's guide tohow to pass an RFASorry and CheersGtstrickyTalkorC16:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose- I think that a potential admin should have more edits, and certainly more average edits per day. Try again soon - also, your claim of AfD activity seems to be a little exaggurated?Porcupine(prickle me!·contribs·status)17:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Weak Oppose.Three AfD edits in the past 1500 per what Stephen said, and this is what you want to focus in. A bit more activity here and I'll support in few months.WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDENaka john lennon19:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. I feel like an idiot doing this, but I mustoppose.Isn't as active as much, lack of experience, and the answers to questions are not good enough. Get more experience and I may support you in a few months.NHRHS2010NHRHS201020:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Oppase:Vague answers, in fact one question went completely unanswered. Whilst you probably have good intentions, your edit summary usage and vague answers mean I cannot support you at this time. Sorry,George D. Watson(Dendodge).TalkHelp20:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
[edit]
  1. Quick review. Overall, I liked what I saw. I would recommend seeking an editor review before submitting your next RfA.User:Izzy007#Articles I've Createdshows you have created about 120 stubs. I estimate that this translates to about 30,000 bytes. This meets my (brand new) minimum article building requirement. The absolute edit count is right on the cusp for me, so I added the Benon questions. I like some of the answers. I would recommend reviewing thedispute resolutionprocess and getting deeper into all of the policies. Laconic works for me, but not for others. I would recommend resuming your prior activity level. You have had a wiki-break. It would be good to address that here. I would like to see greater communication. Please set your preferences to require an edit summary before saving a page. I would like to see more experience inWP:AFD,in recent patrolling, and inWP:CSDtagging. This includes notifying other users about deletion taggings. I saw CorenBot notices, but you fixed those. Overall, you were doing good work, but you need to get back in the swing of things. Consensus changes over time, and you've been away a while. You created many stubs. I would like to see greater expansion of these articles and/or creation of more substantial article ins the future.Dlohcierekim03:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral- Per Dlohcierekim. Recommendadmin coaching.Best of luck,Tiptoetytalk04:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. NeutralPer the above.Midorihana~iidesune?06:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. NeutralWhilst I don't think your answers particularly display it, I think you have the best of intentions in relation to your involvement at the time. I can't support you at the moment, but think that if you were to take a bit of time, a bit of admin coaching, and come back in a few months, you'd be in a position that I would be able to support then.The public face ofGBT/C14:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Neutralper Dlohcierekim. I think you will be great in the future.EJF(talk)17:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. NeutralPromising user... come back in a few months.Blueboy9620:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.Please do not modify it.Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of eitherthis nominationor the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Izzy007&oldid=1142575466"