Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BeanoJosh 2


 * ''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

BeanoJosh
Closed per WP:SNOW at (1/12/0) (non-'crat closure)  Sasha  Call   22:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have been a wikipedian for awhile now, and I have had much fun in doing so. I ran into wikipedia in 2003 when I was attending Bend High School and, of course, like a lot of people got into making "test edits" with wikipedia pages. Those childish and unconstructive edits (vandalism) After I had registered a username (this one), I realized that this website was a wonderful and great place to be apart of. I tried making improvements in pages themselves, as well as placing AfD and AfSD tags where needed and cleaning up articles when needed. Most of my work, as you can see is in combating and cleaning up vandalism, which has been a really awesome experience. I try diligently to do my best with communication with other users, but I am not perfect. I try to do the right thing and say the right thing to others, and I know I can't always do it perfectly. But if I am given the honor and privilege to be promoted as a sysop, I will do everything within my powers (and, if allowed, my new powers) to keep wikipedia a great place to visit.

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * Questions for the candidate
 * 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with?


 * A: As a normal user, I have dealt mostly with searching for, identifying, reverting, and fixing vandalism. I, as an administrator plan to do the same exact thing. I would block vandals that have been reasonably warned beyond a doubt and would respond logically and positively not only to the AIV reports that is added, but also to those that contest their blocks. I would communicate and help new users with patience and confidence, like I have done for a few users before. I have done my part (when asked to) in giving tips to new article creators and help kindly remind others of policies that they may break. I would also continue and increase my participation with AfD discussions and would use my powers to make logical judgment and good decisions with articles under the AfSD debate. I have tried to participate in cleaning up articles in the administrative backlog, and I will work diligently to clean up more.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?


 * A: Before I click that "save page" button, I always make sure that what I am about to contribute to the article is better for Wikipedia. My AfSD judgment and participation has been a great experience and a great opportunity to input a positive and thought-based vote on an article's importance and significance on wikipedia. I have participated in cleaning up pages from wikipedia's backlog... another great experience. My best cleanup right now is 10:00AM-11:00AM (24 season 6)... a random and unimportant article to some, but to me it was great to take a completely raw and unedited page and bring it to life. Another pleasing experience is the skills in identifying and repairing vandalism. Before I used wikipedia's tools in fighting vandalism, it was completely up to me to patrol recent changes and revert vandalism. Sure the tools help do it much quicker, but the tools are completely useless (and can even make things worse) if you don't use proper and neutral judgment. One of my best vandal cleanups were of the Carlos Mencia page, when it was heavily vandalized my two different IP addresses.


 * 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: As a vandalism reverter, of course. Many IP addresses have said rude things to me after I have reverted their WP:VANDALISM vandalism and their unsourced edits. Some conversations, even with users, have been unfriendly, and I am partially to blame for not responding completely positive myself. I had a recent conversation with someone that wasn't 100% positive on either end. The best thing I do, like I say to others, is to not violate the AGF, neutral, or civility policies set fourth by the website. Also, admit fault if you're wrong. Lastly, ask if you don't know. Recently, there was an IP claiming to be a user. Although the conversation mostly didn't come out 100% positive, I didn't know if claiming to be a username was a violation. I asked an admin, and he implemented a AGF reminder. I apologized, and moved on. Not all conversations come out negative. A newbie user thought a vandalism revert I made on an article was me as the vandal. He asked me what the revert was about, and I kindly explained to him how the history pages work. He apologized, and I assured him that there was nothing he did wrong, since I make false-positive reverts too sometimes. I always try to work on replying positively to negative messages sent to me. Other than that, that's how I deal with stressful situations, and that's how I will continue to deal with it.

As a finishing note, I just want to thank everyone for reviewing my request. Whether or not I am promoted, I will do what I can within my power to have fun, keep wikipedia clean in any way I can, and help others.


 * 4. You see that another administrator has blocked an editor and you disagree with the block. What is the policy about unblocking and do you intend to adhere to it?--MONGO 19:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * A: If I were to disagree with a block, I would follow the suggestions and policies according to wikipedia's blocking policy, being 100% careful not to abuse the unblocking policy. I would follow the steps for appealing a block. If, hypothetically following your scenario, I were to disagree with a block, I would contact the admin who blocked the person. I'm not an admin, and I can already tell that it isn't considerate to unblock a user or IP without talking to the admin who blocked him or her. I would explain my point of view with the blocking administrator, and listen to his response and adhere to our: dispute resolution guidelines. I wouldn't unblock the person; instead let the admin decide for himself and let him do the unblocking. In a nutshell, I know the policies and would follow them 100%

Optional questions from User:Dlohcierekim that he lifted form User:Benon who got them from Tawker, JoshuaZ, Rob Church, NSLE . They are 100% optional but may help myself or other voters decide. If I have already voted please feel free to ignore these questions though other editors might find them to be of use. You can also remove the questions you don't want to touch if you like.


 *  I will answer any questions you have.  BeanoJosh 20:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * 5. Suppose you are closing an AfD where it would be keep if one counted certain votes that you suspect are sockpuppets/meatpuppets and would be delete otherwise. The RCU returns inconclusive, what do you do? Is your answer any different if the two possibilities are between no consensus and delete?
 * A- To me, it would be giving a puppet master (that's what I call them), and possibly a vandal their way if I were to count sockpuppet votes. It would be as if I voted for our nation's president with 100 ballots instead of one and the government counted all of them; it's wrong. Everyone has an equal voice. Attempting to vote more than once with sockpuppet accounts or IP's shouldn't get any more attention or credit than someone blanking an article. If the consensus (not including sock puppets) were to be in favor of deleting the article, I would make the decision to delete the article. If the decision is not conclusive, it would be the best decision to make the call if the article meets the WP:SNOW guidelines, or to encourage more votes in order to reach a consensus if the votes are balanced and contain well written statements on both sides. Being an administrator doesn't give me power to just do what I want when I want to... it gives me the power to be the judge, listen, help, make the hard choices, and make sure everyone has an equal voice.


 * 6. Do you believe there is a minimum number of people who need to express their opinions in order to reasonably close an AfD? If so, what is that number? What about RfDs and CfDs?


 * A- There is nothing I like better than a good debate. If you bring up the issue of the war in Iraq, abortion, gay rights, etc... you're going to hear opinions fly. A good debate has a good number of people. I always say that two brains are better than one. If you're asking for a direct number from me, I would say a good minimum would be at least 20 voters. It allows for good teamwork, consensus, and gives room for both sides to be well expressed. One policy I do have to acknowledge and impose is that wikipedia is not a democracy. According to that policy, it's the discussions themselves that are important and not the exact number of voters.


 * 7. A considerable number of administrators have experienced, or are close to, burnout due to stress inherent in a collaborative web site of this nature. Do you feel able to justify yourself under pressure, and to not permit stress to become overwhelming and cause undesirable or confused behaviour?


 * A- Stress is a powerful mindset for someone to undergo. It can either burn you down and make you bitter, angry, and someone with unethical and un-neutral things to say to others. I feel that my experience as a leader in real life and on other URLS has given me the time to know how to positively deal with stress. In my experience an administrator on my family URL myfamilynexus, I was not only in charge of keeping the peace and making sure nothing inappropriate breaks out in messages, chat, and blogs, but I was also in charge of maintaining the website, making the interface more easier to use (for grandparents, relatives that weren't experienced in computers, fixing errors within the website, covering part of the hosting bill, and much more. It was also my job to maintain and keep myself accountable for pretty much all the policies and rules we have here, only not so much in writing. You could call me 1/4 of the owner of the site. It's not a big site, and it's only for use of mt family to communicate with my cousin (currently serving in Iraq, but it gave me a great and vast amount of administrative experience in dealing with issues and keeping the site not only clean, but a maintained one. I have learned to motivate and channel any stress I might gain into a good path. The experience I have as a leader has already addressed the concern of stress.


 * 8. Why do you want to be an administrator?


 * A I am requesting adminship powers in order to be apart of something great to use for good. This website is a big database, and I enjoy using it. And if I enjoy something, I would try to do what I could to become involved and commit myself to making it better. The biggest reason I am here today is because I want the privilege and power to help lead. I want to take all that I have learned here over the time I have been here and apply it further to guide and help those that also love the site and want to make it better (and help reduce the damage done by those that don't).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlohcierekim (talk • contribs) 19:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion


 * It may be a faulty syntax, but my computer shows that BeanoJosh reverted oppose comments, here, does it show up like that on others? Rudget Contributions 20:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right — that does seem to be the case


 * Reply: What happened was that I was answering the optional questions and I forgot to login. I cut and pasted the entire page after logging in - Sorry. BeanoJosh 21:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) Support A fantastic editor. Qst  19:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC) Changed to oppose

Nothing wrong with this user. Good luck!--SJP wishes you a happy Veterans Day 19:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC) Changing to oppose
 * 1) --U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. deleted contribs 21:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose I'm sorry, but the talk page post here from a mere week ago is an enormous red flag; what we look for in an administrator does not include incivility with a side order of stalking. A review of your recent edits leaves me feeling that you need more experience in typical admin areas, such as AIV, images, deletion criteria, and even  basic policy. Additionally, your answer to Q2 above is problematic, as the 10:00AM-11:00AM (24 season 6) article contains no edits from your username, and the Carlos Mencia article which you reference as your "best vandal cleanup" shows merely four 'undo's. You have less than 500 mainspace edits, and all but a handful of those are reversions. You've done some good work in vandal fighting; if you flesh this out by making more contributions to articles, putting effort into learning policy, and keeping your cool, I think you could make a good admin candidate in the future. Maralia 19:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply: It doesn't show for some reason, but according to Kate's Tool, I have. And the reply was out of rudeness because of rudeness. I know it wasn't positive and it was recent, but it was an experience I can move on from and say wasn't my finest hour. BeanoJosh 20:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 2 wrongs do not make a right. I find it very immature to make a rude comment to someone who has been rude. It makes no sense.--SJP wishes you a happy Veterans Day 21:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose per Maralia. That's frightening. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 20:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per this reply, because it seems like biting. Try again in about three months and I will support you. NHRHS2010  talk  20:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) I've seen you around before at randomly picked reversions of vandalism on articles, so on that front your fine. However, the awareness that Maralia has raised unfortunately, leaves me with no choice but to oppose. Rudget Contributions 20:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose to put it bluntly "YOU WILL NOT WIN" .   Sasha  Call   20:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose - You don't counter rudeness with rudeness and you don't feed trolls. Threatening vandals makes no sense. You warn them then you block them, You don't attempt to get into fights with them, threaten them or even act uncivil towards them. Administrators need to be mature and I'm afraid that this user needs more time before I would trust him as an admin.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose - sorry Keepscases 20:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose - need a little work in the WP:CIVIL department for starters. Jauerback 20:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) I am opposing per this. That comment was way to recent. We all make mistake, but that was just a week ago. Sorry.--SJP wishes you a happy Veterans Day 21:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose I hate to pile on, but that recent comment shows your inability to become an admin at the present time. Remember, it is very important that you consider what you are writing, and recognize any potential problems that might occur later on because of your comments. Comments such as those could have started a huge, unnecessary verbal war. Icestorm815 21:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Per the above diff, changed from support to oppose. Qst  21:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose per all of the above. Also, this AFD comment shows a lack of understanding of WP:V and WP:N. Answer to question 6 is way off base, 20 comments is quite a lot for an AFD, an average one might get 3-7. Also, you say your work on 10:00AM-11:00AM (24 season 6) (now a redirect to another page) is your best work, but all you did was spend 4 minutes adding section headers and external links. Get some more work in the Wikipedia namespace, work on civility and policy knowledge and try again in another 6 months or so. Mr.  Z- man  21:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

 * The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.