User:Ad Orientem

About
Just another 50 something classical conservative trapped in the wrong century. My interests are eclectic and include politics, philosophy, theology, economics, history (European & Byzantine), ships especially ocean liners and baseball (GO METS!). I enjoy reading on a wide range of topics and also enjoys the occasional historical fiction novel (Patrick O'Brian, Dewey Lambdin, Julian Stockwin).
 * "Fear no insult, ask for no crown, receive with indifference both flattery and slander, and do not argue with a fool." - Aleksandr Pushkin
 * "Discussions should be conducted without fondness for dispute or desire for victory." - Benjamin Franklin

Places from my past

 * Binghamton, New York
 * USS Orion (AS-18)
 * La Maddalena (Italy)
 * USS Mahlon S. Tisdale
 * USS McClusky
 * Naval Base San Diego
 * USS Trippe (FF-1075)
 * Naval Station Newport
 * USS Caron
 * Naval Station Norfolk
 * State University of New York at Cortland
 * University at Albany
 * Merced, California

Admin Stuff
Things that need doing

Guide

Stats

Recently active users including admins

Association of Deletionist Wikipedians


I am a proud member of the Association of Deletionist Wikipedians. Some random thoughts...


 * OK, we have the two world wars and the sinking of the Titanic covered. How much more do we really need?
 * !Voting Keep should be safe, legal and rare.
 * An article without a single cited reliable source is not an article. It is a 21st century specie of graffiti and should be dealt with accordingly.
 * I am SOO glad I did not find this group before my RFA. I would never... ever... have passed.

Some Thoughts on AfD

 * When Commenting Be pithy. Be concise. Cite policies or guidelines if possible. Confine your comments to what is germane to the discussion and be brief. Above all, be brief! None of us are paid (and certainly not by the word). Plowing through walls of text when there are another 60 AfDs waiting for closure is not what we want to deal with.
 * Relist? Sure. But not ad infinitum. The first relist is not an issue as long as there is no discernible consensus. A second is also not a big deal if there is little or no participation. Especially if what participation there is, is not of one mind. But after two I generally will be looking to close the discussion and will only relist a third time if I think there is a realistic chance it will add clarity. I don't relist AfD discussions beyond three times. If we can't reach a verdict over the course of a month then it's time to admit the jury is deadlocked and declare a mistrial. Which brings me to...
 * No consensus I suspect that some admins regard a "no-consensus' close as some kind of personal failure. I however think it is not a big deal and simply reflects the messy reality that is Wikipedia. I don't close as no-consensus unless the discussion has been relisted at least once and I prefer twice unless there is very heavy participation and it is obvious that no agreement is going to be reachable. A no consensus defaults to Keep and almost always is w/o prejudice to a future renomination. In some cases where participation is very heavy and opinions are all over the place I may add a note encouraging a short cooling off period before renominating.
 * Soft delete If a discussion has been relisted at least once, with either no participation or just a single delete vote, the article has not been the subject of a previous AfD or contested Prod, and I find the OP's rational to be reasonable I may call it a soft delete. That is effectively treating it as an expired Prod (per the recently revised deletion guidelines). In such cases WP:REFUND applies.
 * Userfication I generally no longer accept requests to userfy articles at AfD unless there is a clear consensus in favor of that outcome at the discussion.

Some Thoughts on ANI

 * ANI is not a place typically associated with happy endings. In my experience most of the time you are better off avoiding it if you can. There is a reason it is often referred to as the drama board. Talk to an individual admin first if that's a viable option.
 * Yes, there are times when ANI is the least bad course of action or you just really don't have a choice. Make your case. Be concise. Cite diffs where applicable. And be sure to notify all involved parties.
 * ANI discussions have a bad habit of taking on a momentum and life of their own, becoming bloated, unwieldy and WP:TLDR. Conceding the odd exception, in my experience most ANI discussions cease being productive after 2-3 days. Admins should consider closing discussions after that point.
 * Don't be afraid to admit you were wrong. We all make mistakes and if you do or say something that turns out to have been wrong or less than great, admitting as much upfront can actually end up enhancing your position. In the case of OPs it may also help deflecting the dreaded WP:BOOMERANG.
 * It is not uncommon for experienced editors to assist with reviewing reports, which can be helpful, especially where the report is complicated and might require a little digging. Additionally, some editors considering RfA will do this to help gain experience with policy and guideline questions as well as dealing with problematic editors. However, in general newer and inexperienced editors should stay clear of the drama board to the extent possible.

Some Thoughts on RfA
If you are interested in what I look for in a Candidate for Admin click here.

On Pseudo-Science and Fringe Theories
Why Wikipedia Is So Tough on Bigfoot

Things I (probably) Won't Do

 * Administrator Assisted Wikicide Ok, you have decided to leave, and you want someone to lock the door after you. Sorry, you will need to ask another admin. Yes, there are some admins who will block non-disruptive users on request as a form of "RETIRED and I really mean it." I however, am not one of them. If your stress level has reached the point where you think it's time to go, then just post the retired template and move on. If you are really really sure you aren't coming back, just scramble your password (don't save it) and then log out. But if you are sure that you want to be blocked you can post the request at WP:AN.
 * History Merge Huh?
 * Filters My command of tech probably peaked with the advent of the electric typewriter (it was a wondrous thing). So if you see me playing with edit filters there are probably just two potential explanations; my account has been hacked or I've gone mad.
 * Userfying deleted pages See the section on AfD above.
 *  I strongly disagree with parts of MOS:GENDERID. As a consequence, I generally avoid articles and most discussions where that guideline applies or is likely to be a major issue. Additionally, I have stopped patrolling the Fringe Theories Noticeboard following what appears to be a hostile takeover from the Atheist Inquisition. There is a limit to the amount of belittling and condescending commentary directed at persons of faith that I am prepared to endure. Some exceptions exist and I will deal with naked vandalism or other obvious forms of disruption wherever I find them.
 * A man has got to know his limitations. -SFPD Inspector (Dirty) Harry Callahan

Administrator Recall
I am open to recall under the following procedure:
 * A motion of "No Confidence" may be filed at WP:AN by any experienced editor in good standing (2+ years tenure, 5,000+ edits, no current or very recent sanctions).
 * The motion would remain open for discussion for five days from being filed unless withdrawn by the OP, which may be done at any time.
 * The discussion would be open to participation by any auto-confirmed users but only experienced editors, as defined above, may !vote.
 * At the end of five days, if the motion has the support of six experienced editors, three of whom are current admins, I will either resign or request a vote of confidence from the community via a second RfA.

Best comeback to one of my blocks
''I haven't done anything wrong, you're being very unfair on me, unblock me please this very instant, I have terminal cancer. You have a very small penis.''