m →[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]: ... and subtract self from tally again |
|||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
:: Bad famle or bad image? The latter is not my department. I don't kick kids out to live in the streets. I pay my taxes and I help those who I can. That's my philanthropic nature. Change your name to a Romanian one, then we talk. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 03:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC) |
:: Bad famle or bad image? The latter is not my department. I don't kick kids out to live in the streets. I pay my taxes and I help those who I can. That's my philanthropic nature. Change your name to a Romanian one, then we talk. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 03:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC) |
||
:::Anittas, you of all people should know that there are historical reasons for some purely Romanian people in Moldova to have Russian names. Oleg's native language is Romanian. I'm assuming all or the majority of his ancestors are Romanians/Moldovans (might be wrong here). This doesn't nessecarily mean he'll have a "Romanian name". Since he was born during the Soviet era, it's quite possible his parents gave him a Russian given name hoping it would mean a brighter future for him (similarly, some Taiwanese parents in the period of Japanese occupation gave their kids Japanese names because they thought their kids would be discriminated against less). --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 03:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC) |
:::Anittas, you of all people should know that there are historical reasons for some purely Romanian people in Moldova to have Russian names. Oleg's native language is Romanian. I'm assuming all or the majority of his ancestors are Romanians/Moldovans (might be wrong here). This doesn't nessecarily mean he'll have a "Romanian name". Since he was born during the Soviet era, it's quite possible his parents gave him a Russian given name hoping it would mean a brighter future for him (similarly, some Taiwanese parents in the period of Japanese occupation gave their kids Japanese names because they thought their kids would be discriminated against less). --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 03:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC) |
||
I understand that and I symphatize with him, but nothing stops him now from setting it right. He could take the name of Alexandru, after his father. Or any name that doesn't sound Russian! --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 06:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:23, 27 November 2005
Ronline
Ronline (talk · contribs) – I am proud to nominate Ronline to be Administrator! He has always been a reliable, friendly editor, contributor of countless articles, I've seen him act as the mediator on a number of difficult topics. He is also sysop at Romanian Wikipedia. He is a good researcher and very good defender of the truth. Let's go and vote for him! Bonaparte 13:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Ronline 07:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Support
- Strong Support- Like I said in nomination, I am strongly support his nomination. He's very helpful, nice, and will help with a lot of things! Bonaparte talk & contribs
- Support --Anittas 15:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support: I trust Ronline to use adminship appropriately. -- Jmabel | Talk 09:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support the guy who once flooded Wikinews with Romania-related articles :) Grue 09:24, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support, looks good. NSLE (讨论+extra) 09:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I Support and find the comments about the nominator to be out of place. MONGO 10:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Strong support I've seen he did a great job up until now --Orioane 10:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Merovingian 10:27, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support Despite who the nominator is, after all, this is based on the user, not the nom ;] --негіднийлють (Reply|Spam Me!*) 12:02, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support, due in no small part to the handling of the questions below. Turnstep 16:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. What Turnstep said. I, for one, wouldn't have taken those questions as calmly... ナイトスタリオン ✉ 16:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. I know his good job as a sysop on the Romanian Wikipedia. This argument counterbalances the nominator and the bad timing. --AdiJapan 17:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. mikka (t) 18:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. His responses to the baiting, probing, irrelevant questions below demonstrate that he has the proper temprament for being an admin. ZacharyS 20:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Alexander 007 20:40, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Strongly Support He deserves this nomination and he can be a real help for the other admins. Romihaitza 21:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. He already does a tremendous job as a bureaucrat on Romanian wiki! --Vlad 22:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support Izehar 22:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support Quentin Pierce 23:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Cool-headed user in many hot disputes. I would like to ask Ronline to promise to fill the edit summary more often though. And about the nominator, I suspect Bonaparte's motivation is to have a friend with big stick at certain controversal articles, but I don't think Ronline will fall into that trap. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:28, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Having not been involved in the apparant conflicts, I'm going to side with the majority on this one. This user shows promise, and promise should always get a chance to prove itself. --Martin Osterman 03:07, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Oppose
Oppose – Please enable your email id. (Please inform me once this is done) =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:48, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. I like Ronline. He is a good person, and deserving of adminship probably. But as Zserghei and Iulian U. said, the fact that the nominator is Bonaparte makes this request suspect. If this RfA fails (which it probably won't), I would vote "support" in a new RfA later if the nominator's motives were less suspcious. Now, if it didn't look like this RfA was definitely going to win, I would truly consider a "support" vote because it's Ronline we're talking about, but since it looks like it is with or without me, I'm just registering my opposition here more as a matter of principle. --Node 19:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Good points. I am aware that you had your share of verbal abuse from certain people at certain articles, but it was precisely there that Ronline had a moderating influence. That is to say, keep in mind that this is not a vote for Bonaparte to be an admin. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:28, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Oppose On the basis of the user to question 6 (which I've just taken the liberty of correcting the numbering of by hand). Please review Wikipedia:Protection policy and Wikipedia:Blocking policy, fix your answer to be in line with these, and I'll be glad to review this. Alai 04:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)Changing to abstain, following (iterated) modifications to answer, with which I'm now completely happy, pending a closer look at candidate's contribs/developing an actual substantiative opinion. Alai 05:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Neutral
- Zserghei 23:50, 25 November 2005 (UTC) I don't have anything against Ronline. I support his goal of making Bucharest a featured article, but personality of nominator (Bonaparte) is suspect.
- We are supposed to be judging the candidate here. In my view the nominator should not come into it. If you have a dispute with Bonaparte that is fine, but this is not the place to bring it up. Raven4x4x 09:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with Raven. Such votes may be considered invalid. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- These are nuetral votes, so what would be the point of considering them invalid? Turnstep 16:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I know. I would like to make it clear that this also applies to a negative vote, not necessarily a neutral vote. Voting against a candidate because you have differences with the nominator (but nothing against the candidate) is totally unfair to the RFA in question. If you have doubts on the candidate feel free to ask him questions. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- These are nuetral votes, so what would be the point of considering them invalid? Turnstep 16:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but I also feel that who the nominator is does matter to people. For example, if I don't know a person who is being nominated personally, but I do know and trust the nominator, I will tend to give the person nominated a little more credit. Similarly, unsigned nominations and nominations by anonymous IPs tend to raise the bar of my giving them a support vote, and I tend to subject those people to closer scrutiny. I don't think I would ever negatively discount a person based on the nominator however, which is what the above appears to be doing. So (in a very roundabout way!), I am agreeing with you: any oppose votes based solely on who the nominator is should be discarded or at least heavily discounted. Glad to see the above are nuetral votes. :) Turnstep 19:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Comments
- I think Ronline would be a good admin, but the fact that Bonaparte is the nominator makes me wonder what his intentions are. I don't want my Support vote to endorse Bonaparte's stance (see Talk:Moldovan language). Iulian U. 14:44, 25 November 2005 (UTC).
- May I suggest that User:Anittas treat this as an RfA and not a Senate confirmation hearing. The questions and insinuations below are ridiculous and have no bearing on this nom. Marskell 15:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
- 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
- A. I would be willing to work against vandalism in all of its forms. However, I'd also like to help with requested moves and things like that, the only an administrator can do and that people sometimes wait too much time for!
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A. Well, I've contributed mostly to the Romanian Wikipedia and I haven't really been a content contributor - I've mostly been involved in organisation, planning, stuff like that. I'm really proud, however, of the Caile Ferate Romane article. This isn't my article, but I was one of the major contributors that brought it up to featured status. I'm doing that with Bucharest now, but there's still some work to go :)
- 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
- A. Yes I have, for that matter. I've been involved in a dispute at the Moldovan Wikipedia, and I've tried to deal with that in as neutral a way as possible. The only thing I believe in more than neutrality is communication - without direct, reasonable communication, everything fails. I've also been involved in the Moldovan language article, which has been through some tough times lately. There, I've tried to stand for the truth, to prevent both sides taking things too far on their own way. In the future, I hope to maintain that. Mediating conflict is one thing I really enjoy doing, if only because it achieves a sense of social justice and constructive stability. Have any users caused me stress - yes, but I've never sought to aggrevate conflict. If there's one thing people must learn at Wikipedia, is that we should try to talk to each other in a nicer way. Ronline 07:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- 4. I read that you want to make Bucharest a featured article? Why? That city sucks. You could work on the Iasi article, instead. --Anittas 09:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- But Bucharest is a lovely city! I'm not from there, but it's pretty amazing place. And it's the capital of Romania. That's why I'm trying to make it a featured article. I've never to been to Iaşi, by the way. Ronline 10:17, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- What do you mean when you say that you're not a Romanian-Moldova unionist? Are you against a possible union? And how can you be Romanian and not have been to Iasi? What did Iorga say about Iasi? --Anittas 10:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be against a possible union, but I don't endorse one at the moment. If Moldova becomes Romanianised enough, a union will be OK. However, I wouldn't support a union with a country that is significantly poorer than Romania and doesn't feel particularly Romanian either (due to Russification). And, a federation-type state union similar to Serbia and Montenegro I wouldn't support even in the future. And, yes, I've never been to Iaşi. I've been to many places both in Romania and abroad, but never to Romanian Moldova. I heard that Iaşi is a very nice place and I will go there once. But I just haven't had the need to go so far. And yes, I would be willing to work on the Iaşi article. Ronline 11:53, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- 5. You supported Node on the Moldovan Wiki. Are you ashamed of that, now? And I don't see him supporting you here. How does that make you feel? --Anittas 09:40, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I don't support people, but concepts. At the mo.wiki dispute, I put forward my own proposal, a compromise proposal, that was agreed upon by a majority. All that I did was support Node's intention of creating a Wikipedia in Moldovan Cyrillic. And if you really want to know why, it was because not letting Cyrillic content at mo.wiki would've put pressure on the Romanian Wikipedia to accept Cyrillic content from Moldova, which is totally inappropriate. The fact that I don't support his views on the Moldovan language page doesn't mean a change of concept or rebirth. It just means that on this particular dispute I'm not supporting his point of view. So, no, I don't feel ashamed at all. I'm not a Romania-Moldova unionist. I'm a Romanian. Who is Transylvanian and has never been to Moldova. Ronline 10:17, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- There was no more pressure on the Romanian Wiki to have Cyrillic content than it is on the English Wiki to have Cyrillic content. That argument is not valid. --Anittas 10:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well, if the Moldovan Wikipedia were to be closed down, it would be because Romanian = Moldovan. In that case, people who write Moldovan in Cyrillic will say "you consider us to be Romanian speakers. Hence, we write Romanian in Cyrillic". Since Wikipedia doesn't make new Wikipedias based on script, only on language, these "Romanian-Cyrillic" contributors would say that they should host their content at ro.wiki. Ronline 11:53, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- These two questions seem inappropriate to me. How do they relate to Ronline's adminship abilities? Raven4x4x 09:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- And you are? --Anittas 10:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I am a user who doesn't see how those two questions are relevent to this RFA.Raven4x4x 11:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- They are relevant to me, because I like to make by judgement based on what values people hold. If he, for example, would be a born-again Christian, he would not get my vote, regardless of his skills in communicating with people and arbitrating. --Anittas 11:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not Christian at all for that matter. I'm atheist. Anittas - I don't mind you asking. It would probably be better to do so on my talk page though. Ask anything about me you want, especially stuff like political views, etc. Ronline 11:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Anittas, an RFA is meant to decide if a candidate is suitable for the job. It is not a popularity contest, or votes to bring down candidates just because he has personal beliefs contradictory to yours. Please note, an oppose vote on this count may not be considered by a bureaucrat in the final tally. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Anittas, I'm rather disappointed at your comment. What does the candidate's religion have to do whatsoever with their ability to do the job? --Martin Osterman 03:07, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- They are relevant to me, because I like to make by judgement based on what values people hold. If he, for example, would be a born-again Christian, he would not get my vote, regardless of his skills in communicating with people and arbitrating. --Anittas 11:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- I am a user who doesn't see how those two questions are relevent to this RFA.Raven4x4x 11:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- And you are? --Anittas 10:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well, that doesn't matter, really. I've answered them. (Ask anything you want!) Ronline 10:17, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- These two questions seem inappropriate to me. How do they relate to Ronline's adminship abilities? Raven4x4x 09:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- 6. As an admin, I'm assuming that you wouldn't use admin privileges in disputes you were actively involved in. It's correct, right? Node 19:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Well, that is to see on a case-by-case basis. If, for example, the situation at Moldovan language descends into edit-wars again, then the page should be protected. I won't edit while it is protected, though. If any users violate the 3RR, they should get banned. So, while I won't use my admin powers to favour a certain side (i.e. blocking innocent users, protecting pages when there is no good reason), when admin action is needed in dispute I am involved in, I don't see why it shouldn't be used. Ronline 23:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Further comment: I see my answer above has provoked dispute. I said "the page should be protected" not "I will protect the page". Additionally, if users violate 3RR, they should be blocked. There's no black and white on that, it doesn't matter what "side" they're on. I don't see how that is administrator abuse. As I said above, I won't use my admin powers to favour a certain side. However, in pages that I have edited, when there is vandalism, action must be taken. But, and I think users at ro.wiki will confirm this, I am generally very anti-blocking since I believe it is most undemocratic to block users at Wikipedia for anything else but simple vandalism. As to page protection, it is sometimes necessary, but I won't do it for pages that I am involved in disputes with. Ronline 04:19, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- OK, to make a complex thing short - the answer is "No, except for simple vandalism." I'd also like to let everyone know that I'm in general quite anti-blocking and very pro-dialogue. I've been involved in communication with an anonymous user who was adding misleading information to the Romania article and who people were nearly ready to block, but I managed to talk to him a few times and constructively encourage him not to add that information anymore. So I would only ever block a user, in any case, after I have talked to him. I wouldn't give a "warning", rather I would explain to him a more comfortable way about his actions. (Of course, all of this with the exception of blatantly bad-faith simple vandalism). Ronline 04:43, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- 7. And also... would you agree with the statement "it's usually better to talk things out than to fight a battle over them"? --Node 19:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, very much so. That's one of my main principles as a user. Ronline 23:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Why are you asking him these things? You already opposed him. As an admin, I hope he'll ban your sorry ass! :) --Anittas 22:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Anittas, a lot of things you wrote in here are inapprorpate. You give Romanians a bad fame in the world. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:36, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Bad famle or bad image? The latter is not my department. I don't kick kids out to live in the streets. I pay my taxes and I help those who I can. That's my philanthropic nature. Change your name to a Romanian one, then we talk. --Anittas 03:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- Anittas, you of all people should know that there are historical reasons for some purely Romanian people in Moldova to have Russian names. Oleg's native language is Romanian. I'm assuming all or the majority of his ancestors are Romanians/Moldovans (might be wrong here). This doesn't nessecarily mean he'll have a "Romanian name". Since he was born during the Soviet era, it's quite possible his parents gave him a Russian given name hoping it would mean a brighter future for him (similarly, some Taiwanese parents in the period of Japanese occupation gave their kids Japanese names because they thought their kids would be discriminated against less). --Node 03:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- Bad famle or bad image? The latter is not my department. I don't kick kids out to live in the streets. I pay my taxes and I help those who I can. That's my philanthropic nature. Change your name to a Romanian one, then we talk. --Anittas 03:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I understand that and I symphatize with him, but nothing stops him now from setting it right. He could take the name of Alexandru, after his father. Or any name that doesn't sound Russian! --Anittas 06:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)