→Support: weak support and rationale |
re-reply to Q6 |
||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
:'''6.''' I'd had something in the back of my mind that hadn't been sitting right around your work and I think I have found what it was. You accepted Kung-Flu at AfC which was later [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung-Flu|deleted]] (and has been subsequently recreated as a redirect). I am all about marginal things at AfC being accepted so I am less troubled that it was deleted than creating a disambiguation page that was described, fairly in my opinion, in the AfD nomination as {{tqq|Promotion of racism, xenophobia and stereotype}}. This actually ties into my previous question as well as your response wasn't great (even when you backed down to Drmies it was with a "Sorry if I offended you" comment rather than a re-examination of the action in the first place). Can you say more about your thinking about that siutation now and what, if anything, you've learned from it that would impact how you'd approach work as an admin? Thanks and best, [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 16:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC) |
:'''6.''' I'd had something in the back of my mind that hadn't been sitting right around your work and I think I have found what it was. You accepted Kung-Flu at AfC which was later [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung-Flu|deleted]] (and has been subsequently recreated as a redirect). I am all about marginal things at AfC being accepted so I am less troubled that it was deleted than creating a disambiguation page that was described, fairly in my opinion, in the AfD nomination as {{tqq|Promotion of racism, xenophobia and stereotype}}. This actually ties into my previous question as well as your response wasn't great (even when you backed down to Drmies it was with a "Sorry if I offended you" comment rather than a re-examination of the action in the first place). Can you say more about your thinking about that siutation now and what, if anything, you've learned from it that would impact how you'd approach work as an admin? Thanks and best, [[User:Barkeep49|Barkeep49]] ([[User_talk:Barkeep49|talk]]) 16:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC) |
||
::'''A:''' I was expecting this question. As you said, I had re-created this page as a redirect to [[Covid-19]] upon request by someone at AfC/R. It was nominated for deletion for "promotion of racism, xenophobia, and stereotype". After I was pinged by someone telling me I should never have created this "racist garbage", I voted Neutral and explained that no page should be deleted for being racist, citing NOTCENSORED and the fact that whole articles exist that have way more offensive titles, such as the n-word. {{u|Drmies}} then replied {{tqq|I really, ''really'' wish that y'all would get as much of a kick out of dropping disgusting racist terms for white people as you do for non-white people}}, and {{tqq|Don't y'all think that this is just some white privilege surfacing? }} I replied by apologizing for having spelled out the n-word in my original !vote, to which {{u|Praxidicae}} replied {{tqq|Use some common sense, if you've got any.}} I later apologized again on Drmies' talk page. What I've learned from this situation is that when commenting on politically charged subjects, people will often mischaracterize your arguments and rarely assume good faith, which means that I will have to be much more careful in the future if taking part in this kind of discussion. - L293D |
::'''A:''' <s>I was expecting this question. As you said, I had re-created this page as a redirect to [[Covid-19]] upon request by someone at AfC/R. It was nominated for deletion for "promotion of racism, xenophobia, and stereotype". After I was pinged by someone telling me I should never have created this "racist garbage", I voted Neutral and explained that no page should be deleted for being racist, citing NOTCENSORED and the fact that whole articles exist that have way more offensive titles, such as the n-word. {{u|Drmies}} then replied {{tqq|I really, ''really'' wish that y'all would get as much of a kick out of dropping disgusting racist terms for white people as you do for non-white people}}, and {{tqq|Don't y'all think that this is just some white privilege surfacing? }} I replied by apologizing for having spelled out the n-word in my original !vote, to which {{u|Praxidicae}} replied {{tqq|Use some common sense, if you've got any.}} I later apologized again on Drmies' talk page. What I've learned from this situation is that when commenting on politically charged subjects, people will often mischaracterize your arguments and rarely assume good faith, which means that I will have to be much more careful in the future if taking part in this kind of discussion. - L293D |
||
⚫ | |||
::'''A:''' I’m sorry, I was so anxious over this whole thing that I didn’t think about what I was saying. I apologize; I should have given this more thought instead of trying to answer as quickly as possible. If you’ll give me a second chance, I’d like to give this more thought. |
|||
⚫ | |||
::Here’s what I wish I’d responded: "I wish I had made clearer what my reasoning was. Just because I know I’m editing in good faith doesn’t mean people shouldn’t point out when they think I’m in the wrong; it doesn’t mean they’ve mischaracterized me. It just means I need to explain better." - L293D |
|||
<!-- Add your question above this comment. --> |
<!-- Add your question above this comment. --> |
Revision as of 21:12, 16 September 2020
L293D
(talk page) (22/6/1); Scheduled to end 11:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Nomination
L293D (talk · contribs) – I've been aware of L293D's work for some time, and he's got the magic ingredient I like to see in adminstrators - someone who can write good content and fight vandalism. On the content side, he's got a particular interest in military history and is the primary contributor to the Featured Article 1974 White House helicopter incident, as well as improving over 20 articles to good article status and filing several Did you know nominations. On the maintenance side, he has filed numerous reports at AIV and requested page protection, and he's a regular at WP:AfC/R, responding to many redirect requests.
As he will outline himself, L293D has held off on running for adminship for some time as he came into a few conflicts early in his wiki career. However, over 2019 and 2020, he has in my view worked hard to overcome this and turn things around. I now think he's an ideal all-rounder who will made good use of the tools, and has my full confidence in being able to use them responsibly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:36, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you Ritchie for the kind words. I accept the nomination. I have never edited for pay, and I have three alt accounts: L293D (alt), L293D (AWB), and L293D (AFCRD). I have no connection to the many other blocked accounts starting with "L293D". L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:41, 14 September 2020 (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: Most of my work is centered around fighting vandalism, and writing good and/or featured content, so I intend to start by patrolling WP:AIV, WP:UAA, and WP:RfPP. I have 263 reports at AIV, and I feel I am ready to block similar vandals myself; likewise, I have requested page protection 159 times, and I think I am prepared to protect pages myself. I have also moved 773 pages, mostly responding to requests on WP:RM/TR; admin tools would help me when I encounter a move-protected page, as I occasionally do. Over time, I will help in other areas as well, but this is where I plan to start.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: My best contribution to Wikipedia, in my opinion, is 1974 White House helicopter incident, because I took it from a Start-class article to Featured pretty much by myself. I have also written 23 Good Articles and successfully nominated 37 articles for DYK. Other than that, I have collaborated on another Featured article, German torpedo boat Albatros, and written 59 articles, although those were often only C-class. On the anti-vandalism side, I have performed approximately 9,500 rollbacks, sometimes with Huggle, but mostly by patrolling the recent changes feed with navigation popups. I have also created around 2,500 redirects requested at WP:AFC/R.
- 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: Anti-vandalism and content creation are mostly drama-free, but in April 2018, I decided to fix typos on WP:ANI and a dozen other noticeboards using AutoWikiBrowser, and got a 3 hour block to stop the disruption; I made it even worse by getting mad because of a mass rollback that was then performed on my last ~300 edits, instead of being apologetic. Later in August 2018, I mistakenly rolled back an edit by Primefac on one of his subpages, and TheSandDoctor removed my rollback. Again, there was disagreement on how to proceed, but my rollback was re-instated a couple days later by a consensus of five admins. I think I've learned from both of these incidents and similar ones, and I don't recall any incidents like this in 2019 or later.
You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.
- Additional question from Dolotta
- 4. What area or areas of the English Wikipedia are you the weakest?
- A: The ones that come to my mind are noticeboards (ANI, AN3, DRN, Village pump), political stuff, and copyright-related stuff. - L293D
- Additional questions from Barkeep49
- 5. You discuss the troubles you had in 2018. That's obviously a long time ago in wiki-years. Can you point to some feedback you received where you didn't get defensive and/or a discussion which was tense/heated where you kept your cool (especially if you think you helped to lower its temperature). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- A: I don't go on noticeboards if I can avoid it, so pretty much all tense/heated discussions I have taken part in have unfortunately been about me. I've had people post rude comments and I've generally replied in a normal way. As for me lowering the temperature, I think the best diff I have to show is my apology to Drmies. -L293D
- 6. I'd had something in the back of my mind that hadn't been sitting right around your work and I think I have found what it was. You accepted Kung-Flu at AfC which was later deleted (and has been subsequently recreated as a redirect). I am all about marginal things at AfC being accepted so I am less troubled that it was deleted than creating a disambiguation page that was described, fairly in my opinion, in the AfD nomination as
Promotion of racism, xenophobia and stereotype
. This actually ties into my previous question as well as your response wasn't great (even when you backed down to Drmies it was with a "Sorry if I offended you" comment rather than a re-examination of the action in the first place). Can you say more about your thinking about that siutation now and what, if anything, you've learned from it that would impact how you'd approach work as an admin? Thanks and best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)- A:
I was expecting this question. As you said, I had re-created this page as a redirect to Covid-19 upon request by someone at AfC/R. It was nominated for deletion for "promotion of racism, xenophobia, and stereotype". After I was pinged by someone telling me I should never have created this "racist garbage", I voted Neutral and explained that no page should be deleted for being racist, citing NOTCENSORED and the fact that whole articles exist that have way more offensive titles, such as the n-word. Drmies then repliedI really, really wish that y'all would get as much of a kick out of dropping disgusting racist terms for white people as you do for non-white people
, andDon't y'all think that this is just some white privilege surfacing?
I replied by apologizing for having spelled out the n-word in my original !vote, to which Praxidicae repliedUse some common sense, if you've got any.
I later apologized again on Drmies' talk page. What I've learned from this situation is that when commenting on politically charged subjects, people will often mischaracterize your arguments and rarely assume good faith, which means that I will have to be much more careful in the future if taking part in this kind of discussion. - L293D I will add that the only reason that I did not offer policy-based arguments is that I wasn't voting keep in the first place. I was trying to explain how I thought the oppose !votes were wrong. -L293D
- A:
- A: I’m sorry, I was so anxious over this whole thing that I didn’t think about what I was saying. I apologize; I should have given this more thought instead of trying to answer as quickly as possible. If you’ll give me a second chance, I’d like to give this more thought.
- Here’s what I wish I’d responded: "I wish I had made clearer what my reasoning was. Just because I know I’m editing in good faith doesn’t mean people shouldn’t point out when they think I’m in the wrong; it doesn’t mean they’ve mischaracterized me. It just means I need to explain better." - L293D
Discussion
- Links for L293D: L293D (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for L293D can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
Support
- Support as nominator Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Support seems to have a need for the tools, qualified user, competent actions. Has learned from his past mistakes, always a good quality. Eddie891 Talk Work 11:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)I need to rethink my !vote, mainly based on the answer to Q6. Not sure where I'll end up. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- * Pppery * it has begun... 12:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Support. Haven't encountered the candidate myself, but I trust the nominator and the candidate's answers clearly indicate both a need for the tools and an awareness of how to use them. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 12:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)Regretfully withdrawing my vote per subsequent discussion regarding the nominee's response to Q6. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 20:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support nominator explained everything, I wish him all the best in his new role. Mikola22 (talk) 12:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support The candidate has has been a big net positive on the project, showed that they can learn from past issues and justified the need for tools. Roller26 (talk) 12:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- support been impressed with the work for a while. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support. I've seen the nominated floating about many a time, never had an issue with them or their contribs. No reason to oppose. Nightfury 13:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support Astonishingly high Afd stats, obviously a fine judge of quality. I don't see anything else that would preclude the editor for being an admin. Good candidate. scope_creepTalk 14:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Strong Support No hesitation. Great candidate. Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 14:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Why not? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Not a jerk, has a clue. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support. The candidate seems trustworthy, being an experienced content creator with a need for the tools and good deletion stats. I am also impressed that he is able to acknowledge his past mistakes, which shows self-improvement. epicgenius (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support — Generally a net positive and knows what they are doing. No real reason not to support + the project really needs more admins attending to general backlogs requiring admin attention. Celestina007 14:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support - seen them around the place over the years. Can't recall a reason to not trust them. Anarchyte (talk • work) 15:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support will be a net-positive to the project. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support has a clear need for the tools. —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 17:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support - thought he was already was an admin. Atsme Talk 📧 18:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support So Little Admins, So Much To Do - TNT ✨ 18:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support Looks fine to me. Chetsford (talk) 19:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support Seems well qualified. Herbfur (talk) 20:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support - No concerns. I approve of the way they handled the Q6 issue and don't think they had/have anything to apologize for. In fact, their calm handling of it is one reason I think they'd make a good admin. Lev!vich 20:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Weak Support. Good work overall and a net positive. Regarding the Kung-flu AFD, the candidate has actually handled the situation fairly well. One can of course argue that the candidate shouldn’t have used the words they used to illustrate their point. But to be fair to them, the terms were clearly not uttered with the slightest intent to cause any offense. Further, when the candidate was confronted by other users offended by their language, they clarified and apologized for their remarks, showing composure and assuming good faith all the way. This all inspired confidence in his ability to resolve disputes as an admin. Having said all this though, this is a weak support because (1) the way they answered Q6, especially the part about others
mischaracterize[ing] [their] arguments and rarely assume good faith
, probably isn’t what the questioner expects when they ask the candidate what they themselves learnt from the situation, and (2) I have not had the chance to actually look at the DAB page approved by the candidate in AfC before it was deleted. If the page was really a blatantPromotion of racism, xenophobia and stereotype
, as suggested in Q6 and by some of the opposing votes below, this would raise further questions as to the candidate’s judgment to the extent that I would need to reconsider whether a support vote remains appropriate. --Dps04 (talk) 21:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose per answer to Q6. The issue isn't that other people mischaracterized your arguments and didn't assume good faith, it's that you communicated extremely poorly. Using some of the most offensive words in the English language in order to justify your argument that other offensive terms are okay is not an effective dispute-resolution method. It does nothing to make your point, and only adds noise to an otherwise productive discussion. The solution to this isn't just to be more careful, as you suggest in your answer. Rather, the solution is to make arguments based on policy. For example, you could have argued that "Kung-Flu" is a notable term as there are sources written about it, rather than just argue that other articles on racist terms exist (which, incidentally, have sources written about them). I am disappointed to have to explain this here, as I thought that was just a one-off anomaly from a generally wise editor, but seeing that you have otherwise avoided politically-charged conversations leads me to think you need some more experience in these sorts of areas, and in dispute resolution in general, before you can be an effective administrator. – bradv🍁 18:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose, regretfully, for broadly the same reasons as Bradv. The answer to Q6 is disquieting, particularly the last sentence
"What I've learned from this situation is that when commenting on politically charged subjects, people will often mischaracterize your arguments and rarely assume good faith, which means that I will have to be much more careful in the future if taking part in this kind of discussion."
. The candidate's conduct, both in accepting "Kung-Flu" as a dab and in their comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kung-Flu (which I would not be comfortable quoting), was quite poor, but it could've been a good opportunity to demonstrate reflection and a resolve to improve. Those comments at AfD may have ignited much broader problems if the candidate was an administrator, and especially if the candidate was acting in an administrative capacity, and the candidate hasn't shown, through words or actions, that similar lapses in judgment will not recur. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:56, 16 September 2020 (UTC) - Oppose, regretfully, along the same lines as the above. I don't doubt that he's sincere about apologizing, but the AfD discussion in question suggests a lack of understanding of the difference between analyzing a slur in an encyclopedic manner and effectively endorsing its use in Wikipedia voice, as the dab page did. A stated aversion to controversial topics and noticeboards and a vague commitment to being more careful aren't enough to convince me that he'll be able to better handle similar situations in the future. signed, Rosguill talk 19:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Support Being open about the conflicts they had early on, then showing how they improved and learned from them to me is a big plus. It's almost a bonus in that they know the right way to handle a conflict from experience.Oppose And then I saw the answer to Q6. That one just left a very poor taste in my mouth. It pretty much took what I said in my support, and made it look false. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)- Oppose based on answer to number 5 - we actually need admins to go on noticeboards to protect content creators. Based on the candidates answer they will avoid the noticeboard areas. I am also concerned about temperament issues. The exchanges on this are not what we need from an administrator. Finally the communication on that AfD allow me to guess the candidate's political leanings, and I am afraid that they will not be a neutral arbiter on the project. I have t oppose for those reasons. Lightburst (talk) 21:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose with regret based on answer to questions 5 and 6 (and the history behind them). AugusteBlanqui (talk) 21:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Neutral
- This is a first for me because I generally think that Neutral !votes are not very useful but this is the only place I can honestly find myself. I really, really wanted to place myself in "Support" because I've seen L293D doing a lot of good content work and I've enjoyed many articles they've written. That said, the answer to Q6 raises many of the same issues for me that it did for bradv and Kevin, especially the part about
people will often mischaracterize your arguments and rarely assume good faith
. I do not think it is fair to oppose based on one question and one underlying incident, however, so I wind up down here. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
General comments
- Not sure where to put this, as it's not really an RfA question, but I am immediately struck by the fact that L293D has a signature that is exactly the same as another user's (7&6=thirteen). Co-incidence appears infeasible (same formatting, same colours, and a shared telephone symbol); so I'm left wondering whether the user's are related or whether one just copied the signature style of the other (or of a third editor). Mr rnddude (talk) 13:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- Just a random thought: I have always gotten confused between the candidate and L235 (talk · contribs), and to a lesser extent with (noping) SD0001 and (noping) Dl2000. —usernamekiran (talk) 14:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- See also: Wikipedia:Editors who may be confused. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: Don't forget L3X1 Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 14:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Eddie891: yeah, there are a few familiar pairs indeed. @L235: the X in L3X1's username avoids the confusion —usernamekiran (talk) 14:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)