Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:32, 5 May 2005

Bishonen

Vote here (90/1/2) ending 13:17 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Bishonen has been here since last summer. She has written policies, and done her share of editing forsure. But from time to time she "shoots her mouth off" at people like she says, and people listen. Editors, administrators, even the arbitration committee, directly or indirectly have benefitted from her wisdom. Like JRM, she gets a warm and fuzzy feeling from people offering her to nominate her all the time, and has turned them down several times.

I managed to convince her after much negotiation, that if I could get JRM to consent, that she would finally accept a nomination too. :-)

Kim Bruning 13:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Candidate please indicate acceptance of the nomination here

Well, ok, then. But only because it's an honor to have my nomination on the same page as JRM's! --Bishonen | talk 15:14, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. Support. First one's always free, after that, you're addicted. ;-) Kim Bruning 13:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
2. I can't believe it's not butter! Strong support - Mark 13:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
3. Glad to support an excellent contributor. Grace Note 13:24, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
4. More than happy to support. JuntungWu 13:29, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
5. Strong support. We need more admins with sense like hers. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 13:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
6. Support, Making a very rare apperance here, I will endorse this nomination. How could I not! Inter\ 13:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
7. Strong support. Helpful, intuitive, active, and completely worthy of being an admin. Linuxbeak 13:45, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
8. Strong support. Great contributor, has all the skills to make a great admin too. Rje 13:49, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
9. Support. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:03, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
10. obviously dab (ᛏ) 14:07, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
11. why not? older≠wiser 14:50, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
12. Support; excellent in every way. Antandrus 14:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
13. Support KTC 15:15, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
14. Of course. Neutrality 15:26, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
15. Support: Still, I worry about the Wikiholism getting worse. Geogre 15:49, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
16. Support, most certainly. James F. (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
17. Support. One of the few, the fine, etc. Phils 16:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
18. Super duper strong support - although Sj's argument tempted me for a bit... :) ugen64 16:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
19. Support. Tupsharru 17:09, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
20. Support. Peter Isotalo 18:18, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
21. Support. "Well, ok, then. But only because it's an honor to have my nomination on the same page as JRM's!" Sickening. I nearly voted to oppose, but then I recalled that that's exactly what she wanted me to do. Nice try, but no such luck. Adminship is no big deal + contributor's value is beyond question = admin. JRM · Talk 19:17, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
22. Support. Kelly Martin 19:34, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
23. Support sannse (talk) 21:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
24. Support --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 21:20, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
25. Support. Proteus (Talk) 21:49, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
26. Support. Sounds good to me. --Umofomia 21:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
27. —Charles P.  22:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
28. Support. Already a paragon of editing. Admin tools are just the assets she needs. --Theo (Talk) 22:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
29. Support. An obvious choice. She's one of our best and nicest editors. SlimVirgin 23:02, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
30. Yupsiree. Good editor, good potential admin. Grutness| 00:38, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
31. Support-gadfium 01:13, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
32. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:13, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
33. El_C 03:37, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
34. Andre (talk) 04:14, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
35. Merovingian (t) (c) 07:29, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
36. Strong support. Wisdom and wit: what more can Misplaced Pages want? — mark ✎ 07:55, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
37. Support, of course. Joyous 11:14, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
38. Support Rama 11:34, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
39. Support. Good editor. Xtra 11:46, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
40. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 11:54, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
41. Kbdank71 12:50, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
42. Rmhermen 13:02, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
43. Fer shooer. violet/riga (t) 13:11, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
44. Support an excellent editor, will use sysop powers appropriately. Fawcett5 13:15, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
45. Support, though it's not as if you need more. - Taxman 13:30, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
46. Support - I may be away, but that won't stop me voting for these two. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
47. Support. PedanticallySpeaking 17:09, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
48. Support, of course.--Wiglaf 17:50, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
49. Support. Giano | talk 19:31, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
50. Super-Duper Support. - BanyanTree 20:24, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
51. Complete support. If there was something higher than support, I'd vote that. PRiis 20:30, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
52. She's always been nice to me. -- Netoholic @ 20:39, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
53. Strongest possible support!!! If I could vote fifty times for Bish, I would. - Lucky 6.9 21:14, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
54. Support: a friendly, helpful editor. Jonathunder 22:22, 2005 May 2 (UTC)
55. Support, obviously. --MarkSweep 00:08, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
56. Support, indubitably. Emsworth 01:21, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
57. Support, oh yes. -- Hoary 02:24, 2005 May 3 (UTC)
58. Wow! Lots of good editors who I already throught were admins. Support! - Ta bu shi da yu 02:49, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
59. Support of course. You said yes, you are in ;-) AlexR 03:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
60. Support. -Willmcw 04:16, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
61. Support. Have you seen how delightful Bishonen's TalkPage is? It is a marvel of wit. ---Rednblu | Talk 04:33, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
62. Support strongly. David Cannon 05:04, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
63. Support. Sheesh, it took long enough to get to the bottom of this list. --MPerel 05:50, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
64. Support. Excellent user. Sjakkalle 06:27, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
65. Bish bosh! - Worldtraveller 11:37, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
66. I thought $USER already was an arbitr^Wadmin - David Gerard 19:05, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
67. Support what David said, long overdue. --Wgfinley 19:58, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
68. (Seems as votes are rather unnecessary now, but...) Johan Magnus 20:27, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
69. She broke my admin support vote number! (64) Mike H 21:57, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
70. Support. — flamingspinach | (talk) 01:51, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
71. Support, with or without footnotes. Filiocht | Blarneyman 07:40, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
72. Support BlankVerse ∅ 10:43, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
73. Viajero 14:44, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
74. Support-JCarriker 19:22, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
75. Like, duh. Support. - Seth Ilys 20:44, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
76. I was intending to support earlier, but I guess I must've forgotten. Isomorphic 20:50, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
77. Support- A responsible editor (with a sense of humor, too)- L33tminion (talk) 21:02, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
78. Um, er, oops. Are you saying I didn't already support? Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 22:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
79. How could I but support? Páll 22:50, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
80. Support. Of course. — Trilobite (Talk) 23:05, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
81. Support. How could I not vote for the person who started, and contributed much to, my favorite April Fool ever? With great respect. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:35, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
82. Support. Oh, yes - I get the 82d vote. We need more people like Bishonen. Solid contributor, dedicated and active all over the place. Accepting the nomination basically for the convenience factor is a plus -- not overly eager and likely to be a very stable admin. Definite support. SWAdair | Talk 01:14, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
83. Support. ✏ OvenFresh² 02:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
84. Support "$user isn't already an admin?!" – ABCD 02:20, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
85. I could have sworn I already voted! Well, at this point, I usually wouldn't hop on the bandwagon, but I am obliged to show my strong support here. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 03:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
86. Of course. Happy to cast the 85th vote in favor. Bratsche 03:58, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
87. After being reminded that even addiction is good in moderation, changing vote to Support. +sj + 06:25, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
88. Support. Noisy | Talk 09:11, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
89. Come on, just 11 more votes and she'll be the first admin with 100 votes! sɪzlæk 10:09, May 5, 2005 (UTC)
90. Support. YAY! I get to be number 90! :p --Silversmith 16:03, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Strong oppose. <<garbled transmission>> -Nathan J. Yoder 14:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
   • Excuse me, what are you talking about? Carbonite | Talk 14:14, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
   • Where's my other sock? I must have lost it. Ah, here it is. Neutrality 15:26, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
   • Are you saying this is your sockpuppet? zomgwtflolbbq ban time! :P ugen64 16:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
     • What is interesting is that I did originally post it as a joke, however I have decided to stand by my vote. This is based on later statements in a conversation in #wikipedia@FreeNode that demonstrated her extreme immaturity. I was having a serious discussion with Kim Bruning about the GFDL and Misplaced Pages. However, when I demonstrated flaws in his points, he degraded to sarcastic passive aggerssive insults. Soon after, several others in his channel who had obviously known him prior simply started jumping on the bandwagon. Bishonen was one of those users engaging in self-admitted passive aggressive behavior, mainly in the form of sarcasm. This is not the sign of someone who can be an objective admin. Here are some fun quotes that came from simply having a conversation about the GFDL: User:Njyoder/bishonen. Lastly, there were other admins on there too who jumped on the band wagon. It seems a lot of these votes for new admins are meaningless, since the votes come primarily from people who already know and are on friendly terms with her. #wikipedia@freenode has done nothing but contribute to making wikipedia more of a circle jerk by encouraging power through cliques and mob mentality. If you are disliked by one of the clique, you are disliked by all automatically. Conversely, if you are strongly liked by one, you are liked by all and have a good chance of becoming an admin. Frankly, it's insane that so many admins are part of one massive clique, it only leads to mob/herd mentality. -Nathan J. Yoder 14:48, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
2. Lovely person, excellent editor, serene community member; but regretfully oppose. Inexplicably drawn to washrooms and their trappings. Should not be tempted into janitorial duty, considering the placement of the broomcloset. +sj + 14:18, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Are the above some sort of "insider jokes"? Somehow I don't really get it. Phils 16:17, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Phils, I'm sorry, I quite agree. Nathan was on IRC when I got nominated and I think he put in what was meant to be a joke, and other people removed it as being offensive. The traces left of that are certainly confusing. Even more so is sj's vote, which is a ... delicate reference to my subpage User:Bishonen/European toilet paper holder. ("Mine" only in the sense of living in my userspace, I'm merely one of many equally bathroom-fittings obsessed contributors.) If further clarification is desired, see this archive.--Bishonen | talk 17:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   • No jokes, but oppose pro forma unless and until User:Bishonen indicates some positive interest in being an admin, such as in the questions below. Making someone an admin who has to be virtually coerced into it is devalues the position for those who are willing and take the job seriously. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC) Bishonen answered the questions and shows herself ready to engage the broader community, so my objection is withdrawn. Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:59, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   You can't devalue the position, as it has no value — admins are ordinary editors with a few extra abilities and a lot of extra responsibilities. And better someone who has to be coerced than someone who's too eager. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:26, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Your opinion is not universally held. Admin is a position of trust and responsibility and I wouldn't ask someone to take it seriously if I could support someone who doesn't. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Well, I suggest that you read Misplaced Pages:Administrators. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:45, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Notwithstanding the much-recycled Jimbo quote, those who write the page push their opinion. The voting on RfA and the extensive discussions at talk, at times quite contentious, illustrate that many Wikipedians take the position quite seriously indeed. Do you think admin isn't a position of "trust and responsibility," as I have said? -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 17:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Well actually I specifically mentioned increased responsibility. The issue was the value of the position, however. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Ah, the value of the position. All admins receive the same scale, but bureaucrats are paid double. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 18:08, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

   Someone who accept reluctantly but can and will do a good job is better than someone who really wants it, over-eager, and wants it purely because of the associated value. -- KTC 20:35, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I would vote support, but there's way too many support votes already. It kinda makes me nervous. Besides, what was up with that April Fools' stuff? Everyking 07:48, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

It was a joke - you know ho ho ho and all that!!! Giano | talk 07:53, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

And it was not primarily intended as an April Fools' Day article at first, at least not by this contributor. It was a harmless outlet for some editors to poke fun at themselves and at the follies of life in general, Misplaced Pages in particular, in a manner that was entirely positive and enabled me, specifically, to regain my enthusiasm for this project. The fact that Bishonen hosted the whole thing with wit, grace, equanimity and great good humour strengthens her admin qualifications in my mind. Filiocht | Blarneyman 08:01, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

It's fine as it is, James. Normally I'd be disappointed not to have your support, but I set less store by it after you didn't have the courtesy to explain your Oppose vote to JRM, in spite of several requests to do so. I hope you'll reconsider and give the explanation, seeing as JRM has given you a bunch of good reasons why he wants to know.--Bishonen | talk 13:10, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

1. Abstain. Although Bishonen deserves being promoted for the work she has done here, I am a little concerned that the entire Misplaced Pages community is suffering from an acute case of herd behavior here. (although I might support her if she reaches over 100 votes or at the very last minute). Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Comments

• I just want to make a quick comment that Bishonen helped me with my featured article attempt (Civil Air Patrol) by doing some extensive copyediting. Seeing that she doesn't know much about the subject, yet was willing to help me out over several days, I would say that this person would make a great admin. Linuxbeak 13:45, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
• The nature of the two oppose votes cast so far is such that I think that they should be counted as supports. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  • The bureaucrats will probably discount Sj's vote, and Nathan's vote shouldn't matter, because the vote will probably not be close. ugen64 16:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
• I agree with Cecropia, for whatever it's worth. I won't change my vote or make it conditional, but I have wholehearted support for both Bishonen's adminship and the questionaire's answers being mandatory. Geogre 19:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
• Well, now we know what took bishonen so long to answer. That's ... detailed! :-) Kim Bruning 20:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
• Just want to note that I wanted to put this person up for nomination :-) Then I, um, left (sort of). I encourage everyone to vote for Bish! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:03, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Ta bu shi da yu. I know this nomination has the face of ungraciousness towards you and one or two other people. :-( It's not that I didn't appreciate your offer to nominate me before--I did--but I just wasn't ready. (And then Kim stamped on my fingers till I dropped off the ledge.)--Bishonen | talk 18:05, 3 May 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 read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)

A. Frankly, I don't expect to be a highly active admin, if I'm elected. I see myself as a content contributor primarily. But I do have some high-traffic pages watchlisted and revert vandalism on them when I see it, and it would be convenient to be able to do that in a simpler way. And to be able to occasionally to block somebody on a major vandalism spree, rather than have to go to IRC and shout for "an admin" to do it. I would especially like to do some New Pages patrol--I find that mighty frustrating at present, so I don't do it much, but it's something I'm interested in. I hope to avoid as far as possible the most contentious areas like blocking users and protecting pages, but as Kim said I am quite involved in the community--interfering, even--so these things will probably happen, too.

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

A. I suppose I'm quite proud of the Featured Articles I've authored, though most of them unfortunately don't demonstrate what's best about the wiki system: they're not very collaborative (exception: John Vanbrugh, mine and User:Giano's pride and joy). The subject I'm most interested in writing about is, well, kind of obscure and minor, so other editors tend to give these articles a bit of a wide berth. (Geogre, who is also into obscure stuff, is the exception!) Though, since you force me to blow my own horn here, some readers have ... oh, what the hell (caution to the wind), if you want to check out a comparatively light piece, try Colley Cibber. I do enjoy collaborative editing, and add bits to more widely edited articles (though rarely in the most controversial areas), just to get more of the smell of it in my nostrils. I'm kind of pleased with my housekeeping at Peer review, and hope/believe that the changes I helped make in February, and the new removal policy I wrote, has contributed to making it more dynamic.

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 will deal with it in the future?

A. Yes, I get stressed, and no, I'm not so laid-back that I just shake it off, I wish I were. The most contentious things I do are probably vote on WP:FAC, and remove inappropriate postings on Peer review, and on occasion I've gotten unexpected reactions. Somebody reckoned I was insulting him recently on WP:FAC, for instance. I'll be up front with you: I'm not the most seasoned admin material you'll ever see. (Well, duh, with JRM on the same page!) I get quite ...stressed, at something like that. What I do about it is explain how I feel (because people are entitled to know ... GRRRR ... no, no, just kidding!), and try to think, next time, more about what a sensitive situation it is for a user to put their baby articles on WP:FAC or WP:PR, and how I can try to be more tactful. I won't claim that conflicts with other users normally end with our being best buddies. Though, hey, that very thing did happen with User:Giano, if he doesn't mind my mentioning it!

As for stress over editing specifically, I think I'd make a better admin if I'd exposed myself to a bit more of it. I do tend to stay with safe subjects. I hereby vow to edit a little more controversially, and get more practice in being equable in controversy.

Finally, a question that hasn't been asked, but that Cecropia implies: why was I hard to persuade? Because I'm a serious wikipediholic, and I'm looking to cut down a little, rather than do more. I've been around a lot recently, and it isn't doing my day job any good (chorus:"She has a day job?"). I here vow to be online a little less (a little less, Geogre!), and try for higher quality instead.--Bishonen | talk 19:49, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

4. In what way do you feel you can further enhance the Italian influences slowly improving Misplaced Pages, and what are your views of the cultivation of oranges? Giano | talk 21:24, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

This obvious reference to Orange (word) should send you right to the next candidacy. --Bishonen | talk 21:42, 1 May 2005 (UTC)