User talk:Bobblewik/Wikipedia administration

Proposal
Hi Bobblewik - a question or two to ponder. 1) Isn't it about time you became an admin? 2) Would you mind if I nominated you? You're spend so much time doing behind the scene work changing inches to feet and hectares to square kilometres that a lot of people probably haven't noticed what a huge amount of work that is very approximately janitorial you are doing... I think it's only fair if you were given the Administrational Super-Powers (tm). Grutness...  wha?  08:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Many thanks. To take each question in turn:
 * 1. You could be right. However, I don't feel in any way constrained by my current status. I don't know what benefit being an admin would give the community or myself. Nor do I know what the disadvantages would be and whether I would have extra obligations. If it is "An administrator is simply a Wikipedian who can access the few restricted Wikipedia software functions: deleting articles and uploaded files, protecting and unprotecting pages and blocking and unblocking IP addresses.", then that sounds fine to me. I took a brief look at the reading list too. I can't see anything much different to what I already do beyond a few extra options.
 * 2. I don't mind if you nominate me. The suggestion is praise in itself.
 * It is a huge amount of janitorial work, as you say. I am reasonably self-motivated in this respect and the occasional praise such as yours keeps me going. In summary, please do. Thanks. Bobblewik (talk) 08:23, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

A lot of the sort of work you do would probably be made easier by having abilities like rollback available to you. I've added your name on WP:RFA - you need to go over and formally accept nomination and answer a couple of simple questions, and then the voting can start! Good luck! :) Grutness...  wha?  13:58, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Opposition
Hi Bobblewik: The oppose votes on your RFA all seem grounded and, although I have no plan to change my support vote, I hope that you intend to note the associated comments and act upon them. Keep up the great work. --Theo (Talk) 14:35, 26 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes. I am reading with interest. I am currently resisting the temptation to respond to detailed comments of voters. Some of the issues are no surprise and have been discussed on this page and elsewhere. The general discussion is giving me a welcome overview of how my contribution is perceived. In many cases, the genuine disagreements are perennial when units of measurement are the subject. As an individual, I accept that I am flawed and need to learn and adapt. I am proud to be active in the internationalisation of Wikipedia and I know some of what that entails will not please all individuals. But I will continue to look for personally acceptable ways to change my behaviour, my opinion or both, that can move me towards the group-think. Your feedback is welcome. Thanks. Bobblewik (talk) 10:12, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi Bobblewik - sorry the RfA vote failed to reach consensus. The majority were in favour of you becoming an admin, but it didn't reach the 75-80% normally required. The one good thing though is that, as you said, the comments during the RfA period have given you a chance to assess how others see your performance in Wikipedia. Grutness...  wha?  00:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I am impressed with the self-restraint you demonstrated during the RFA vote, despite the fact that some of the criticism raised seemed (to me at least) unfair and out of proportion. I hope you will keep up your good work which most certainly benefits a large majority of those people who use Wikipedia without ever knowing about RFAs, let alone this particular one. Rl 15:32, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I beg to differ, RI. It did not look like self-restraint. It looked like disrespect. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:56, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sorry you didn't get a better vote and I'm glad you are carrying on with your work. Would being an admin actually help with what you do? (I'm not an admin and I've never bothered to see what extra they can do). Part of the difficulty is that in RFA the accolade aspect gets muddled up with the janatorial aspect. You've got a barnstar already so maybe being an admin isn't important. To be turned down must be disappointing all the same. I have seen from some of your quiet replies (horsepower, for example) that you have been taking far more care and going to far more trouble than many people (including me!) have realised. Thincat 15:03, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks to all of you for the positive feedback. I also know that there are lurkers that have positive thoughts, so thanks to those too. As an upgrade to my abilities, it would have been welcome. I occasionally get frustrated that I can't do something that needs admin permissions. For example, only today I wanted to edit MediaWiki:Searchsize and move 40mm grenade but have had to leave notes on the talk pages. However, if being an administrator involves additional administrative *duties*, then I can take comfort that I do not have those duties. My niche as a user is quite comfortable (I am beginning to sound like a G, D or E in Brave New World). Being put forward by Grutness for community review was very interesting, I am grateful and wiser for that. Bobblewik (talk) 22:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * You don't need to be admin to move a page, unless the target name is already in use. Am I missing something? Anyway, we are not supposed to move a page while a VfD is in progress (although it already happened once during this very VfD). Rl 07:57, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * That explains it then. Thanks. Bobblewik (talk) 09:35, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Listing as active editor
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:19, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)