Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Thumperward 2: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:42, 9 March 2009 editOttava Rima (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,327 edits →Oppose← Previous edit Revision as of 20:58, 9 March 2009 edit undoKeepscases~enwiki (talk | contribs)1,916 edits →Questions for the candidateNext edit →
Line 26: Line 26:
:'''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? :'''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:''' I've voluntarily restricted myself to one revert with a forced discussion on any occasion where I disagree with an edit, and will continue to do so. If a dispute can't be resolved on the talk page readily enough, there are a variety of escalation paths; ], RfCs, bringing the issue to the attention of related WikiProjects and pinging editors who I feel are good at dispute resolution. I'm fortunate enough that my watchlist is big enough that I can easily walk away from anything which is causing me stress, and come back to it later. I also try to find some form of common ground with editors who disagree with me in whatever way - such as by pinging them if I find an article which I might not be equipped to improve myself. ::'''A:''' I've voluntarily restricted myself to one revert with a forced discussion on any occasion where I disagree with an edit, and will continue to do so. If a dispute can't be resolved on the talk page readily enough, there are a variety of escalation paths; ], RfCs, bringing the issue to the attention of related WikiProjects and pinging editors who I feel are good at dispute resolution. I'm fortunate enough that my watchlist is big enough that I can easily walk away from anything which is causing me stress, and come back to it later. I also try to find some form of common ground with editors who disagree with me in whatever way - such as by pinging them if I find an article which I might not be equipped to improve myself.

'''Additional question from ]
:'''4.''' Some older versions of your user page state that you edit Misplaced Pages while drunk. Do you think this is acceptable behavior for a user? For an administrator?
::'''A:'''
<!-- ;Additional questions from ]: --> <!-- ;Additional questions from ]: -->


Revision as of 20:58, 9 March 2009

Thumperward

Nomination

Voice your opinion (talk page) (4/1/0); Scheduled to end 18:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thumperward (talk · contribs) – Chris Cunningham, or Thumperward, has been with us for more than three years. This level of experience serves Misplaced Pages well; his comments on talk pages in the areas I in which encounter him are always well reasoned and based in policy, and this is reflected in his editing. He is particularly active in areas relating to templates, meaning he regularly needs to makes requests for admin assistance like this one. Such requests involve making changes that an awful lot of admins don't have the template knowledge and/or confidence to fulfill. Chris has a thorough knowledge of this area, and has shown that he is trustworthy enough to use it. He already tackles backlogs that don't require tools; he recently cleared a year-old maintenance backlog at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Football. He is also active at AfD, where his contributions are always reasoned.

Chris has had one previous failed request for adminship, from late 2007. Much of the opposition there related to a 3RR block earlier that year. His actions since have shown that he has learned from experience, and that he is now a capable candidate. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Accepted. 18:21, 9 March 2009 (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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: I do a lot of work on template cleanup and construction; right now I tend to contribute to the editprotected backlog and I'd rather be clearing it. The same goes for vandalism patrol and fixing botched page moves.
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: I don't keep a tally of the articles I've helped get to GA / FA, but I remember editing the guinea pig article back in the day because I had a friend who liked guinea pigs and it ended up FA, which was nice. I've done a lot of work on template unification which has seen the project's infobox and navbox templates become more consistent and professional looking, and I pride myself on never turning down a request for help if I can.
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: I've voluntarily restricted myself to one revert with a forced discussion on any occasion where I disagree with an edit, and will continue to do so. If a dispute can't be resolved on the talk page readily enough, there are a variety of escalation paths; third opinions, RfCs, bringing the issue to the attention of related WikiProjects and pinging editors who I feel are good at dispute resolution. I'm fortunate enough that my watchlist is big enough that I can easily walk away from anything which is causing me stress, and come back to it later. I also try to find some form of common ground with editors who disagree with me in whatever way - such as by pinging them if I find an article which I might not be equipped to improve myself.

Additional question from Keepscases

4. Some older versions of your user page state that you edit Misplaced Pages while drunk. Do you think this is acceptable behavior for a user? For an administrator?
A:

General comments

RfAs for this user:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Thumperward before commenting.

Discussion


Support
  1. Oldelpaso (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. Support Essentially a specialist. Long time contributor with extensive experience. Has my support. Wisdom89 (T / ) 19:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  3. I'm going to support here. With respects to A Nobody's research into AfDs, I have two points. Firstly, expressing opinion in any debate on this website is just that, opinion. Caveats being Jimbo, Cary, and our dear attorney. They can lay down law. As with a certain RfA that was very recent it is my belief that participation in AfDs is a positive thing, even if the participants hold different views. Sometimes participants are flat out wrong, but most of the time they simply have a different interpretation of policy and guidelines (which yes, are open to interpretation). I may have the opinion to delete something, and express it. It does not mean that as an administrator I will ignore the thoughts of others and do as I please. We've had admins like that before, and they don't last long. I trust the candidate to put personal opinion aside and read the ideas of others and in that process, judge consensus. The second point (and this is not directed at A Nobody, but the participants of RfA in general) is that I have seen a disturbing trend of cherry picking points of contention along the lines of "That's not what I would have done." This is a collaborative process, and opposition based on disagreement is not progress but is, in fact, standing still. Further discussion of this idea can be taken to the RfA talk page but I have little interest in debating this- it's just my own little opinion. Steps off soapbox Keegan 20:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  4. Support for now, considering user hasn't stated they wish to work in the deletion area. If they did, I'd have to take A Nobody's oppose into more consideration. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 20:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  5. Am-somewhat-shocked-that-he-wasn't-already-support //roux   20:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  6. Support - Huh? -- not already an admin.? --EEMIV (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  7. Support. A level-headed editor who has been rational and respectful every time I've seen him. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 20:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose per User:A_Nobody#RfA_Standards. Thumperward at times can be a civil and constructive editor as when he has suggested some pages I help edit on and as such I am pleased at times to interact with him as an editor. And for the record, I like the pirate image on the userpage! My concerns with regards to adminship is how tools might be used based on past interactions. For example, he was pretty persistent about trying to get aspects of my old userspace undeleted that caused near wheel warring among admins over the issue. And with regards to AfDs, I am concerned with such instances as Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Abhuman, i.e. not thinking outside of the box. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alexander Corvinus, digging in to delete when a merge as happened was reasonable as a compromise was disappointing. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alien and Predator Timeline, we have use of the non-word "cruft." Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Blood Ravens, why not per WP:BEFORE attempt a merge or redirect? With Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Catsuits and bodysuits in popular media, not suitably acknowledging efforts to improve during discussion. With Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Eddie Quist, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of fictional characters by IQ, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rabbit of Caerbannog, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Snotling, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Snotling, and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Lathander we have a misread of the sources that was obviously inconsistent with consensus. With Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Horus Heresy, not objecting to future reuse seems more a call for a redirect with edit history intact to avoid having to request recreation. Just as with Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of SD Gundam G-Generation F mobile suits, why not redirect as happened? With Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Michael Corvin and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Suburbs (web series), it was just disappointing that when pretty much everyone else is persuaded by the sources that resulted in a keep, to still argue against them. In Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Coltons, even TTN didn't seem opposed to a merge and redirect. Finally in Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Stormie/DRV notes, he adamantly defended something that was speedily deleted. So, my concern with regards to AfDs are as follows: 1) overly biased tendency toward deletion of fictional subjects, even when they are improved and sources presented during the discussions; and 2) reluctance to change stance during discussions. It is important for admins to identify trends in an AfD and how the discussion develops when new material is presented and as such based on past experiences, I am concerned that even if an article is in fact rescued that might not be adequately taken into consideration. So, I am happy to work with Thumperward to improve articles and of the various editors with whom I have disagreed in my time here, I give him a lot of credit for making good faith gestures to suggest articles to work on or to make the talk page archive thing in my talk page when I changed names, but there have been just a few things regarding deletion that make me apprehensive as to what he might try to undelete and how he might close discussions. So, I am somewhat torn, because I believe he is an editor I can work with, but maybe if he pledged to not close fiction AfDs for which he might be biased (I think every fiction AfD I have participated in with him he said to delete, which is over 30 by my count, and not all of those closed as delete after all), maybe it would be reassuring. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, --A Nobody 18:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. Oppose - I am concerned with statements around the edit protection template pages. I am unable to trust this editor to do such without a chance of CoI or other problems. The concerns by A Nobody only verify a lack of trust. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


Neutral