Revision as of 13:17, 10 November 2014 editWee Curry Monster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,546 edits →Questions for the candidate: question about gap← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:18, 10 November 2014 edit undoWee Curry Monster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,546 edits →Oppose: movedNext edit → | ||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
# '''Support'''. Content creation is a bit limited, but otherwise good contributions. Sensible. ] <font color="#3CB371">¤</font> <small></font>]]</small> 10:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | # '''Support'''. Content creation is a bit limited, but otherwise good contributions. Sensible. ] <font color="#3CB371">¤</font> <small></font>]]</small> 10:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
# '''Support''' Thanks for volunteering. ''']'''] 11:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | # '''Support''' Thanks for volunteering. ''']'''] 11:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
⚫ | #'''Oppose''' per , sorry. I suppose you were right to turn the heading into a plural but you were certainly wrong to capitalise the word "link". It is not a proper noun. Try again in six months. --] (]) 11:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
#'''Support''' I've never had any direct contact with IJB but I've seen him around for as long as I've been here (and he was here two years before that too). Never seen any problems. Have seen a lot of good work. ] (]) 12:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | #'''Support''' I've never had any direct contact with IJB but I've seen him around for as long as I've been here (and he was here two years before that too). Never seen any problems. Have seen a lot of good work. ] (]) 12:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
#:BTW To anyone who can fix things like that, the counter seems to be stuck. ] (]) | #:BTW To anyone who can fix things like that, the counter seems to be stuck. ] (]) | ||
Line 91: | Line 90: | ||
=====Oppose===== | =====Oppose===== | ||
⚫ | #'''Oppose''' per , sorry. I suppose you were right to turn the heading into a plural but you were certainly wrong to capitalise the word "link". It is not a proper noun. Try again in six months. --] (]) 11:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
=====Neutral===== | =====Neutral===== |
Revision as of 13:18, 10 November 2014
I JethroBT
Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (28/1/0); Scheduled to end 22:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Nomination
I JethroBT (talk · contribs) – I would like to nominate User:I JethroBT for adminship. I couldn't think of a more suited candidate. He has it all. He's got experience closing discussions (and attacking the list at WP:ANRFC), CSD tagging, AFD participation, he's got a some quality content (including working on a FAC), he is an OTRS volunteer, and he can make high quality contributions to Arbcom cases.
The first time I ran into I, JethroBT was during a WP:RFC/Username discussion here. Despite creating his account before the rule about "bot" usernames being disallowed, and despite being under the gun, he handled himself maturely and respectfully making very clear arguments in support of his username. The result was that he was allowed to keep his username. Despite that, still, he volunteered to rename it anyway. This is a guy who abhors drama and is all about putting his pride away to get the job done.
Since then, he has been a beacon of good sense and respectfulness. I cannot recall a single instance of him loosing his cool. He makes solid decisions based in policy and he can back up his own comments with quality content work. I went through an extensive review of his edits, articles created, main articles contributed to, ANI participation, CSDs, talk page, featured content, block log, edit count, deleted contributions, Gender Gap Arbcom participation, checked sourcing for plagiarism, CSD tags and RFC closures. He consistently gets it right. We're highly served by giving I, JethroBT the tools.--v/r - TP 21:30, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
- Thanks for your nomination, TParis, and I graciously accept.
- For participants in the RfA, as you look over how my edits are distributed, you will no doubt notice that many of them are in the User talk namespace (~30%). The majority of these contributions reflect my participation in the Moodbar Feedback Tool when it was active (2011-2013, I think?) in an effort to engage with and assist new editors. I, JethroBT 22:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A: I'd like to primarily focus my work on closing discussions at WP:ANRFC, which has a frequent backlog and few editors working to clear it up because, let's face it, it can be very time consuming to evaluate consensus. Many requests specify for an admin close or otherwise require it just by nature of the discussion itself. Helping to resolve these discussions is important to me because when a consensus can be reached, it can improve an article and sometimes will allow editors refocus their efforts on further building the article and avoid getting caught up in the same dispute in the future (which isn't to say consensus cannot change later on).
- I'd also like to help evaluate speedy deletion nominations based on my experience with them (see User:I JethroBT/CSD log). I would also feel comfortable evaluating AfD discussions after having participated in many of them () and having done some appropriate non-admin closes on my own.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
- A: If folks are looking for articles that best illustrate my labor and research, they should check out taiko, retrieval-induced forgetting, and Miss Major Griffin-Gracy. They can all definitely be improved; I am working to get them to GA or FA status (heading to the library this week for some materials for the Taiko article). Aside from article writing, this three-closer RfC on the Monty Hall problem that I completed with Eraserhead1 and Churn and change was the most involved and collaborative consensus process I've been involved with. I also have enjoyed engaging with new editors at the Teahouse, and previously at the Moodbar Feedback Tool when it was active. For better or for worse, first impressions are important, and I spend my time engaging with new editors because I want to help them accomplish their goals and show them that contributing to Misplaced Pages is worth their time and consideration. I believe building our encyclopedia can be a rewarding and productive experience, as it has been for me.
- 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: Editors can challenge RFC closes, such as in this example. In this case, the challenge did not stand up to scrutiny, but during the course of the AN discussion, another editor brought up an alternative that wasn't proposed during the RfC itself. I endorsed the idea, even though it conflicted with my close, because it appeared to resolve the main problems that initiated the RfC in the first place, which I felt was more important. Being mindful about solutions like this, even if they conflict with my RfC closes, is crucial if they can fairly resolve legitimate article issues.
- Back in 2011, I also had a rough time trying to sort out complicated issues with the Heroes in Hell book series. There is too much detail to describe here (see this and this for reference), but there were publication, neutrality, and merger issues that multiple contributors to the series were involved with. A dispute resolution did not fully resolve the issues. The situation was generally frustrating because the default mode of communication was walls of text and the atmosphere was consistently hostile despite attempts to cool things down. I sometimes found myself without a good solution. In these situations, I have found it best to disengage for a time and let other editors handle it rather than escalate matters.
- Additional question from GraniteSand
- 4. What's your most accomplished piece of original content contribution, as a whole or as part of a collaboration?
- A:
- Additional questions from Wee Curry Monster
- 5. There is a 5 year gap when your account appeared to be dormant, would you mind elaborating what you were doing in that period?
- A:
- 6. Have you ever edited as an IP editor or with another named account in that period?
- A:
General comments
- Links for I JethroBT: I JethroBT (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
- Edit summary usage for I JethroBT can be found here.
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.
Discussion
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
Support
- Support. Dekimasuよ! 22:59, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support, I've seen him at the Teahouse. Good host. --AmaryllisGardener 23:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support of course! Cheers, Thanks, L235-Talk Ping when replying 23:04, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support I haven't crossed paths with Jethro on pages, but I've seen them around enough to take notice and always had a good feeling about them. Looking at the stats, I see a lot of solid AFD work, plenty of article edits and creations, all the basics that show reasonable clue and judgement, plus it is pretty easy to see that he's here to build an encyclopedia. And I trust TP's vetting as well. Dennis - 2¢ 23:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Sure. → Call me Hahc21 23:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Looks like a solid well rounded candidate. A quick glance at his stats suggests that he checks all the important boxes for a prospective admin. Good luck! -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:35, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Don't forget me. Support per awesome nom, he's a swell guy!--v/r - TP 23:42, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Rschen7754 23:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Sure! Why not? Howicus (Did I mess up?) 23:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support I was positive he was an admin already. – Philosopher 00:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support a perfect candidate! ///EuroCarGT 00:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Stephen 01:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support --I am One of Many (talk) 02:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support No obvious issues. LHM 02:56, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Why not?--Church 03:10, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support: answers to the 3 questions seem impressive, editing history is generally excellent, and good job with that Monty Hall RfC! Thizzlehatter (talk) 05:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support I have had the great pleasure of interacting with this editor many times over the years. He is solid, mature, level-headed, knowledgeable, and fully committed to this encyclopedia. His work at the Teahouse has demonstrated, over and over again, how hard he works to assist new editors, the best of whom represent the very future of this project. I support this candidacy without reservation. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support - Seen him a couple of times around WP. Contributions are usefull, seems to know what he is doing. No reason to oppose. - Taketa (talk) 06:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support - experienced editor who would have great use for the administrative tools. I agree with Thizzlehatter; the answers to the questions were great, and that I JethroBT is just a fantastic contributor overall. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 06:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support No issues. Philg88 07:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Helpful, friendly and knowledgeable editor. Everything else looks good, I'm sure he will make a great admin. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Oh hell, yes. Excellent candidate who truly has the best interests of the project at heart. About time he got the bit. Yunshui 水 08:34, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Wikipedian 2 (talk) 09:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- He wasn't an admin already? cliché, I know... —Kusma (t·c) 10:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support. Content creation is a bit limited, but otherwise good contributions. Sensible. Axl ¤ 10:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for volunteering. benmoore 11:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support I've never had any direct contact with IJB but I've seen him around for as long as I've been here (and he was here two years before that too). Never seen any problems. Have seen a lot of good work. Peridon (talk) 12:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support - It's rare that I vote in RfAs recently, because I don't have the time to fully investigate candidates. That said, here is a user that I've worked with in the past and have met in real life. Without a doubt I trust him to be a responsible administrator and wholeheartedly support. Worm(talk) 12:55, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Oppose
- Oppose per this, sorry. I suppose you were right to turn the heading into a plural but you were certainly wrong to capitalise the word "link". It is not a proper noun. Try again in six months. --Mkativerata (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)