Wayne Slam (talk | contribs) →Support: fix |
→Support: rationale |
||
Line 181: | Line 181: | ||
#'''Support''' - not worried. '''''<span style="font-family:Garamond;font-size:100%;">[[Special:Contributions/Pepper|<span style="color:black">:</span>]][[User:Pepper|<span style="color:black">pep</span>]][[User talk:Pepper|<span style="color:black">per</span>]]</span>''''' 00:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' - not worried. '''''<span style="font-family:Garamond;font-size:100%;">[[Special:Contributions/Pepper|<span style="color:black">:</span>]][[User:Pepper|<span style="color:black">pep</span>]][[User talk:Pepper|<span style="color:black">per</span>]]</span>''''' 00:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''': He'll be a good administrator. <b>[[User:Wayne Olajuwon|<span style="font-family:Times New Roman;color: blue">Wayne Olajuwon</span>]] <small>[[User talk:Wayne Olajuwon|<span style="vertical-align:super;">chat</span>]]</small></b> 00:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC) |
#'''Support''': He'll be a good administrator. <b>[[User:Wayne Olajuwon|<span style="font-family:Times New Roman;color: blue">Wayne Olajuwon</span>]] <small>[[User talk:Wayne Olajuwon|<span style="vertical-align:super;">chat</span>]]</small></b> 00:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC) |
||
#Strong candidate. [[User:Townlake|Townlake]] ([[User talk:Townlake|talk]]) 00:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
=====Oppose===== |
=====Oppose===== |
Revision as of 00:58, 12 October 2010
Vejvančický
(talk page) (59/1/3); Scheduled to end 19:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Nomination
Vejvančický (talk · contribs) – I'm extremely pleased to be able to nominate Vejvančický (talk · contribs) for the role of administrator. Vejvančický is in my opinion perfectly placed to perform well in the position, with over 16,000 edits and around two and a half years' experience in a wide range of areas. I first came across Vejvančický in his capacity as a new page patroller, and was impressed by the competence and helpfulness he invariably shows to new users. Further investigation revealed a clean block log and an impressive level of content creation. Vejvančický also has a large amount of policy experience, with a strong record at speedy deletion and experience at AfD. As both areas are frequently backlogged at present, this experience will be invaluable should this nomination succeed.
When I first approached Vejvančický about the possibility of an RfA nomination, he was initially reluctant as he did not believe his English was good enough. This may well have been true back in 2008; however, his user talk page and their archives show a strong level of improvement over the past two years, and I firmly believe that this is no longer a cause for concern. I hope you will support this nomination. Alzarian16 (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:I accept. Thank you, Alzarian. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 19:08, 9 October 2010 (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: I believe that I can help with reviewing and deleting of the articles nominated for speedy deletion. I'm a long term participant at NPP, vast majority of my cca 2.400 deleted edits are CSD nominations. At the new pages I focus not only on speedy nominations, I'm trying to assist new users, help with referencing, formatting etc. My editing there is non-problematic, as far as I know. Of course, I made some mistakes in the past, but from my experience it is impossible not to make a mistake when you edit the endless stream of new pages, all possible topics and articles of varied quality. I'm trying to do my best and I'm always willing to fix any problems that I cause. The CSD is not my only deletion related area, I've an experience with another levels, such as PROD, BLPprod and AfD. I'm not a deletionist or inclusionist, I follow the notability guidelines and my common sense.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: I've written a lot of articles (I don't know how many, but surely more than one hundred, incuding several re-creations of mistakenly deleted articles). I've spent a long time at Leoš Janáček, which is now - I believe - a decent article. I think that my article Moravian traditional music is also a good contribution. From the late 2008 my articles regularly appear at DYK (the sole purpose of my nominations is improving my clumsy English grammar in the articles). Today I created an article which could reveal something about me :) I don't maintain any list of my contributions, but you can find the articles either in my talk page archives or with the help of X's tool. I have no GAs or FAs, as contributing in these venues requires excellent English, and unfortunately my English isn't perfect. Additionally I'm a participant at various WikiProjects, such as WP:COMPOSERS, WP:CZECH, WP:CLASSICAL and WP:SLOVAKIA, where I'm trying to help with the maintenance.
- 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 edit Wikipedia to forget the stress of real life :) I'm not aware of any major conflict, though it is difficult to avoid disagreement at venues such as AfD. Most recently I was involved in a complicated AfD and I'm still inolved in a subsequent DRV. But I wouldn't call it a "conflict". If I'm unsure, I'm asking, I can't help myself. I enjoy working here and I value hard and honest work of all editors, even if I disagree ... Please, ask for more if you feel my answers are insufficient. Thank you.
- 4. Why do you want to be an admin?
- A: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiley4541 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Addition Question from tofutwitch11
- 4. What authority (if any) does being an administrator give you? What does being an administrator mean to you?
- A: Authority? This is not a good way to acquire more authority. The adminship requires big responsibility and honesty.
- Addition Question from Seddon
- 5. Could you privide either a list or prehaps more suitable a link to a list of you DYK'S?
- A: Okay, I don't maintain a list of my DYK's and I can't find any automatic tool suitable for searching this. I went through my talk page archives and I listed my contributions in the box below, please check. Btw, I would like to say thanks to my great collaborators and excellent content contributors, who help me regularly with my articles. They know who they are, though they probably don't watch this forum :)
- Optional Question from hobit
- 6. Consider the following AfD as it stands at this time [1]. How would you close it and why?
- A: I would close this AfD as keep or no consenus. The nomination questioned notability of the subject, however, a lot of substantial sources in multiple languages were introduced during the discussion. Some of the sources were published by notable media. If a Youtube video meets the notability guidelines, I can see no reason for deletion. There's quite volumnious Category:YouTube videos and Category:Internet memes, all that because this kind of information could be important for our readers (even if not for me). As for the advert issue, the sources describe an unusual and interactive format of advertising, not a product. Any blatant advertising in our article should be easily fixable. Most of 'delete' arguments is based on the lack of notability, and this problem has been resolved during the discussion.
- Additional optional question from S h i v a (Visnu)
- 7. Requesting a "teachable moment": About this AfD, please explain why the present sources, which others say have non-neutral backgrounds, are appropriate to use for the article on a book that is perhaps literally on the edge of notability? How would you argue on the point that maybe their coverage of this book just to promote its sale?
- A: There's clearly a bias in the sources presented, and notability is really thin, but I prefer to wait a little more time to find out whether the subject provoked a discussion in foreign language sources. Any verifiable and reliable information supported by sources is valuable for this project, especially in this area. It doesn't matter where my sympathy lies. I'm still questioning myself, and perhaps I'm totally mistaken about this. I would like to see a more balanced article on the book. If the article will be nominated for deletion again, I'll probably abstain from any further comments.
- Additional optional questions from Panyd
- 8a. - You mentioned as your answer to question number one that you wish to do deletions. What other administrative areas would you be willing to work on and what experience do you have in these fields?
- A: I've a little experience with vandal fighting and DYK is another area where I could help. I admit, I have to learn a lot before any major intervention.
- 8b.Are there any administrative areas you are not willing to work on? If so, why?
- A: I'm willing to help in any area if needed and if I feel my action is competent and helpful.
- Additional optional questions from DGG
- 9. - When you do speedy deletion work as an administrator, are you planning to delete immediately those articles that you would now be tagging, or are going to instead delete articles that others nominate? DGG ( talk ) 04:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- A: I've noticed that some administrators delete articles immediately, sometimes during my checking. I'd prefer double-checking, so (with an exception of blatant personal attacks) I'll delete articles nominated by others.
- Optional question from Keepscases
- 10. You rate your own English as "intermediate". I would normally oppose an administrator candidate with only intermediate English skill, but I suspect your English is better than that. Is there anything you could do, or plan on doing, that would make you feel comfortable rating yourself at at least an advanced level?
- A: I should probably change it to en-3 ... some people (with a better judgement in this field) told me recently that my English is better.
- Ok, done.
- A: I should probably change it to en-3 ... some people (with a better judgement in this field) told me recently that my English is better.
General comments
- Links for Vejvančický: Vejvančický (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for Vejvančický can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.
Discussion
- Edit stats posted on the talk page. Airplaneman ✈ 19:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Support
- Support - CSD tagging looks good, don't see any issues. Good luck =) Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support I see no issues. --Inka888Come yell at me! 19:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. All looks good to me - lots of great work done, good friendly communicator, and English is just fine. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Good impression. Content creation is excellent, and Vejvančický seems to have the calm and detached attitude needed for the job. And we need more Eastern European admins because of the number and frequency of nationalist wiki-disputes this region seems to continue to generate. Sandstein 20:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support From the looks of it, he has a good head on his shoulders :)--White Shadows Your guess is as good as mine 21:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- I don't see why not. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 21:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support absolutely.Fainites barleyscribs 21:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Scan of CSD tagging and AfD contributions, as well as content creations, brings up all good things. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Beat the nom support - No problems here. ~NerdyScienceDude 23:24, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support I see no reasons not to. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support—Looks good. Airplaneman ✈ 00:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - Good work in CSD and AFD. Derild4921☼ 01:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Extremely qualified candidate. —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 1:03pm • 02:03, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support – Looks good to me. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 02:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Interactions are nothing but a pleasure. sonia♫ 05:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Unable to find a valid reason to oppose. Vodello (talk) 05:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Good Track and see no concerns.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:57, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - Can't find any reasons not to, and Vejvančický's English is excellent.--Kudpung (talk) 07:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - Of course. Graham87 07:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Agree with the project needing more Eastern European admins, so support. MarmadukePercy (talk) 09:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Per above. ―cobaltcigs 10:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - Well-qualified. The candidate was reluctant to pursue adminship until a sufficient mastery of English was accomplished ---> this shows excellent judgement--Hokeman (talk) 10:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support This editor's contributions are excellent. I'm also impressed with the honest, measured, and thoughtful responses to the questions. I see someone focused on adding to and improving the project. --Quartermaster (talk) 11:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Addihockey10 14:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Looks good, great contributions. Tyrol5 [Talk] 15:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Active, long-term editor with a lot of experience, deserves the mop. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 15:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support I believe this user only wants to work on deletions. Because he knows the inclusion and deletion criteria I'll support unless he wants to work on other admin criteria, which require understanding of expansion policies. Minimac (talk) 16:26, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. I don't feel satisfied with his answer to Q7. But I see he is open-minded enough to accept that he is fallible and unafraid to put his opinion out there because the discussion demands that every possible avenue be examined. To be fair, Cracking the Quran Code is really a more complicated case than it looks, an entirely grey area. Everything else about this editor is excellent. All the best! Shiva (Visnu) 16:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Secret account 16:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Why not? -FASTILY (TALK) 17:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oh absolutely. T. Canens (talk) 18:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Very late support by nom returning from a day's break :) Alzarian16 (talk) 21:30, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Yes, Yes... Good luck! Gfoley4 | Wanna chat? 21:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Appears to be a good editor with sound judgement. Meets all my admin criteria. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 22:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support No concerns. -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 00:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Stephen 02:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Quadzilla99 (talk) 04:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with my Mentoree. "Support I see no issues.--Inka888" :)--Talktome(Intelati) 05:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. Fully qualified candidate. A minor point as the candidate attains adminship is that some editors (who do not think to cut-and-paste) may have trouble typing his username. He should probably create the User:Vejvancicky (without the diacritical marks) and its talkpage as redirects to his pages to ease communication. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Good answers, good editor, will use the tools well. First Light (talk) 05:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. Very modest, helpful user with which I have had only positive interactions. Clearly here for the right reasons (just look at the user page!).
decltype
(talk) 08:34, 11 October 2010 (UTC) - Support. Good contributions. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support: Seen him around often at various deletion avenues and always impressed with his attitude and approach. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- No alarms here. GedUK 11:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. I see no reasons not to. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. No reason to think they'll misuse the tools. FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. Excellent contributor. VictorianMutant (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Looks perfectly fine to me. ~~ Hi878 (Come shout at me!) 16:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Hard-working editor, and the "if I'm not sure, I ask" philosophy is a big plus. 28bytes (talk) 16:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Seems like good people, small backlogs are good. ErikHaugen (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Keepscases (talk) 18:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. I think this editor is an asset. Demeanor and approach to editing and adminship is a breath of fresh air. Honestly, your English is fine. I look forward to working with you more in the future. Cindamuse (talk) 19:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support I think Vejvančický can be trusted with the tools. English language skills are fine - better than many natives! :-) bobrayner (talk) 20:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Vejvančický is doing a great job creating articles and with CSD. I don't see any reason why he shouldn't get the tools. --Alpha Quadrant talk 20:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support. This is not a college entrance essay; the answer to the authority question is fine. I also don't see a problem with the answers to Panyd's questions. I've never been an administrator, but as far as I'm concerned, the notion that "they will inevitably get dragged into other things" only applies to those administrators who go looking for trouble. He said he'll help elsewhere if/when he thinks he can be of assistance, which is good enough for me. :) Recognizance (talk) 23:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Seems rather well qualified for the job. Can't think of a single objection. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 23:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - not worried. :pepper 00:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support: He'll be a good administrator. Wayne Olajuwon chat 00:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
- Strong candidate. Townlake (talk) 00:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose. This person is a better candidate for Czech Wikipedia. Also see Tofuwitch11's comments under neutral. Housekeepers(talk) 20:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Unless you can point out, why Vej's language skills are insufficient for this project, I see no reason why his origin or native language should matter at all, so please clarify your !vote. Regards SoWhy 21:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- Noting that this oppose is Housekeepers' eighth-ever edit. (Or rather, it would be, if Housekeepers had actually posted the oppose himself instead of oddly asking someone else to do it for him.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:51, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- So the signature is a forgery by Tofuwitch11! I'd say that's sufficient reason to strike the !vote - if we were allowed to add !votes in other people's names, we could each rack up hundreds of them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- It's legit: [2]. This is odd, but not a forgery. ErikHaugen (talk) 22:42, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
- So the signature is a forgery by Tofuwitch11! I'd say that's sufficient reason to strike the !vote - if we were allowed to add !votes in other people's names, we could each rack up hundreds of them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Neutral
- Neutral: Good Edits. I'm not really impressed with the answer to my question, if the answer was a little more thorough I would probably switch to support. Sorry. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 12:30, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
- Neutral: I'm a little concerned that Vejvančický would concentrate on deletions, but I'll switch to support easily if I see otherwise! 20:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk • contribs)
- Neutral - I just don't believe that an administrator can only work in one area, not because they don't want to, just because they will inevitably get dragged into other things. I really want to see some proof that this person has worked on more than just deletions. If there had been a more thorough answer to my questions, this would have been a support without hesitation. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)