Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:49, 19 January 2008

Gwen Gale

Voice your opinion (talk page) (15/1/0); Scheduled to end 23:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Gwen Gale (talk · contribs) - Gwen Gale has been editing Misplaced Pages under her current user name for over a year, during which time she has made over 13,000 edits. She made a further 13,000 edits under her previous account User:Wyss. She is an excellent article writer, developing articles on a range of subjects, some up to Good Article level. She is experienced at XfD and guideline discussions, and has taken part in vandal fighting. Gwen Gale is an experienced and knowledgable user who can be trusted with the tools, in whatever area she decides to use them. Epbr123 (talk) 17:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I'd tend to go where I was needed most. This said, I'd watch WP:AIV, WP:ANI, WP:RFP and CAT:CSD (also WP:AN3, maybe), pitching in where I could. For example, I have so much experience spotting and dealing with unambiguous vandalism (I go by the narrow definition). I was given the new WP:Rollback tool lately and because of this, I've likely rv'd a bit more vandalism and graffiti than I otherwise would have done. I'd also like to help individual editors who approach me with questions and other worries. Oftentimes no response with sysop tools is even needed, but hearing this in a friendly way from a sysop, along with some tips, can be very helpful to a less experienced editor. I strongly believe in the stark line between admin tasks and content editing, so aside from dealing with blatant IP or new-user vandalism, I wouldn't use the tools on any article I've edited for content. Misplaced Pages has come such a long way since I started editing on this wiki. One sign of this is how lately, I've even brought up my participation here in discussions with professional colleagues who have responded very positively to suggestions I've made about implementing wiki solutions to content management tasks whilst citing Misplaced Pages as a very successful implementation. I've learned a lot through my Misplaced Pages hobby and happily, I'm finding meaningful ways to share it these days.

2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: To answer this, I'd say the hardest thing to do here is growing an article about a high-profile topic towards WP:GA or WP:FA and I think this is as it should be. Knowledge management in the context of open, free content is highly complex and skeinish. Writing a readable, user-friendly narrative to carry it all is a skill. I also think a thoroughly cited and cleanly written article can be so helpful to casual readers, long before it gets to GA. Given this, I tend to work on topics which for me, represent an overlap of two or more core areas of my own interest. I try to combine WP:V and WP:WEIGHT with a steadfastly wide historical perspective and coherent writing style. I always see an article as a "whole" so my edits are often targeted at integrating helpful but perhaps carelessly written edits into a smoothly flowing narrative. My best contributions (to put it that way) have had to do with putting all this together, with all kinds of editors. This brings me to WP:AGF: In my experience most editors, even those who seem (to experienced editors) utterly clueless, nettlesome and PoV driven in the most unhelpful ways (WP:OR, WP:3RR and so on), are editing here in good faith. They want to "help the world" by sharing their views, understanding and knowledge. One "trick" is is to nudge a knowledgeable but inexperienced editor towards sharing what amounts to their acquired knowledge of verifiable sources.

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: Almost three years ago as inexperienced but enthusiastic User:Wyss (my former username) I got caught in the middle of a very sad dispute between banned sockpuppeteer User:Ted Wilkes and User:Onefortyone. This went on for months and in the heat of an ad hominum, project space argument by User:Ted Wilkes which I should have stayed away from altogether, User:Redwolf24 added me to Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone. User:Redwolf24 then looked at it more closely, had second thoughts and tried to have me removed from the arbitration action but was ignored. I was shocked and humiliated when I received a topical ban but my interests are wide and I weathered it through. Meanwhile I think it was wholly my own fault it ever got that far. I look back and wince when I see how easy it would have been to resolve the dispute on the talk page (wish I knew then what I know now and so on). Anyway since then, Arbcom has more than shown their good faith in me. They're volunteers doing a mostly thankless and difficult job. I can sometimes be a WP:BOLD editor so very short, bright flashups do happen. The latest was at Abraham Lincoln. After inquiries on my talk page I tried to help out, but had to walk away since I don't like conflict: Of the two editors there who disputed with me, one was an admin who was soon after blocked for edit warring and hasn't edited since (hope he comes back though, I think he only got into an over-enthusiastic mood). The other was politley asked to refrain from editing at WP:ANI before he scrambled his password and stopped contributing altogether with that account. High profile/traffic articles have problems all their own and sometimes grow at a glacial pace but they do tend to improve with (lots of) time and patience. The only other thing worth mentioning is WP:3rr. With 26,000+ edits since December 2004 (editing as User:Gwen Gale since November 2006) I guess one could say I haven't had much trouble with breaches of 3rr but there was a time when I thought editing by multiple revert could be done from "higher principle" or whatever, to thwart WP:SPAs, socks and blatant PoV warring. I was mistaken. From the perspectives of a casual reader, Misplaced Pages's purpose as a helpful, free tertiary source and notions of peaceful encyclopedia writing, I believe edit warring is always corrosive and destabilizing. When it comes to content, there is never an emergency on Misplaced Pages.

Question from Sarcasticidealist

4. You come across the following articles marked as A7 speedies. How do you handle each?

• "Ernst Weemerman is an American politician and has been a city councillor in Omaha, Nebraska since 1995." (citing the Omaha City Council homepage as a reference)

No assertion of encyclopedic significance (membership in a town/city council alone rarely if ever meets the threshold), I'd delete the article.

• "Britney Spheres is an adult film actress who has appeared in upwards of fifty popular adult films." (no source cited)

Has at least some minimal assertion of significance, I'd rm the tag, then likely stubify and add a cite request tag.

• "Grant Boogernia is the most significant campaign setting in the Oozes & Oopsies series of roleplaying games." (citing the website for Warlocks of the Island, the makers of Oozes & Oopsies)

Not an A7, I'd rm the tag. Could be AfD'd or merged but with games and cartoons I'd tend to leave that to other editors.

• "The Mediterranean Bird of Prey is an award winning film by director Johnny McRedlink." (no source cited)

Not an A7, I'd rm the tag. Separately, the article may have been started by Johnny himself but since it asserts an award (significance), AfD is the only way to deal with this if the award happens to be either unverifiable or meaningless.

Follow-up: How, if at all, would your answer change of Ernst Weemerman was a city councillor in Los Angeles?

I think the assertion of membership in the city council of a city the size (and wide notability) of LA has encyclopedic significance in the English-language WP. Not an A7, I'd rm the tag and stubify.

One last question, then: where (approximately) is the line between a city whose councillors are speedy-able and those whose councillors are not?

Tough one. I don't know, but would say while a city's size is a helpful gauge, its economic, historical and cultural significance also have some sway. I mean, there are maybe a million towns and villages in the world. Perhaps 25 (1 in 40,000) have city councils in which membership alone could be taken as encyclopedic and the line gets fuzzy with the bottom dozen or so of these. If I had that kind of doubt, I'd send it to AfD. Also, in that fuzzy area, I might Google the person to see if I could dig up something else notable about them. Gwen Gale (talk) 06:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Question from Spartaz

5.: Are you still covered by the topic ban imposed by the arbitration committee?

A: No. When I changed my username at the suggestion of an arbcom member in November 2006 (11 months after the arcom ruling) I was told I could edit anywhere I liked.

• Was this an on wiki note that we can see? Spartaz 17:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it was in a private email exchange with User:Fred Bauder, since my privacy was the pith of the username change. I asked him if the topical ban still applied and his answer was (either in these words or close enough) I could edit anywhere I wanted to. Because it wasn't done on the wiki, there was a flurry a few months later (May 2007) when someone, hoping to compromise me, dug up who I was and reported it to User:Thatcher, who briefly blocked me before learning (I would guess by IRC but I don't know) I was no longer subject to the arbcom ruling and promptly unblocking me with a note, "probation had expired" (see the diff). At that time I also had a few friendly emails and other messages of support. I do also recall User:Fred Bauder sending me a politely worded note at that time which said something like, "We're counting on you, don't let us down" or words with that meaning. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions from BusterD

6. This edit by Fred Bauder seems to indicate that you also edited briefly under User:The Witch. Is that correct?

For about 24 hours, two years ago, yes. I quickly decided User:The Witch was an unhelpful username so I went back to User:Wyss. You will please note the account wasn't used to evade the arbcom ruling. I don't consider this brief experiment relevant but I'll be happy to answer questions about it.

I have no issue at all with the interim user account, but was wondering why this wasn't disclosed. Shouldn't those edits also be logged on this page's talk? Late sig by BusterD (talk) 17:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

To be straightforward with you, I still kinda like the name but many editors seemed to take it as disruptive (I quickly understood that and dropped it "like a hot potato" since this wasn't at all what I meant to happen). Since it was only a day-long experiment I thought it was nn. I'll add it to the links though, thanks for bringing it up. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

It's a great name, but I could see how you'd have to be as ubiquitous as User:Voice of All to get away with it. I'd be satisfied if you were to agree (other than unregistered editing) no other user accounts have been used and/or need to be logged in talk. BusterD (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

7. Have you ever edited any current or previous version of talk pages (including your own user talk page or talk archives) in a manner that might be seen as misleading to a current reader of that page or those archives?

I would like to answer your question but I need something more specific, like,

(Here, Gwen asks herself a question as an example) ... "As Gwen Gale, did you ever try to hide the fact you were User:Wyss?"

Yes, WP:RTV, 11 months after the arbcom ruling I was being stalked and personally identifiable information about me had been posted on this wiki by another editor. After another year this turned out to be non-threatening and nothing to worry about but at the time I took it seriously. Fred Bauder suggested I change my username.

By coincidence, I redirected User:Wyss to User:Gwen Gale a couple of days before I received this nomination (which I must say, I was expecting). Truth be told, this User:Ted Wilkes User:Onefortyone thing all blew over a long time ago. Moreover, I recently told 141 I thought there was a way WP policy would indeed wholly support the inclusion of his tabloid/gossip sources and made it clear I support that inclusion.

Please do ask me anything you like and I'll be open about it but be specific, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Not to nitpick, but the unindented bullet used in your comment above makes it appear as if it were I who posed the question which begins: "As Gwen Gale, did you ever..." I did not ask that question, thinking its form a bit provocative. BusterD (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't mean for that to happen, I've fixed it, please let me know if you're ok with it now.

followup: This edit seems to mislead the reader. Was this a notice of a legitimate block? BusterD (talk) 17:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

That was almost two years ago and I think I was still kind of "touchy" about all this back then (which I know most editors would undertsand). My comments there say the block wasn't justified. I don't remember the details at all but if I said at the time it was unjustified it likely was. Please note, in my comments back then I still acknowledged that the block happened, but I was clearly unhappy and was strongly contesting it. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

following up to reply: In retrospect, do you think that's the right way an admin candidate should be expected to deal with talk archives? Doesn't that sort of edit make your archives a less reliable source for current evaluation? BusterD (talk) 18:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I see what you're getting at. I do so agree with you, in retrospect I think rm'ing the template was an over-reaction at the time. I truly don't remember the details but I can say, reading my comments, I was upset and felt wronged. If I felt that way today, I would handle it very differently (and I think, far more effectively). It was two years ago, I have lots more experience now along with a much deeper understanding of how WP works (and why it works) and I should say, Misplaced Pages has grown up more too. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

continued followup: I see that "At request of user" Fred Bauder appears to have deleted the page history for User talk:Wyss. Was this talk archive page history deleted because it permitted access to inflammatory or personal information? BusterD (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, WP:RTV. At the time it seemed like the wise thing to do. The talk pages were sprinkled with bits of personal information I'd disclosed about myself in causal exchanges and a certain user had homed in on who I was, where I lived and so on. Moreover, a recently banned sockpuppet had my private email address, had seen a picture of me on another web site and knew something about where I lived. I got very worried and asked Mr Bauder to wipe out the talk pages, which he immediately did. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

final followup: And that sounds quite appropriate, but with this RfA in mind it might have been better to just oversight the inappropriate information and leave most of the history intact. Of course, you may have had no intention of seeking tools at that time, and have had very good-faith reasons for deleting an entire talk page history which covers a big chunk of your editing career. I have zero issue with the pedia protecting users from abuse. Do you agree that this missing talk page history further clouds the picture for a current or casual reader (albeit for the best of reasons)? BusterD (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

General comments

• See Gwen Gale's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Gwen Gale: Gwen Gale (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• I edited as User:Wyss briefly in February 2004, then from December 2004 to November 2006 when on the advice of an arbcom member I changed my username. At the time this was a helpful privacy precaution but events since then have shown me there are no worries, so here are the links for Wyss: Wyss (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi) Gwen Gale (talk) 18:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
• Two years ago, for about 24 hours, I tried out a new user name, which I thought sounded cool, but turned out to be nettlesome to some editors and I quickly dropped it: The Witch (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/Gwen Gale before commenting.

Discussion

• You need to accept the nom first :) — DarkFalls 23:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops! Done :) Gwen Gale (talk) 23:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. Great editor. (Except they s/he needs to accept the nomination officially. =D.) Malinaccier (talk) 23:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

   Oh yeah, beat the nom! Malinaccier (talk) 23:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

2. I strongly support this nomination. Gwen Gale is an excellent article-writer, good at vandal-fighting, experienced, and overall, a nice user. My interactions with her have been positive, and I'm sure she'll make a fine admin. Acalamari 23:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Per Acalamari. Concerns in the past (with arbcom) has been addressed. — DarkFalls 23:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Support - although we have had limited contact, editing skills and personal interaction appears great. WBardwin (talk) 00:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Support per nom. Epbr123 (talk) 00:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Support Jmlk17 00:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Support per nominator. Excellent editor, Gwen will make a great admin. Postoak (talk) 00:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Support No problems here. --Sharkface217 02:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
9. Support As per Acalamari and track.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
10. Support per nom and answers to questions. Spencer 02:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
11. Strong Support Wonderful editor, will put the mop to good use. Very happy to support. --Veritas (talk) 04:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
12. Support Don't see any reason not to. Lawrence Cohen 16:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
13. Support Excellent candidate, will surely make an excellent admin. - PeaceNT (talk) 17:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
14. Support as per my experience with Gwen's excellent, collaborative work on the Oral Roberts University article. She proved herself to be both calm and even-handed when dealing with rabid POV-pushers on that article, so I have zero concerns that she would abuse the tools. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
15. Support. I hope you'll be conservative with the deletion of municipal politicians, since it's often hard to call how they'll go at AfD, but I confess that this is something of a personal bugbear of mine, and it would be churlish to oppose a good candidate on that basis. I'm also entirely satisfied with Gwen's discussion of the Arb Comm ruling and related events. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
16. Support. Fine editor. I had a problematic interaction with her last year (see oppose section below) but I'm willing to take at face value that she learned from this experience and moved on. Ronnotel (talk) 19:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

#Oppose (change to support) While Gwen has a strong record of contribution, my interactions with her leave me with decided reservations about her temperament and style of editing. In particular, I found her to be excessively aggressive over what I thought was a minor issue in this discussion: Talk:Fred_Noonan#Presumed_dead. Based on this, I'm not at all convinced that Gwen would bring the right attitude to difficult situations. Ronnotel (talk) 19:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

This looks like any other typical dispute over a policy issue and should probably have been taken to WP:3O, but Gwen's behavior doesn't seem "excessively aggressive." --Veritas (talk) 19:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

From February 2007? That was almost a year ago. Acalamari 19:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I shouldn't have let it go on and on like that. I wasn't "excessively aggressive" but could/should have gotten other, disinterested editors in on it after our first back and forth. Sorry about that Ronnotel, looking back on it, I see this as my botch and you have my apologies. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral