Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:06, 22 July 2007

N

Voice your opinion (talk page) (1/1/0); Scheduled to end 21:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

N (talk · contribs) - I have decided to self-nominate again after trying to get a admin coach and getting User:Dgies, who has been so inactive he hasn't been able to help me much. I have learned a lot since my previous RfA... I have learned to master my wiki-temper, I have been much more civil towards other editors, and I got a free picture of that flute. It actually took a bit of sleuthing to find, as the word "flute" is misspelled on the original Flickr page. There are no obvious Google hits suggesting the flute is in the Henan Museum as the media seems to have lost interest in tracking the story once the original discovery story broke, plus the fact that everyone is content reprinting the non-commercially licensed image from the Brookhaven Lab. I determined the name of the closest museum to the archaeological site though and looked on Flickr, lo and behold a picture of the flute, but as All Rights Reserved. One re-licensing request later and it is now a free image. You are all welcome to look at the notes I made in preparation for Dgies helping me, including a candid self-assessment of my flaws. I am trusted on Commons to review Flickr image licensing. -N 21:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: I particularly enjoy tracking persistent sockpuppets, so I suppose that would be something I would work on. I also enjoy looking at dubious image licenses and improper use of non-free media. (I recently got to combine the two in a checkuser report that used evidence gathered on 2 wikis). I would generally participate in reviewing and deleting image backlogs and discussions. Betacommand may be controversial but he's doing the right thing. We do not need pictures of every boy band and TV show ever produced. I am much more critical of these than important historical pictures, ones where NFCC#8 ranks much higher on the scale. -N 21:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

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

A: I suppose it would be the dozens of free pictures I have uploaded to Commons, as well as what I've done to try to track down difficult sources on images or work on the rationale for them. It saddens me that many historic photos other sites have no problems using are deleted here because nobody knows who took a photo. However, my views on this matter will not stop me from enforcing the policies. I will just be sad when I delete those images. -N 21:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

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: Yes I've been involved with conflicts in editing. Sometimes it was caused by my temper, although I've learned from those mistakes. I've learned to just walk away from the computer when that happens, and remember we're all human and we all make mistakes. Most people trying to do edits that aren't in line with policy aren't trying to vandalize Misplaced Pages, they're trying to put in what they feel is right. I've very patiently tried to explain the NFCC to several editors lately, and while it's frustrating to see them not get it, I just accept it and tag the images and walk away (and then revert when they remove the tags from the images). -N 21:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Optional questions from Wikidudeman

4. Could you give an example in an image deletion discussion where you thought editors were displaying "copyright paranoia"?

A. No. I disagree with some of the decisions made by others, but Misplaced Pages is run first by policy and second by consensus. (and vice versa, consensus can make policy). If the majority clearly thought an image's copyright status was too unclear to keep, or if the closing administrator did so, and the decision was not successfully appealed, it is in no way my place to debate it any further. I may not agree, but it's not paranoia, as we should err on the side of caution in difficult cases. As Quadell pointed out to me in the link above, in those cases the image could still easily be under copyright. -N 00:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

General comments

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

• Links for N: N (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/N before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. S seems to be a good candidate. -- Anonymous Dissident 23:52, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

   Mandatory follow-up: This RfA is for N, not S. ;) Black Falcon 00:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose I'm going to have to oppose. This user has made some edits not assuming good faith and attacking other editors in the recent past. Most notably my experience with him, where I nominated an image for speedy deletion which hadn't quite been up for the 7 days, he stated that my "cavalier attitude towards established policy appalled him". ]. The image was indeed deleted and even if I was a bit too early to tag it, he didn't treat the situation very well by attacking me and being confrontational. Also this edit ] seems to indicate the same. I don't believe he has corrected his problems since his last RFA where his temper and attitude was also brought up and was one of the main reasons it failed. Perhaps in a few more moths and more experience dealing with people and not attacking them would be in order before becoming administrator. Wikidudeman 00:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   When I pointed out to you the image did not meet the speedy deletion criteria your reply seemed to indicate you were perfectly aware of the policy but you chose to ignore it. I do find that appalling. -N 00:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   I wasn't ignoring policy. I explained clearly why I nominated the image for deletion. You need to read WP:IAR and WP:AGF, the deletion of the image benefited wikipedia as it served no purpose and was being used soley for an article deleted by consensus. Your response (even if I was in the wrong) was itself in the wrong. You attacked me and labeled my attitude as "cavalier" and stated you were "appalled" by it. A simple objection to my nomination of it would have sufficed, however you saw the need to attack me. Wikidudeman 00:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   I do believe you were acting in good faith, but the speedy deletion rules are especially immune to IAR for a reason. I'm sorry I called your attitude cavalier though, apparently "cavalier" means the macho attitude a hero (or horseman, ie knight) shows, and you definitely were acting in good faith. -N 00:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   It's good that you apologize, at least you recognize that you were in the wrong by attacking me. Though it still shows that you're probably not quite ready for the mop. P.S. Tell me where it says WP:IAR doesn't apply to WP:CSD, that would seem to be an oxymoron and a contradiction of WP:IAR itself. Wikidudeman 00:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   Nowhere explicitly, although WP:CSD does start off with "The speedy deletion policy specifies the limited cases where administrators may delete Misplaced Pages pages or media without discussion" and if you hang around the CSD talk page much or WP:DRV you would see people being angry at stuff being deleted when it shouldn't have. Administrators should not delete things on a whim, or their personal ideas, hence the commentary at CSD about how such deletions should be uncontroversial. Such deletions are rapidly overturned at DRV unless there's another reason to keep the page deleted. -N 01:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

2. Reverting an edit of an experienced user here on the basis that they were purely not a member of the "Single Letter Group" and therefore had no "right" to edit that page, is conduct which I consider unbecoming an administrator. Also, characterising a bunch of experienced users who protested the fact that this page was a joke as "trolls" ("Looks good. I think we should ask R to have the page deleted and then re-create it after the MfD. That way we can start over. And somehow avoid attracting the trolls") isn't too fantastic either. Further, you supported the deletion of edits selectively on that page ("Nice that you deleted the diffs from the people who didn't qualify"), which was proven to be in terrible judgement by the general consensus at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:R/Single Letter Group. A lot of general concerns as well, as pointed out above, including having a confusing username. Strong oppose. Daniel 01:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

   Experienced administrators performed the deletions. And people randomly editing the page just to prove they could is what I consider trolling. It's a wiki. People can edit pages. Doing it over and over to prove a point is just WP:LAME. -N 01:05, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

3. Oppose — I view self-noms as prima facie evidence of power-hunger. Kurt Weber 01:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Neutral