m →Oppose: fx |
→Oppose: more |
||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
=====Oppose===== |
=====Oppose===== |
||
#'''Oppose''' Attitude to copyright unbecoming an administrator expressed at [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files from Mathew Campbell and Adam Colvin]]. Suggests uploading third-party created images with inadequate evidence of permission to enwikipedia [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3ADeletion_requests%2FFiles_from_Mathew_Campbell_and_Adam_Colvin&action=historysubmit&diff=53332310&oldid=53330519] (can't use them here either, unless justified under the [[WP:NFCC|NFCC]], and certainly not with a claim of free content.) [[User:Chester Markel|Chester Markel]] ([[User talk:Chester Markel|talk]]) 06:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC) |
#'''Oppose''' Attitude to copyright unbecoming an administrator expressed at [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files from Mathew Campbell and Adam Colvin]]. Suggests uploading third-party created images with inadequate evidence of permission to enwikipedia [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3ADeletion_requests%2FFiles_from_Mathew_Campbell_and_Adam_Colvin&action=historysubmit&diff=53332310&oldid=53330519] (can't use them here either, unless justified under the [[WP:NFCC|NFCC]], and certainly not with a claim of free content.) [[User:Chester Markel|Chester Markel]] ([[User talk:Chester Markel|talk]]) 06:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
#'''Strong Oppose'''. ''Severe'' concerns with temperament, maturity, and civility. Although I originally came here to support, I thought I'd have a brief look at some of the candidate's edits in the last few days just to be safe. The diffs I came across are extremely troubling (note the edit summaries in particular): [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=427479908#Proposal], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)&diff=prev&oldid=427329677], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=prev&oldid=427310602], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Floydian/Electrical_pollution&diff=prev&oldid=426902945], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:MediaWiki_messages&diff=prev&oldid=426895796], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Perfect_game&diff=prev&oldid=426223245], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oakshade&diff=prev&oldid=425786013]. <ins>All</ins> of these edits were made in the <ins>past |
#'''Strong Oppose'''. ''Severe'' concerns with temperament, maturity, and civility. Although I originally came here to support, I thought I'd have a brief look at some of the candidate's edits in the last few days just to be safe. The diffs I came across are extremely troubling (note the edit summaries in particular): [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=427479908#Proposal], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)&diff=prev&oldid=427329677], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&diff=prev&oldid=427310602], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Floydian/Electrical_pollution&diff=prev&oldid=426902945], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:MediaWiki_messages&diff=prev&oldid=426895796], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Perfect_game&diff=prev&oldid=426223245], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oakshade&diff=prev&oldid=425786013], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ontario_Highway_404&diff=prev&oldid=425692056], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oakshade&diff=prev&oldid=425756935], . <ins>All</ins> of these edits were made in the <ins>past two weeks</ins>. The edit summaries Floydian uses are offensive, crude, and uncivil. FWIW, Many users have been blocked for much less. I don't believe the candinate is fit for adminship at this time. -'''[[User:Fastily|<span style='font-family: "Trebuchet MS"; color:#4B0082'><big>F</big><small>ASTILY</small></span>]]''' <sup><small>[[User talk:Fastily|<span style = 'color:#4B0082'>(TALK)</span>]]</small></sup> 07:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
=====Neutral===== |
=====Neutral===== |
Revision as of 07:15, 5 May 2011
Floydian
(talk page) (1/2/1); Scheduled to end 04:30, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Nomination
Floydian (talk · contribs) – Hello. My name is Jess, but I commonly go by the screen name of Floydian. I come to RFA after many many months of self-debate, as I know I have the occasional blip in my history which I feel predispose me to failure; nonetheless, a recent proposal on the village pump has led me to bite the bullet and pursue the tools to increase my efficiency. The primary use of the permission would be for editing protected templates, as I am skilled with troubleshooting templates. Most of my contributions in that realm have been from the sidelines, and that is why I feel having the tools would benefit my efficiency. In addition there are several other tasks which I feel I could perform better with a mop in hand, which I'll go into more below. My editing pattern generally consists of highway articles, though I've dabbled my toes into several other topics, including a medical syndrome, a village and a bridge - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 03:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A: There are three primary things I intend to do if I'm granted this tool belt. The first would be working with templates, including edit-protected requests. I also have been performing dozens of moves generally non-controversial moves (a few had a touch of boldness to them, and were reverted, after which I did not attempt to move them again). Very often I have been unable to perform these as the receiving page has an extra edit to change/add/remove a category from the target. My final intention is work with conflict resolution, where I am well experienced in acting as a neutral third-party mediator, but am incapable of setting forth a resolution as a non-admin.
- I have absolutely no intention of using these tools to block users (with the exception of clear, obvious and active vandals that crop up on my watchlist); my interest is content creation.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: My greatest contributions thus far have been in content creation, where I have made significant contributions to several good articles and a featured article. I've also helped numerous times in solving of identifying complicated issues in complicated templates. I feel the former are some of my best contributions because my experience allows me to create well-sourced and informative articles right out of the gate.
- 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 run into numerous conflicts over the years, as sometimes I will jump into discussions demanding that they be backed by convention, guideline and policy, and not the assertion of "its consensus". I will come out straight and say that one of my worst conflicts was in February involving an attempt to rearrange the presentation of content, which would have involved the merging of several short but independent and directly related articles into a list. While that issue, as well as many minor issues, involve heated discussion (where I may express my frustration at fruitless situations, but explicitly never address it towards any editors), I have never once attempted to contravene discussion, edit war (despite an odd and unfounded accusation or two over the years), or go above the respectable process for discussing controversial changes (WP:BRD).
- In the future I understand that I will need to hold my breath more often and express my frustrations in better ways. However, I hope the community trusts me enough to understand that despite my occasional impatience or temper, I would never make use of these tools or the status to give me and sort of advantage or weight in any discussion in which I am involved.
- Additional questions from 43?9enter
- 4. If you were engaged in a long content dispute with another editor, and they started cursing suddenly, what would you do?
- A:
- 5. Can vandals be completely rehabilitated? Or is it "Once blocked, always watched"?
- A:
- Additional question from Mtking
- 6. When judging the notability of a subject, what is your view of the primacy of the WP:GNG over other WP:SNG?
- A:
General comments
- Links for Floydian: Floydian (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for Floydian can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
Discussion
Support
- Support He seems to be sensible, mature and experienced. Also good at content creation, helping to get articles and lists to a good standard. He should have no problems with the mop. Minima© (talk) 06:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose Attitude to copyright unbecoming an administrator expressed at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files from Mathew Campbell and Adam Colvin. Suggests uploading third-party created images with inadequate evidence of permission to enwikipedia [1] (can't use them here either, unless justified under the NFCC, and certainly not with a claim of free content.) Chester Markel (talk) 06:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose. Severe concerns with temperament, maturity, and civility. Although I originally came here to support, I thought I'd have a brief look at some of the candidate's edits in the last few days just to be safe. The diffs I came across are extremely troubling (note the edit summaries in particular): [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], . All of these edits were made in the past two weeks. The edit summaries Floydian uses are offensive, crude, and uncivil. FWIW, Many users have been blocked for much less. I don't believe the candinate is fit for adminship at this time. -FASTILY (TALK) 07:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Neutral
- Based on this discussion, I have an issue with your judgement of consensus and apparent inability to keep an NPOV view on certain issues, but barring further investigation into your other contributions I will not oppose at this time. StrPby (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)