Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/August 2009 election/Oversight/Mr.Z-man

Mr.Z-man
Thank you for considering my request to serve the project as an oversighter.

I've had an account on Wikipedia since December 2005, became an active editor several months later, and became an administrator in June 2007. More recently, I've gotten involved as an OTRS volunteer (February 2008) and as a MediaWiki developer (September 2008). My recent work focuses mainly on the maintenance and support side of the project, developing bots, scripts, and tools to maintain the project and to help other users work more efficiently. I see oversight as an extension of the work that I do, as oversight should be a tool used in the background to quietly protect Wikipedia, users, and the general public from potential harm.

From my OTRS/BLP work, I'm familiar with working discreetly with potentially sensitive information and I've requested oversight several times in the past and believe I have a good grasp of the oversight policy and can use it to protect the project and individuals. From my MediaWiki work, I'm already familiar with the interface for the oversight system and the new revision deletion system.

Living in the US Eastern Time Zone, I'm typically available between ~20:00–04:00 UTC, though depending on the season and my schedule, I may also be available at other times throughout the day. Even when not actively editing, I can generally still be reached through email and/or IRC. Mr.Z-man 17:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments and questions for Mr.Z-man

 * Question from Aitias (added 00:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)): Obviously, you would not have nominated yourself if you did not believe that there is a realistic chance to be elected. Why do you feel that you of all people should be one of those which will be elected? Do you, for example, reckon that you are better qualified than the other candidates?
 * I don't know if I would go as far to say that I'm better qualified than all other candidates. I have respect for all the candidates and the work that they've done, though I do believe my experiences, particularly OTRS experience working with the public, including BLP subjects, as well as my desire to continue serving the project in a maintenance/support role make me well suited for working as an oversighter. I believe I have the trust of the community, and as an oversighter, one of my goals would be to maintain that trust, as well as the integrity of the project. Mr.Z-man 03:36, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Question from Mailer Diablo 04:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC): How would you deal with editors/vandals/requestors/lawyers who attempt to creatively stretch the Oversight/Suppression policy, be it making an edit or making a request for suppression?
 * I don't believe that the motivation for the request or the motivation for the potential suppression target should really matter. The purpose of oversight/suppression is to protect the project, its users, and the public from harm. Whether an edit was made out of malice, an accident, or an attempt to game the system should not matter; if it has the potential to cause harm and cannot be adequately dealt with without suppression, it should be suppressed, regardless of whether or not it gives some vandal or wikilawyer any gratification. Such attempts to game the system should be dealt with separately from the issues of potential harm, this should be immediately in the case of vandals, or by the community or ArbCom (depending on the severity and sensitivity of the situation) for other cases. Mr.Z-man 05:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Question from Samir 04:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC): How old are you? Number please, not "over 18"?  I realize there are diverging opinions on the relevancy of age, but I personally think age is very relevant when you are standing for OS and dealing with sensitive information.  To boot, I am asking you what you do in real life, and specifically whether you have real world experience in handling sensitive information, as it would help me with my decision on your candidacy also.  Thanks.
 * For privacy reasons, I'd rather not make my exact age public, though the answer to the rest of the question ought to narrow down the range quite a bit. For most of the year I'm a full-time undergraduate student studying Materials Engineering (with a minor in economics). Currently I'm doing some MediaWiki-related advising and MediaWiki extension development for a non-profit organization. I have access to a few non-public wikis, though none of the information is particularly sensitive, and shell access for one wiki. In previous jobs I've worked in building services engineering design and CNC machining. I've also worked as an election inspector, which involved access to voters' IDs. Mr.Z-man 15:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Question from Mike.lifeguard 05:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC): May I ask why you are asking for oversight rather than checkuser permissions?
 * I did consider it when deciding to apply. From what I understand, checkuser often requires large time investments, in some instances hours per case. While I do often spend such time working on wiki-related matters, I was concerned that I would either spend too much time working on checkuser work and my other work might suffer, or I might not devote an adequate amount of time to checkuser work. Additionally, while I may be qualified for the technical side of checkuser, I'm admittedly not very good at things like analyzing behavior patterns and I have little experience working with sockpuppetry matters (out of choice, I don't find it particularly interesting). So I decided to leave checkuser to people with different priorities and/or better qualifications and instead apply for a tool that seems to be more consistent with the work I do now. Mr.Z-man 15:01, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answer, disappointing though it may be. I see a greater need for checkusers than for oversighters, and it is confusing to me that the number of candidates is so skewed. While I think having you as a checkuser would be more useful, I think having you as an oversighter will be useful too. Thanks for your honest answer - it is indeed difficult to find people interested and willing in the nature and volume of checkuser work. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; @en.wb 15:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Votes in support of Mr.Z-man

 * 1) Jamie S93  00:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Yep. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 00:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Dabomb87 (talk) 00:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 5)  Majorly  talk  00:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) Prodego  talk 00:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) Acalamari 00:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) ( X!  ·  talk )  · @065  · 00:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) ~  Ameliorate ! 01:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) —Animum (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) Strong support --  Tinu  Cherian  - 05:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 14) ~ fl  06:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 15) --Closedmouth (talk) 07:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 16) tedder (talk) 08:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 17) Shimgray | talk | 14:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 18)  Little  Mountain  5   15:18, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 19) --Jc3s5h (talk) 16:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 20) — Gavia immer (talk) 19:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 21) --Cybercobra (talk) 19:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 22) Masonpatriot (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 23) --Ipatrol (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 24) -Drdisque (talk) 20:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 25) — Ched :  ?  21:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 26) Shappy   talk  22:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 27) —Emufarmers(T/C) 23:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 28) Daniel (talk) 00:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 29) &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 06:20, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 30) Camaron ·  Christopher · talk 13:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 31) — Kralizec! (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 32) <font color="Blue">Alex '<font color="Red">fusco '<font color="Green">5  19:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 33) Recognizance (talk) 19:54, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 34) <font face="Verdana"> Stwalkerster  [  talk  ]  20:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 35) → ROUX   ₪  21:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 36) --  SPhilbrick  T  23:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 37) (reasoning)  The Earwig  (Talk &#124; Contribs) 02:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 38)  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 04:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 39) Tryptofish (talk) 14:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 40) &mdash; <b style="color:#309;">Mike</b>.<b style="color:#309;">lifeguard</b> &#124; @en.wb 15:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 41) Res2216firestar 16:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 42) — <span style="font-family: 'Georgia', serif; color: #20406F;">Aitias  // <span style="font-family: 'Georgia', serif; color: #20406F;">discussion  22:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 43) See here. -- Dylan 620  (contribs, logs) 00:30, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 44) Ncmvocalist (talk) 10:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 45) Ysangkok (talk) 11:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 46) Caspian blue 00:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 47)  iMatthew  talk  at 00:27, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 48) Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 49) —EncMstr (talk) 06:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 50) --Charitwo (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 51) &mdash; <tt>madman bum and angel</tt> 04:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 52) Ruslik_ Zero 13:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 53) Sceptre (talk) 14:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 54) <font color="#808000">Axl  <font color="#3CB371">¤ <font color="#808000">[Talk]  14:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 55) ▫ <font color="#202040">Johnny <font color="#204040">Mr <font color="#206040">Nin <font color="#204040">ja  03:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 56) --<font face="Segoe Print"> Until It Sleeps <sup style="color:green;">alternate   17:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 57) Aye  Phoe   talk   21:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 58)  Cbrown1023    talk   17:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 59) Protonk (talk) 00:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 60)  Master&amp;  Expert ( Talk ) 09:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 61) –Megaboz (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 62) <font style="font-family: Hoefler Text">Steven Walling (talk) 04:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 63) —DerHexer (Talk) 22:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 64) -  ALLST✰R ▼ echo wuz here  07:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 65) kollision (talk) 11:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 66) &mdash;Terrence and Phillip 16:29, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Doctorhobomd (talk) 17:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC) Sorry, not eligible, does not have 150 article edits before June 15. Risker (talk) 02:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Strong Support &mdash; Will scrlt ( “Talk” ) 16:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2)  Lara  17:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) <font face="times new roman"> hmwith t   18:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Whitehorse1 21:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) BJ Talk 23:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) BJ Talk 23:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Votes in opposition to Mr.Z-man

 * 1) Pzrmd (talk) 00:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Kingturtle (talk) 03:42, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Jehochman Talk 03:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * --Fox1942 (talk) 11:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC) (Vote indented as user is ineligible to vote in this election -  So Why  11:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC))
 * 1) Davewild (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) BrianY (talk) 04:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 4)  Pmlin  editor  18:01, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) <strong style="font-variant:small-caps">WJBscribe (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) JayHenry (talk) 01:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) <u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#28c">fish &amp;<u style="text-decoration:none;font:100% cursive;color:#D33">karate  11:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) Technically bright, but analytically dull and a bit judgment impaired. We have too many of such in the upper echelons on Wikipedia already.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 14:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) SlamDiego<font size="-2">&#8592;T 12:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) Outriggr (talk) 23:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Outriggr (talk) 23:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)