→Oppose: +1 |
FlightTime (talk | contribs) →Oppose: Oppose |
||
Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
#'''Oppose''' Not even close to the amount of experience I want to see in a candidate- especially in the areas where you intend to work. Although I'm not really one to oppose a candidate just because of content creation-related reasons, we are still a Wikipedia, and I'd like to see some time spent on contributing to it so that I can see that you understand what Wikipedia is about. Not supporting until and unless there is enough evidence, through contributions and actions, to show thorough knowledge of policy.--[[User:Slon02|Slon02]] ([[User talk:Slon02|talk]]) 03:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
#'''Oppose''' Not even close to the amount of experience I want to see in a candidate- especially in the areas where you intend to work. Although I'm not really one to oppose a candidate just because of content creation-related reasons, we are still a Wikipedia, and I'd like to see some time spent on contributing to it so that I can see that you understand what Wikipedia is about. Not supporting until and unless there is enough evidence, through contributions and actions, to show thorough knowledge of policy.--[[User:Slon02|Slon02]] ([[User talk:Slon02|talk]]) 03:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
#'''Oppose''' - Master&Expert, I think you do have the makings of a good admin. I really do! I just don't think you're there yet. I think it would do you a lot of good to do some really extensive content work, because so much of what admins do is based on knowing how content writing works. I don't really care how much you edit per month, but more content work would really help you understand some of the most important admin jobs. You could "check some boxes" and go participate at some number of AfDs, report X vandals, etc., but I don't recommend it. Find some articles you're really interested in and push them to be the best they can be. If you want to help out by leaving thoughtful comments at AfD, do it! If you want to help out by whacking vandals, do it! If you really like helping newbies, check out the [[WP:TEAHOUSE|Teahouse]], the [[WP:HELPDESK|help desk]], and places like that. That's how you'll get the experience commenters want to see, and you'll be a lot happier than by checking boxes. So, tl;dr, work really hard on a couple articles you're passionate about and find an administrative area that is fun and that you enjoy. If you want help with any of this, please ask me! I would love to help you. Happy editing and best wishes, [[User:Keilana|Keilana]]|<sup>[[User talk:Keilana|Parlez ici]]</sup> 03:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
#'''Oppose''' - Master&Expert, I think you do have the makings of a good admin. I really do! I just don't think you're there yet. I think it would do you a lot of good to do some really extensive content work, because so much of what admins do is based on knowing how content writing works. I don't really care how much you edit per month, but more content work would really help you understand some of the most important admin jobs. You could "check some boxes" and go participate at some number of AfDs, report X vandals, etc., but I don't recommend it. Find some articles you're really interested in and push them to be the best they can be. If you want to help out by leaving thoughtful comments at AfD, do it! If you want to help out by whacking vandals, do it! If you really like helping newbies, check out the [[WP:TEAHOUSE|Teahouse]], the [[WP:HELPDESK|help desk]], and places like that. That's how you'll get the experience commenters want to see, and you'll be a lot happier than by checking boxes. So, tl;dr, work really hard on a couple articles you're passionate about and find an administrative area that is fun and that you enjoy. If you want help with any of this, please ask me! I would love to help you. Happy editing and best wishes, [[User:Keilana|Keilana]]|<sup>[[User talk:Keilana|Parlez ici]]</sup> 03:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
#'''Oppose''' - [[Wikipedia:Not now|NOT NOW]]. [[User:Mlpearc|<font color="#800020">'''Mlpearc'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Mlpearc|<font color="#CFB53B">'''powwow'''</font>]])</small> 03:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|||
=====Neutral===== |
=====Neutral===== |
Revision as of 03:56, 1 August 2012
Master&Expert
(talk page) (6/9/2); Scheduled to end 22:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Nomination
Master&Expert (talk · contribs) – Before we even begin, I just want to get one thing out of the way — I'm probably not your ideal candidate. I first edited in June 2008 and have made over 3,000 edits in total, nearly 40% of which are to Wikipedia space (specifically ITN/C and the very process I'm going through today). In October 2008, administrator Thingg granted me rollback rights [1], but generally speaking I find reverting vandalism to be boring. The only article writing credential to my name is a DYK from all the way back in December 2008, and I find it hard for me to really concentrate on bringing an article up to GA or FA status. I'm sort of a cross between a WikiGnome and a WikiElf — I make incremental changes to articles, all the while offering my opinion wherever I can behind-the-scenes. I've made occasional comments at AIV, UAA, ANI, AN, ARB/N and elsewhere. I also nominated some articles for speedy deletion, and have been known to occasionally partake in AfD discussions. Not your typical RfA shoo-in, I know, but these are the facts. Make what you will of them.
So why am I here today? Put simply, the role of an administrator is perfectly catered to my personality. I love helping people wherever I can. I find it empowering when others look to me for assistance, and I'll go out of my to lend a helping hand where I know I can make a positive difference. There are many occasions where I feel inclined towards clearing out admin backlogs, or reaching out to somebody caught in the middle of an edit war asking for a fair hearing and an unblock. I would definitely be a pretty lenient administrator overall, but I do think I'm smart enough to know not to bury my head in the sand.
For a long time, even the notion of myself submitting an RfA was terrifying, despite having been offered nominations in the past by certain users (you know who you are), because I was worried that the community as a whole would not feel fully confident in my judgement. Make no mistake, I know I'm not perfect. There are many times when I am dead wrong in my sentiments, and I won't shy away from admitting it. What you'd get from me were I given +sysop is a calm, patient, and extremely cautious administrator. I would not jump into things without being familiar with them first, nor will I be afraid to ask for help when I need it. I'm very easy to get along with and I'm always open to communicating with others who disagree with me. So after a while of reflecting, I figured, "what the hell?" If I don't succeed, it's not the end of the world.
So although I'm not your typical RfA candidate, I ask that you trust that I will not do anything disastrous with the admin toolset. Wikipedia needs more admins, and I'm here to do what I can. Master&Expert (Talk) 22:37, 31 July 2012 (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?
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: It's been a long time since my DYK (as mentioned above), so I guess I'll have to go with my involvement in anything related to the ongoing Syrian crisis. I've been quite active in editing the article, but even more so on its talk page where I do my part to help out anyone who's looking for information or is proposing a change in formatting (title, layout, etc). I know it sounds minor (and it is), but I am still pleased with my involvement there.
- 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: There are times when I find myself somewhat frustrated when other users disagree with something I've said, or I feel I've been spoken to in a needlessly aggressive tone. When that happens, I respond as calmly as possible and maintain focus on the content of their argument, rather than the manner in which they've expressed it. That way I can hopefully diffuse a situation and come to a positive resolution. I'm also pretty keen on whether or not it is wise to pursue a matter further; some things are just better left alone.
- There is something else I'd like to bring up. Not so long ago, I removed vandalism to another page with this edit summary. I was attempting to be sarcastic so as to provide humour, not to demean somebody. Is it not typical of me to be that way; I'm much more cautious about the feelings of others than what I'd shown in that edit. I promise not to be that way as a sysop.
- Additional question by Dennis Brown
- 4. Philosophically speaking, what are the most important things that an admin does?
- A An administrator is here to help in any way they can. They are ordinary volunteers that have been entrusted with an additional toolset by the Wikipedia community for the purpose of providing maintenance for the safekeeping of our articles and other contributors. That's the most basic explanation I can give.
- Additional question from Graeme Bartlett
- 5. What are the requirements here for uploading images? I am asking this because of File:2011arabprotests.png which may or may not be free.
- A: For an image to be accepted on Wikipedia, it needs to have a very clearly labelled copyright status, and must fall under one of these three categories: either a) it is public domain, in that the original copyright owner has died (or otherwise it may have been free from the beginning); b) the original owner of said image (generally the uploader) has granted express permission for it to be recreated elsewhere; c) it is fair use, which means there are some fairly strict limitations to its usage. As I recall, I was not the original uploader of that image, but I did regularly update it at the time. I must have forgotten to re-add the licensing information in the process. Sorry about that. =/
- Additional question from Electriccatfish2
- 6. An IP editor has reverted you for the 7th time in 24 hours on Shane Victorino and you are the first admin to notice it. What do you do?
- A: I'd probably bring it up at ANI and look for more feedback from the broader community. I would definitely not feel comfortable blocking them, given that I'm the one they've been (it would seem) harassing. If a block is required, I'd prefer another administrator to apply it.
- Additional question from LuK3
- 7. When should an article be indefinitely semi-protected?
- A: Generally speaking, articles should not be indefinitely semi-protected unless they would otherwise attract an exceptionally large volume of vandalism (examples include "fuck", "Israel", "Scientology").
- Additional questions from Hahc21
- 8. A user is trying to upload an image from Flickr using the license cc-by-nc-2.0, which does not allow commercial use. How would you proceed?
- A: I think that, so long as they provide a link to the source to assert that the content has indeed been licensed as such by the original author, then it should be fine. Then again, I'm not really the top expert on image licensing. I'd probably redirect them to somebody with more experience in the area.
- 8.1. Let's pretend you are the first admin to spot some sort of edit warring (or any difficult situation) at a BLP article, say Ricardo Arjona, over some content that could be controversial. If any of the users haven't clearly violated 3RR and both have legitimate purposes for their behavior, how would you proceed?
- A: I'd leave a note on both of their talk pages to cease edit warring and to discuss the issues on the article's talk page (emphasizing the importance of doing so on biographical articles), and then I'd also bring the content there for a discussion on what can be done with it so as not to defame or otherwise cause harm to the subject of the biography. If it doesn't get a lot of traffic, I might even request outside opinions or bring it up at this noticeboard. If they continue to edit war, I would block them both for 36 hours.
General comments
- Links for Master&Expert: Master&Expert (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for Master&Expert 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
- The AfD vote counting tools don't work correctly by default for this candidate, because his signature doesn't exactly match his username (uses & instead of &). This can be overcome by specifying an alternate username, or by using these links:
- -Scottywong| gab _ 23:52, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Stats on talk page. —Hahc21 01:28, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm anticipating an eventual closure per WP:SNOW, with minimal support and plenty of people opposing (and I'm guessing not just for lack of activity/experience and that one instance of rudeness, either — I think there's probably other concerns that have yet to be materialized below). I'll keep it open for several hours more, then I'm going to withdraw. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Please don't take the oppose votes personally. They are a reflection of your contribution history, not on you as a person. Electric Catfish 23:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, of course! I'm very familiar with RfA; I had been under the impression that this would fail were I to submit it today. What I'm worried about is somebody coming here with opposes based on their general impression of me from elsewhere. I suspect I've given somebody or other a negative impression, and I do think I'll see something to that effect before this RfA is closed. Master&Expert (Talk) 00:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I doubt it would be a snow, and don't withdraw. I read somewhere opposes come first, with supports following thereafter. It's not looking bright now, but it may in the future. Also, you offered bringing up diffs that show you helping new users, and I don't think that would make it any worse, and I as well as others may change. It really is that looking at it now and still not recognizing it as gf is what did it for me. Mysterytrey talk 00:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- If all else fails, at least you receive some helpful advice. MJ94 (talk) 00:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- @Mysterytrey; I'm confused as to what you mean by failing to assume good faith at this point. I had acknowledged that it was likely not vandalism or made with ill-intent. Master&Expert (Talk) 00:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I doubt it would be a snow, and don't withdraw. I read somewhere opposes come first, with supports following thereafter. It's not looking bright now, but it may in the future. Also, you offered bringing up diffs that show you helping new users, and I don't think that would make it any worse, and I as well as others may change. It really is that looking at it now and still not recognizing it as gf is what did it for me. Mysterytrey talk 00:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, of course! I'm very familiar with RfA; I had been under the impression that this would fail were I to submit it today. What I'm worried about is somebody coming here with opposes based on their general impression of me from elsewhere. I suspect I've given somebody or other a negative impression, and I do think I'll see something to that effect before this RfA is closed. Master&Expert (Talk) 00:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Please don't take the oppose votes personally. They are a reflection of your contribution history, not on you as a person. Electric Catfish 23:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- On second thought, I'll leave this to run and see how things go. Master&Expert (Talk) 02:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Moral support I think the experience issues are valid, but I've seen this user around a lot and I've found their input fair, balanced and useful. May not be ready yet, but has great potential. Hobit (talk) 00:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Moral Support Moved from Oppose. Electric Catfish 00:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support - though unlikely to have an impact at this stage. Edit count is on the low side, but from what I've seen he wouldn't do a bad job as a sysop. Learn a lot on the job maybe, but he wouldn't destroy the wiki. Better luck next time mate. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 01:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- BEING AN ADMIN IS JUST NOT A BIG DEAL - M&E - sorry, you have very little chance. You are going to be opposed for all sorts of petty reasons. But be aware that there is absolutely no proper reason you couldn't be an admin. You won't ban Jimbo Wales, you won't have the main page raining penises. If RFA was working then the oppose !votes would disappear. So good luck, and frankly I wouldn't even worry that much about doing whatever the opposers (who will be of great number if this is run to its end) say - the adminship rules will fairly shortly be sorted and consequently their pedantic opposes will be of no relevance. Just carry on the good work, and shortly you shall have the tools Egg Centric 01:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support - While M&E's edit count is low, I've seen him around for a long time. The thought, concern for others, and analysis I typical see from him would make him a great admin. The edit from April is the only such edit I've ever seen from him like that, so I'm chalking it up to an off day, we all have them.PumpkinSky talk 01:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support I don't see the harm in a WikiGnome/WikiElf becoming an admin. It's ok to have more admins with experience in those areas. AutomaticStrikeout 01:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose: For someone who insists that they are planning to help wherever they can, I must admit Mysterytrey's link is disquieting. It's very bitey. Also not impressed with content contributions. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- I don't mean to badger, but I just wanted to address this quickly, for the sake of disclosure and clarification. I mentioned that incident in my answer to Q3 above; it is very unusual for me to speak that way to anybody. I can cite many more examples of myself being proactive with newer contributors. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - Concerns with experience and activity levels. Only 671 edits to article space, about 3300 edits total is squarely on the low side. In the first 6 months of this year, he had a total of 139 edits, which is less than one edit per day. This is a far lower than average activity level for a typical admin candidate. Additionally, an interest in closing AfD's has been expressed, but the candidate has participated in less than 100 AfD's, which in my opinion is not enough to grasp the intricacies of AfD required to make an effective closer (user also has no non-admin closures). In closing, the candidate has been around for a long time and clearly is familiar with Wikipedia, and I think I would be more apt to support if the candidate showed more interest in Wikipedia by contributing regularly to areas of interest. -Scottywong| express _ 23:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - Now, usually I'm the last person to oppose based on something relating to edit counts etc., but there's just not enough recent edits to show that the candidate have a sufficiently wide and depth level of experience. With edits often in the tens per month, are you even going to be using the extra tools? KTC (talk) 23:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose Like Crisco says, Mysterytrey's link worries me. Additionally, the candidate does not meet my criteria, most notably #2. I don't think the candidate has enough experience or need for the tools at this time. Scotty pretty much summed up my thoughts. MJ94 (talk) 23:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Just so you know, I am not opposing based on your lack of content creation. I am, however, opposing due to your lack of mainspace edits and overall activity levels. MJ94 (talk) 02:18, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Weak Oppose First of all, I see zero articles created. I'm not looking for a FA or GA here, not even a DYK, I just want to see a few well-sourced articles, and a few BLPs, too. Also, your mainspace edits (20.66%) are too little. Also, you intend to work at AIV and UAA. I barely see any edits to these venues. I'd have no problem supporting in the future, I'm just a bit concerned.Electric Catfish 23:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)- Just as a note, I actually technically did create Human rights in Qatar [2]; the article in its original state was considered a copyright violation, and promptly blanked. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not yet I have never interacted with this user but I believe I've seen them editing a few times. Unfortunately, I believe this user has a small amount of edits specifically with article space. I may reconsider if you wait 6 months. Additionally, echoing what Scotty is mentioning above, you only have 671 edits to the article space. While I think several of your answers are pleasable, I strongly recommend editing more articles. I'm surprised that you've been a user for 4 years and only have 3,349 edits. The monthly edit counts also show you nearly always have fewer than 50 edits. The most recent significant activity you had was this past December, nearly a year ago. I wouldn't oppose simply because of edit count, but I feel you need more work. You shouldn't be discouraged with this oppose comments, rather take several of these comments as advice. SwisterTwister talk 01:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose An editor review in all but name. FWIW I'd recommend seriously considering a change of username; as I can't express this with subtlety, I'll come right out with it: Master&Expert sounds like the name of a wannabe mod from some AOL BDSM forum. Circa 1997. Even the vanilla interpretation seems somewhat boastful and rather asking for trouble if you're unable to always live up to it. Anyway, I hope you've found this experience useful. Plutonium27 (talk) 02:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- PS. Re the nomination statement - I'm intrigued to know what it is M&E says he will go out of to lend a hand. The front door? His prize Cucurbitaceae? But seriously. Just from this RfA alone, its clear that M&E writes well. Editors that can do so are in short supply and I'd like to see him put those skills to use where they're needed. Plutonium27 (talk) 03:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose Not even close to the amount of experience I want to see in a candidate- especially in the areas where you intend to work. Although I'm not really one to oppose a candidate just because of content creation-related reasons, we are still a Wikipedia, and I'd like to see some time spent on contributing to it so that I can see that you understand what Wikipedia is about. Not supporting until and unless there is enough evidence, through contributions and actions, to show thorough knowledge of policy.--Slon02 (talk) 03:04, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - Master&Expert, I think you do have the makings of a good admin. I really do! I just don't think you're there yet. I think it would do you a lot of good to do some really extensive content work, because so much of what admins do is based on knowing how content writing works. I don't really care how much you edit per month, but more content work would really help you understand some of the most important admin jobs. You could "check some boxes" and go participate at some number of AfDs, report X vandals, etc., but I don't recommend it. Find some articles you're really interested in and push them to be the best they can be. If you want to help out by leaving thoughtful comments at AfD, do it! If you want to help out by whacking vandals, do it! If you really like helping newbies, check out the Teahouse, the help desk, and places like that. That's how you'll get the experience commenters want to see, and you'll be a lot happier than by checking boxes. So, tl;dr, work really hard on a couple articles you're passionate about and find an administrative area that is fun and that you enjoy. If you want help with any of this, please ask me! I would love to help you. Happy editing and best wishes, Keilana|Parlez ici 03:40, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose - NOT NOW. Mlpearc (powwow) 03:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Neutral
- Strong neutral. Master&Expert's quite recent edit, on April 7th 2012, may not have been vandalism. It may have been a clarification, for anyone who doesn't enable pictures to be shown, just short of "...was a male Malawian politician...", and it may have been bitey to the user, and not falling in line with "I love helping people wherever I can...". However, he would probably be a admin with a good-decision-making skill, but I couldn't be sure. Mysterytrey talk 23:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Odds are it wasn't actually intended as vandalism, now that I look at the edit. Probably just a misunderstanding on the part of whoever inserted it there. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- The problem is 4 months later, and still not recognizing it isn't necessarily vandalism. Still probably won't be opposing or supporting, at least for the moment Mysterytrey talk 23:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Odds are it wasn't actually intended as vandalism, now that I look at the edit. Probably just a misunderstanding on the part of whoever inserted it there. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Neutral and may likely vote to support in the next one. I haven't been around you a lot, but I have seen some very good work from you, enough to think you likely have the skills, but maybe not yet the discipline. I might *think* what you said above once in a great while, but it would be a pretty serious error if I said that as an admin. Give it 6 months, listen to the other items you will hear this week, and prepare yourself mentally for the job. I can't oppose, as I think you would likely curtail the incivility and wouldn't delete the main page, but I can't support yet either. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Although, do bear in mind, that was essentially a one-off incident. It is exceedingly rare for me to speak in such a sardonic tone. If I were blocking an editor or anything to that effect, I would only use summaries such as "vandalism-only account" or "disruptive editing". I'm also quite keen on avoiding outright reversion wherever I can, instead building off of whatever good content was contributed. That's just for the purposes of disclosure, so nobody will get the wrong idea about me ("Oh, God, it's M&E... uh, hi!" =D ) Master&Expert (Talk) 00:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- And I do think well of you, and think eventually you could make a good admin if you spend the time and effort. I didn't labor the points that others are making as they have already done so. I think that an RfA that doesn't end with someone getting the admin bit doesn't have to be a failure. Hopefully, others will be kind enough to offer useful, constructive criticisms and observations in their !votes. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Absolutely, and I am very pleasantly surprised at how polite and approachable the people who commented have been. I honestly came in here thinking I'd get comments like, "Absolutely not — Frankly, this user does not have the prerequisite clue, yada yada yada", or something to that effect. I've seen RfA at its worst; it's not pretty. But this has been a much more pleasant experience than I expected it to be. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- RfA isn't broke, we were. All we can do is take individual responsibility, and choose to make it a positive experience, regardless of outcome. Many people greatly underestimate how much of a powerful and positive difference it makes wiki-wide when they choose to make a thoughtful, honest and polite comment. Not everyone will, but you should feel free to ignore those that don't. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Dennis, it's like you've mind-melded with me — that's almost exactly what I said back in December of last year. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Then that is one more reason I hope you shore up some shortcomings and try again in 6 months. To me, attitude and perspective outweigh how many articles you've started or how many AFD's you have NAC'ed. Most of what you need to know, you learn after you get the bit, but you still need a well rounded foundation to build on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Dennis, it's like you've mind-melded with me — that's almost exactly what I said back in December of last year. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- RfA isn't broke, we were. All we can do is take individual responsibility, and choose to make it a positive experience, regardless of outcome. Many people greatly underestimate how much of a powerful and positive difference it makes wiki-wide when they choose to make a thoughtful, honest and polite comment. Not everyone will, but you should feel free to ignore those that don't. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Absolutely, and I am very pleasantly surprised at how polite and approachable the people who commented have been. I honestly came in here thinking I'd get comments like, "Absolutely not — Frankly, this user does not have the prerequisite clue, yada yada yada", or something to that effect. I've seen RfA at its worst; it's not pretty. But this has been a much more pleasant experience than I expected it to be. Master&Expert (Talk) 01:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- And I do think well of you, and think eventually you could make a good admin if you spend the time and effort. I didn't labor the points that others are making as they have already done so. I think that an RfA that doesn't end with someone getting the admin bit doesn't have to be a failure. Hopefully, others will be kind enough to offer useful, constructive criticisms and observations in their !votes. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Although, do bear in mind, that was essentially a one-off incident. It is exceedingly rare for me to speak in such a sardonic tone. If I were blocking an editor or anything to that effect, I would only use summaries such as "vandalism-only account" or "disruptive editing". I'm also quite keen on avoiding outright reversion wherever I can, instead building off of whatever good content was contributed. That's just for the purposes of disclosure, so nobody will get the wrong idea about me ("Oh, God, it's M&E... uh, hi!" =D ) Master&Expert (Talk) 00:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)