Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:02, 5 May 2009

Gaia Octavia Agrippa

Voice your opinion (talk page) (5/3/4); Scheduled to end 19:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Nomination

Gaia Octavia Agrippa (talk · contribs) – I would consider myself a wikignome working quietly away to improve wikipedia behind the scenes. I am regularly involved in anti-vandalism using Huggle, and would like to further this being able to block persistent vandals. I also get myself involved in Articles for deletion, on occasion and would like to further my involvement by being able to delete pages. Gaia Octavia Agrippa | _Sign 19:33, 5 May 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 intend to take part in page deletion and user/ip blocking.

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

A: As a wikignome I haven't made massive edits to wikipedia. However, I would say my best contributions are when I generate a random page a get it up to B-class standard by adding references, links, headings, and most commonly, infoboxes.

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: There have been a number of occasions in the past when I have been involved in conflicts of some kind. When this happens I take it off the article and onto the others talk page and try to resolve our dispute civilly.

Additional optional questions from user:Tempodivalse:

4. Under what circumstances would you block an established editor to Misplaced Pages?

A: If they had regularly been vandalising wikipedia and/or causing general trouble such as incivility. It wouldn't matter to me if they had written 100 FA, if they constantly vandalised,

5. Are there any Misplaced Pages policies that you particularly agree with? Conversely, are there any policies you particularly disagree with?

A: I particularly agree with wikipedia's policy on vandalism, and the warning system used against vandals, because they are cleanly cut and easily enforced. I have some issues with wikipedia's policy on Naming conventions, because it is my belief that articles should be named the official name of the subject matter, with well know alternatives listed in the introduction and redirected to the article.

6. What is your understanding of consensus? How would you determine if consensus does or does not exist in different situations? I'm asking this because, as an administrator, you will sooner or later come across a situation where you will need to judge consensus in order to take a certain action, like in a content dispute, etc.

A: It is my belief that a consensus is reached when the majority of voters/participants have agreed on the outcome, after a reasonable amount of time, and without any major objections. I am aware that wikipedia itself finds it hard to define consensus, and therefore it is up to those involved to decide when one has been reached.

Optional question from Dank

7. Point us to a conversation where you did a good job of explaining or supporting a policy or guideline; or if you prefer, point us to a conversation where you made a good argument against a policy or guideline.

A: Unfortunately I cannot find any conversations. However I do remember having a discussion with a user about abusing multiple accounts, after which I was compelled to report them, and forthwith got them blocked.

General comments

• Links for Gaia Octavia Agrippa: Gaia Octavia Agrippa (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Gaia Octavia Agrippa can be found here.

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

Discussion

• Editing stats posted at the talk page. –Juliancolton |  19:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Neurolysis/Counters.js

Support

1. Support I really like the answer to Q3, support.--Giants27 /C 19:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
2. Support per User:Gaia Octavia Agrippa/Awards, good argument in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Cutler Beckett, and as candidate has never been blocked. Best, --A Nobody 19:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

   Interesting. Dlohcierekim 21:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

3. Support Good answers to questions show a good level of knowledge in policy matters, can be trusted. tempodivalse  20:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
4. Support No reason not to. Meetare Shappy 20:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
5. Support per above. One (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
6. Weak Support I do not agree with this user's positions on singular "they", usage of quotation marks, and spacing between sentences. Keepscases (talk) 22:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Answers to questions are not impressive, and I see little sign of preparation to become an admin -- a bit of Huggling, a few AfD noms, hardly anything more. I could support after a few months more of experience with admin-related matters. Looie496 (talk) 21:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
2. Oppose - While I applaud the user's boldness to request adminship, I do not think they are ready. They have virtually no contributions in both Misplaced Pages or Misplaced Pages talk namespaces; despite the user wanting to work in both deletion and blocking, there are no edits to AIV to speak of (5 according to X!'s counter, no AFD nominations, no edits to policy talk pages. The only recent speedy tagging was a G7 to a page where the creator replaced the content with an external URL (would have been an A3) and in March a A1 to foreign language material. The answer to Q4 is hazy - we do not block established users any other way than all other vandals: If they break the rules and a block is needed to stop them, we block them. They don't need to do it regularly to be blocked, they just need to continue after being given warnings to stop. Answer to Q6 sounds like the user believes that consensus is more of a vote than a !vote (see comment in neutral). So, to sum it up, I believe this user means well, I really do. But I do not think they grasp policy enough for the mop just yet. Regards SoWhy 21:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
3. Oppose per SoWhy. Additionally, with Wikignome users that most of the community is not familiar with, it's especially important to have detailed answers to the questions, which this candidate does not supply. Qs 1 and 6 are exceedingly vague, and Q7 reveals that this user has not had enough interaction with others to demonstrably prove that he/she has the proper temperament for the tools. GlassCobra 21:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I can't see any reason to not support but I tend to put a lot of weight on the answers to the questions and these responses are, um, spotty. Some 'meat' in the answers (a diff here and there and a little passion in the 'greatest contributions' would be nice). Meanwhile, I'm parking in the neutral section. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 19:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
2. Grave concerns related to understanding of consensus not being a vote. Dlohcierekim 20:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

   I said in my answer that it was majority of voters/participants implying that it could be a straight vote or a discussion on a talk-page. But please correct me if I am wrong. Gaia Octavia Agrippa | _Sign 20:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

   Consensus is not necessarily the majority of participants agreeing, it's where the best (policy) reasons for a decision lay. 10 people can argue to keep an article at AFD because they are interested in the subject and still the one !vote to delete can be consensus if it is backed by policy. Regards SoWhy 21:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

   Yes. Exactly It is not a majority vote. Consensus traditionally hovers in the 75% range, but it is about weighing arguments rather than counting votes. If a consensus is not reached in an AFD discussion, the default is "Keep," though there is some debate as to whether this should be true in BLP's. Expanding rationale.I see no CSD taggings in deleted contribs. I would like to see more CSD experience. Reported vandal who had stopped after final warning. I would like to see more AIV experience. Since others have cited the answers in Support, I must say I find the answers lackluster and leaving me with serious doubts. Dlohcierekim 21:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

3. Neutral. I've come across Gaia a few times in her Wikignoming and appreciate her contributions; however, I am largely unimpressed with her answers to the questions. KuyaBriBri 21:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
4. Neutral per RegentsPark and KuyaBriBri. LITTLEMOUNTAIN5 21:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)