m →Questions for the candidate: saving edits |
→Orlady: Strongest possible support |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
====Nomination==== |
====Nomination==== |
||
<span class="plainlinks">'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Orlady|action=edit§ion=5}} Voice your opinion]'''</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Orlady|talk page]]) |
<span class="plainlinks">'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Orlady|action=edit§ion=5}} Voice your opinion]'''</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Orlady|talk page]]) |
||
'''( |
'''(2/0/0); Scheduled to end 02:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)''' |
||
{{User|Orlady}} – Orlady has been a Wikipedian since 2004. During that time she has authored and improved countless articles (a few to featured status), fought off trolls and vandals, earned numerous barnstars, worked tirelessly to enforce Wikipedia policies, educated countless newbies, conducted herself in a civil manner, and just in general been a huge asset to Wikipedia. She usually works in lower traffic areas, so if you haven't heard of her, it isn't due to inactivity. It's high time she be given the tools appropriate to her level of Wikipedia experience and activity. [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 02:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
{{User|Orlady}} – Orlady has been a Wikipedian since 2004. During that time she has authored and improved countless articles (a few to featured status), fought off trolls and vandals, earned numerous barnstars, worked tirelessly to enforce Wikipedia policies, educated countless newbies, conducted herself in a civil manner, and just in general been a huge asset to Wikipedia. She usually works in lower traffic areas, so if you haven't heard of her, it isn't due to inactivity. It's high time she be given the tools appropriate to her level of Wikipedia experience and activity. [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 02:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
<!-- Please do not submit !votes before the RfA starts. Feel free to remove this notice if the RfA has been transcluded. --> |
<!-- Please do not submit !votes before the RfA starts. Feel free to remove this notice if the RfA has been transcluded. --> |
||
'''Support''' Orlady is a valued Wikipedian and I believe would make a great admin. [[User:TallMagic|TallMagic]] ([[User talk:TallMagic|talk]]) 13:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' Orlady is a valued Wikipedian and I believe would make a great admin. [[User:TallMagic|TallMagic]] ([[User talk:TallMagic|talk]]) 13:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
#'''Strongest possible support''' -- #1 Orlady is an editor's editor. #2 She is judicious and diplomatic; in controversies, she always just takes the discussion back to encyclopedia-building and our editorial standards, thereby defusing behavioural issues. I've been asking her to stand for admin for a couple of years now. --<font face="Futura">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] <sup>([[User talk:A. B.|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/A. B.|contribs]])</sup> </font> 21:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
=====Oppose===== |
=====Oppose===== |
Revision as of 21:31, 28 February 2009
Orlady
Nomination
(talk page) (2/0/0); Scheduled to end 02:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Orlady (talk · contribs) – Orlady has been a Wikipedian since 2004. During that time she has authored and improved countless articles (a few to featured status), fought off trolls and vandals, earned numerous barnstars, worked tirelessly to enforce Wikipedia policies, educated countless newbies, conducted herself in a civil manner, and just in general been a huge asset to Wikipedia. She usually works in lower traffic areas, so if you haven't heard of her, it isn't due to inactivity. It's high time she be given the tools appropriate to her level of Wikipedia experience and activity. Kaldari (talk) 02:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I appreciate Kaldari's confidence, and I accept the nomination.
I've been a fairly active "Wikipedia dilettante" since some time in 2006 (although I registered in 2004, I was not very active until 2006). I'm usually not very predictable in my activity levels or systematic about my contributions, I'm not a technically minded tool-builder or template-maker, and I'm not much interested in wikipolitical processes or wikibureaucracy. Mostly, I got involved to fix mistakes in articles and edit articles about topics I find interesting, I used to figure that I could leave the admin work to other people who are more dedicated and more technically adept than I am. However, for a long time it has been clear to me that much of my "work" here has been essentially admin-like, including reverting vandalism, warning and reporting vandals, ferreting out sockpuppets, participating in XfDs, trying to ensure that NPOV is maintained in various articles that I have watchlisted, and participating in featured list reviews and at DYK. I am aware that if I had admin tools, I could do some of these things more efficiently -- and reduce the workload of the administrators who I suspect might be sick and tired of responding to my requests for help with tasks I don't have the tools to perform.
If granted admin privileges, I can't promise that I won't make mistakes (heck, I know that I will make some mistakes), but I can promise not to break anything intentionally, and to try to clean up after myself when I do mess up. --Orlady (talk) 19:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A: To be honest, I don't know what I will do. (I don't have a crystal ball.) I do know that when I notice errors on the main page, I will repair them myself instead of posting at WP:ERRORS. Also, when I find an article with a non-MOS title that requires a sysop to move it to the correct title, I will move it myself instead of requesting sysop assistance. Other areas where I am likely to help out are:
- WP:DYK - From time to time, I get involved at DYK (including reviewing hook suggestions, doing minor editing on articles proposed for DYK, and building hook sets for future updates). With admin tools, I expect to help with main page updates when the bot isn't work, and to move hooks into the queue for future updates to the main page. DYK is a very energy-intensive feature of Wikipedia (meaning that it requires a lot of volunteer energy to keep it running), but I think it is beneficial for bringing attention to a diverse variety of new articles and drawing people into helping to improve those articles.
- WP:AfD - My experience in AfD runs the gamut: nominating articles for deletion, participating in discussions (both for and against deletion), working to rescue some articles from deletion, and participating in deletion review discussions later on. I have done just one or two non-admin closures, but if given the tools it is likely that I will use them to help out with AfD closures.
- WP:AIV - Having warned many vandals and reported some at AIV (about 90, according to my edit count), I think I have a pretty good understanding of the accepted criteria for imposing blocks and other responses to vandalism, and I probably will help out at AIV.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A:
- 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:
General comments
- Links for Orlady: Orlady (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Orlady before commenting.
Discussion
Support
- Support Orlady is a valued Wikipedian and I believe would make a great admin. TallMagic (talk) 13:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- Strongest possible support -- #1 Orlady is an editor's editor. #2 She is judicious and diplomatic; in controversies, she always just takes the discussion back to encyclopedia-building and our editorial standards, thereby defusing behavioural issues. I've been asking her to stand for admin for a couple of years now. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose