Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:18, 24 June 2006

Badlydrawnjeff

Discuss here (30/1/0) ending 18:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Badlydrawnjeff (talk · contribs) – Badlydrawnjeff has been around since February 2005, and his activity levels have increased steadily over that time. The quality of his edits is generally good and often very good, but I think he's best known for his presence on WP:AFD and WP:DRV, where he is a staunch defender of articles, always from a basis of policy. I think it is safe to call him an inclusionist, but never to the extent of defending uncited or unverifiable or non-neutral content. AfD regulars won't necessarily have noticed his steady work in the background chipping away at the uncited and biased. He has around 4,800 edits, including 2,000 main space edits and has also done much to promote the WP:MEMES draft guideline. He has a sound working knowledge of policy and guidelines and appears capable of being firm without being aggressive. For the record I disagree with him on just about every AfD and most of his political opinions as well! But this is supposed to be No Big Deal, right? And I have no personal doubts about Jeff's sincerity or his commitment to the project. Just zis Guy you know? 17:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I sincerely and humbly accept, and I especially appreciate JzG's kind words, as we have clashed many a time on deletion issues. I'll be glad to answer any extra questions people have as well. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Support

1. Meets my standards, as far as I can see. NSLE 18:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
2. Great contributions, especially to Misplaced Pages and Misplaced Pages:talk namespace. Combine that with nice answers to the questions and 2000 article edits, and you have an admin. AdamBiswanger1 18:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
3. Badlydrawnsupport I've been hoping to see this RfA. Good work on AfD! CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 18:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
4. Strong Support Having a dedicated administrator so interested in championing "ugly duckling" content will be a great boon to Misplaced Pages. Plus, he's a kind fellow. Xoloz 18:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
5. Hey, I wanted to nominate this guy. Anyway, I agree with Jeff on some things, I disagree with him on others. But every encounter has left me with the impression that he is reasonable, will always discuss things calmly, and is willing to listen to criticism and dissenting views, and actually wants to understand them, rather than just disagree with them. Should make a good admin. --W.marsh 19:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
6. Strong Support One of the most active guys at the AFD. Excellent user overall. --Srikeit 19:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
7. I normally don't agree with Jeff, especially on notabily on sports articles, but I personally believe he won't abuse the tools so Easy Support Jaranda 19:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
8. Support per all above. Roy A.A. 19:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
9. Support - per all above -- Tawker 19:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
10. Support, absolutely. bikeable (talk) 19:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
11. Reviewed User talk: and Misplaced Pages: contributions and approved of them. — Vildricianus 19:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
12. Support nice guy - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
13. Support Great user...everything I've seen has been thoughtful and level headed. Rx StrangeLove 19:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
14. Support No problems here. --Siva1979 20:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
15. I dunno, doesn't know the difference between "flair" and "flare"... oh, what the hell, seen this one around, support. ;) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 20:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
16. Never, he'd make a terrible admin. --Rory096 21:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

    In case anyone is wondering, this is a support. --Rory096 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

17. Support Regardless of whether you agree with his AfD positions or not, you always get the impression he's taken the time to consider them carefully, and he's open to discussion, which are two of the most important qualities in an admin. Very sound grasp of policy, generally polite, so I'm happy to support. Good luck! Ziggurat 21:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
18. Support with cliche "I thought this person was an admin!" I've seen this editor a lot, and while I too have disagreed with some of his positions on AfDs and such, I've also agreed with him on a lot of them as well. Produces good work and highly likely will be a good admin. Good nom, Guy! Agent 86 21:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
19. Support passes my rfa criteria. Anonymous__Anonymous 22:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
20. Support per above.--Kungfu Adam 22:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
21. Support. DarthVader 22:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
22. Support Naconkantari 23:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
23. Pepsidrinka supports. 00:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
24. Support seems like he would do well to have the extra tools and a pledge to stay away from issues where he might have a POV (some XfD's) shows an honest self-analysis and a good show of responsibility hoopydink 00:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
25. Support. I may not always agree with his opinions, but I can't find fault with his wikiwork. Grutness...wha? 00:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
26. digital_me
27. Support See him around a lot. Dlyons493 Talk 01:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
28. Support absolutely. I disagree with his stance on many AfD's, but this user is committed, works hard, and is openminded. Wholehearted support -- Samir धर्म 01:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
29. Support --Jay(Reply) 03:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
30. Support—looks good to me. —Khoikhoi 03:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
31. Indie Support Good record, solid civility, and a degree in history to boot. Teke 04:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
32. Having looked over the comments given, I believe this user is worthy of adminship. Chacor 04:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Is this a joke? I can't think of a single user that is less qualified to be an admin. He is petty, loves to wikistalk, is prone to edit wars, and enforces a heavy right wing POV in almost every article he graces with his "Edits". He is a troll and I don’t use that phrase lightly.--8bitJake 22:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

   ...And as such, I would like to see examples, preferably in the form of diffs. Grandmasterka 22:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

   I have had the misfortunes of knowing him due to his questionable edit wars on

   Christine Gregoire Henry M. Jackson Dave Reichert Morgan Spurlock Debbie Schlussel and His alliance in edit wars with former user "FRCP11"

   He is a perfect example of “The Great Failure of Misplaced Pages”.--8bitJake 23:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

   User:8bitJake is currently involved in an arbitration dispute with User:Badlydrawnjeff. Naconkantari 23:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

All user's edits.Voice-of-All 18:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

--Viewing contribution data for user Badlydrawnjeff (over the 4857 edit(s) shown on this page)--  (FAQ)
Time range: 467 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 18hr (UTC) -- 23, Jun, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 13, February, 2005
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 92.78% Minor edits: 95%
Average edits per day: 31.6 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 264 edits) : Major article edits: 99.47% Minor article edits: 97.4%
Analysis of edits (out of all 4857 edits shown of this page):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/rewrites/sourcing): 0.37% (18)
Small article edits (small content/info/reference additions): 9.68% (470)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 22.52% (1094)
Minor article edits marked as minor: 58%
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 1752 | Average edits per page: 2.77 | Edits on top: 8.21%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 52.09% (2530 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 17.15% (833 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 7.99% (388 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 15.77% (766 edit(s))
Edits by Misplaced Pages namespace:
Article: 41.18% (2000) | Article talk: 11.26% (547)
User: 3.34% (162) | User talk: 7.21% (350)
Misplaced Pages: 25.74% (1250) | Misplaced Pages talk: 6.59% (320)
Image: 4.04% (196)
Template: 0.56% (27)
Category: 0.04% (2)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.06% (3)

• See Badlydrawnjeff's edit summary usage with Mathbot's tool.
• Badlydrawnjeff's edit counts (from User:Interiot/Tool2):

Username Badlydrawnjeff
Total edits 4858
Distinct pages edited 1883
Average edits/page 2.580
First edit 01:11, 13 February 2005
(main) 2000
Talk 547
User 162
User talk 350
Image 196
Image talk 2
Template 27
Template talk 1
Category 2
Misplaced Pages 1251
Misplaced Pages talk 320

Is this a joke? I can't think of a single user that is less qualified to be an admin. He is petty, loves to wikistalk, is prone to edit wars, and enforces a heavy right wing POV in almost every article he graces with his "Edits". He is a troll and I don’t use that phrase lightly.--8bitJake 18:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll only note, for clarity's sake, that I've had a number of conflicts with 8bitJake which have resulted in the unfortunate need to open a Request for Arbitration that is still in process. I'm confident to allow my record to speak for itself further in this particular dispute. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I stand by my statement that Badlydrawnjeff is the worse example of an editor that I have encountered on Misplaced Pages. It would be a massive mistake to give him Admin rights.--8bitJake 18:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Misplaced Pages backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: Along with helping out in any backlog situation that could occur that I'd be an asset, I'd be most interested in pitching in with Speedy deletion and prod, which often gets backed up as I've noticed from time to time. I'm also interested in becoming much more energetic in dealing with copyvio, and a mop will help tremendously in working in that area. Help over at WP:3RR and related areas is always a good place to help out as well. Perhaps the future will bring me into a great mediation/dispute resolution role as well.

One area I will be avoiding, for the record, is the closing of controversial XfDs, as I'm a) usually involved in them, and b) know that I have a deserved reputation of being a hardline inclusionist, so I don't want there to be any question about using any possible powers for my own agenda.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I make a lot of stubs, and I'm not ashamed to say it. Of my 2000+ mainspace edits, almost 10% of them are new article creation or rewrites. My most major project thus far involved creating articles for The Elephant Six Collective, and creating a template for a collective of musicians that lacked any sort of centralized source. The project, of course, is still ongoing.

For specific articles, I'm currently in the process of making The Reputation into a Good/Featured Article-worthy entry, and I'm pleased with the work I've done on Kroger Babb, as well. I'm also fairly happy with how Mark Eitzel has come out so far, considering it was a day away from being deleted via WP:PROD when I found it.

Finally, I'm also someone who's not afraid to dive into political/controversial articles. I was able to deal fairly well with a situation a couple months ago revolving around Lew Rockwell and Joseph Sobran, and I feel I've made positive contributions in articles such as Michael Moore as well, where tempers and POV issues can flair up in a moment's notice.

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: Oh, absolutely. If I have one major personal downside in my WP history, it's probably the types of conflicts I end up getting into.

Some have worked out well, or at least according to whatever guidelines are laid out. Early on, conflict at Karl Rove was worked out fairly harmoniously, I've had some decent conflict resolutions at articles like Debbie Schlussel, and I've had to go to mediation/RfAr for one situation that the typical "try to work it out" method didn't solve, and have been more and more open of late to using requests for comment.

Others, not so much. I still regret how some issues with User:Nathanrdotcom went, I wish things weren't so continually tenuous with at couple other users, I know full well I haven't always handled my issues with WP:SNOW to the best of my ability, and I sometimes speak up in a knee-jerk fashion when approaching people regarding articles I feel strongly on at AfD. It's something I'm always aware of and always working on, and the longer I'm here, the more I'm using the tools available to reach the best result for the greater wiki, even if it doesn't end up the way I want it to.

Either way, I'm very fond of using talk pages, I have recently started using IRC and it has greatly benefited my ability to work through policy/guideline issues. Communication is key, and that's what I'm trying to stay focused on.