Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Biekko

Biekko
final (25/8/2) ending 03:56 16 April 2005 (UTC) (9:11 added to compensate for early closure)

Biekko (user page, contributions) is from Iceland. He is an ideal for Wikipedian: no wikiholic, no POV warrior, sticks with facts, helps with vandals. He is with us since Aug 23, 2003 and clocked 946 edits, mostly Iceland related (see user page for more details). I think he would be of great help to keep this corner of Wikipedia tidy. Pavel Vozenilek 18:51, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Candidate please indicate acceptance of the nomination here

Yeah sure, I accept this nomination. --Bjarki 19:20, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 19:00, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC) (and it should be noted that he has 3089 edits if you count is and enwiki)
 * 2) Carnildo 19:44, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Pavel Vozenilek 20:09, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Smári McCarthy 02:59, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) - Despite the lack of international involvement, I believe that Biekko will be a fine addition to the administration team. He has served the Icelandic Wikipedia well and is dedicated to the cause. en: might well enjoy and benefit from his help. The way I see it, the worst case scenario is that he does absolutely nothing, which despite being highly unlikely is completely irrelevant: There's no legal or standardized limit to the number of admins. There's no factual reason to deter people from this posting if people have proven worthy and committed at any rate.
 * 5) Support. The opposition is en: Wikipedia snobbery in my opinion. If we take into account his considerable work for is: (and we should take it into account) then it's clear he knows how the wiki works, and even if he isn't yet familiar with every last detail of en: policy I doubt given his admin experience on is: that he'd take some foolish action. Unless someone can point to evidence of disruptive behaviour I'd err on the side of granting adminship. I think it's highly unlikely any harm will result. As Smári says, the worst case scenario is that he does nothing. &mdash; Trilobite (Talk) 03:59, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. I faintly recall that I'd never touched VfD, RfA, nor any other such page before becoming an admin; why is it different now than it was then? ugen 64 04:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. Fits my primary criterion: highly unlikely to misuse the abilities or cause trouble. Isomorphic 05:40, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Fine by me. --JuntungWu 11:47, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * :) &mdash; Helpful Dave 12:34, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support considering this user's excellent work and additional experience with Icelandic Wikipedia. I would like to see hir get hirs hands dirty in the other namespaces, though. – ClockworkSoul 13:52, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:42, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Skaz 17:30, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) I think people are pushing the expectations for adminship too high ( 1000 total edits, 500 to articles, 200 to talk, 100 to user talk, 100 to Wikipedia:, 100 to Wikipedia talk, 100 to category/talk, 100 to template/talk...uh, on second thought, make that 2000 total edits). He's done enough work here to show he knows how to edit in English, discussed enough to show he knows how to collaborate in English. I don't necessarily give credit for work done on the Icelandic Wikipedia, but it does speak for the fact that he can be trusted, which is what really counts. --Michael Snow 18:11, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support - Seems active enough and level-headed enough, having a long history in is.wikipedia helps Tuf-Kat 06:34, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) 2208 edits on islandic wikipedia too. People should be made admins as soon as they can be shown to be able to handle the proverbial mop and bucket. We can be pretty sure of Biekko I think, unless someone has found an example of a particularly bad conflict? Kim Bruning 11:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Thank you for vocalising how I feel, Michael Snow :-)  &mdash; MikeX (talk) 16:41, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support.  We need more diversity.--Chammy Koala 11:38, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support; trustworthy, experienced; that the experience is on another wikipedia is fine with me. Antandrus 02:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Support We need lots of ice. I mean Icelandic experts and total stick tothe fact guys.--Jondel 02:38, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Experience on the Icelandic project shows an ability to work with others and carry out admin tasks; adminship on the English wikipedia will involve only adjusting to the English-specific policies; he has apparently already shown the requisite temperament and ability to do so. And if he only seldom uses the powers but responsibly, that's fine by me. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 02:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Kbdank71 20:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support, why not, no reason to oppose. I strongly support interlanguage wikis, esp. when they translate, BTW! Sam Spade Apply now, exciting opportunities available at Spade & Archer! 15:45, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Xezbeth  16:02, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Smit 17:41, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Support. These edit count objections are odd. Are we just after a number or a trusted contributor? 3000 total and 800 on English with no negative behavior at least indicates toward a positive contributor. Taxman 17:54, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Not enough experience on the janitorial tasks such as VfD, TfD, CfD, etc. These janitorial tasks are an integral part at being an admin. Zzyzx11 | Talk 21:26, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * See my comment below for more.
 * 1) Oppose, I expect to see more community involvement and active janitoring from a potential admin. Rje 21:46, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Sorry, not enough experience in janitorial work in the Wikipedia namespace. Mgm|(talk) 23:26, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Needs slightly more experience. Will support in the future. Carbonite | Talk 13:17, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Biekko seems helpful, but needs more experience here, imho. Kingturtle 05:34, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Good guy, but will support at 1100 edits. -- M e r o v i n g i a n  (t) (c) 15:27, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) oppose for now, not enough edits. my threshold is 1500+.   ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 20:18, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. Not now. Please come back after you have 1200 edits to the English Wikipedia. (Unsigned, but vote by - Lst27 17:50, Apr 13, 2005)

Neutral
 * 1) Comment. I will support after this candidate does some more work on the Wikipedia namespace. Rad Racer | Talk 01:19, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Will support in a few months when they have more edits.-gadfium 05:53, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Can you make it clearer your username on the Icelandic wikipedia? These edit count objections are very strange to me if you really have over three thousand edits total. With that kind of experience I'd be inclined to vote support. - Taxman 15:59, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * My Icelandic username is the same as my English username, Biekko, see also edit count here.
 * Ok, I'm supporting now. - Taxman 17:54, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Comments
 * Biekko currently has 894 total edits to en: 697/79 to articles/talk, 32/0 to image, 29/0 to category, 21/15 to user/talk, 12/2 to Wikipedia/talk, 6/0 to Template, and 0/1 to MediaWiki/talk. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 21:31, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Regarding my lack of "janitorial experience": I don't know how much experience from other language editions should be taken into account here. I have played a big role in building up the Icelandic Wikipedia from scratch, I was one of the first admins there and I have definately been one of the most active janitors there as well. I have near 800 edits there outside the main article namespace which is the second highest count for that project. I created the process there for approving featured articles and did a lot of work on the categories. I have deleted, blocked, protected, unprotected & reverted more often than I care to know about. Considering all this it makes me feel a bit odd to read it here that I don't have janitorial experience although I recognize that it would be unfair to expect people to know my background from other projects. Also, these comments express a view that is different from my own about what adminship on Wikipedia is about. My view (and the dominant opinion on is.wikipedia) is that anybody who has established him/herself on Wikipedia as a respected editor should gain access to these few extra functions if they want to, why shouldn't they? But of course this decision is eventually made by the community and I will gladly accept any result they might come up with. --Bjarki 01:33, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That used to be the policy on this project as well, when the administrator status was initially introduced basically anyone who had been with the project for a few weeks and bothered to ask for it got it, later people started to vote for it which eventually wound up in something of a popularity contest (but that's just my opinion of it). &mdash;Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 02:43, 2005 Apr 9 (UTC)


 * I would like to address Bjarki and others who feel that his janitorial experience and work in is.wikipedia is sufficient. Sure, the mechanics and the software program is the same. My concern is that you are dealing with an entirely different set of users here on en.Wikipedia, all with different ideas, culture, and using different versions of the English language. An admin should be able to work effectively, interacting with all these people, and be familar with a wide range of categories here. I do not think you can get a feel for this until you have actually actively participated in janitorial work and discussions here at en.Wikipedia. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:35, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * As it says in Requests for adminship, admins "should take care to be courteous, and exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees should have been on Wikipedia long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities." It is hard to judge how Bjarki can effectively deal with this wide range of users here on en.Wikipedia when he currently has less than 1000 total edits and currently less than 20 edits in the Wikipedia namespace. I don't want to see him be overwhelmed with Wikistress that he is not effectively prepared for. Zzyzx11 | Talk 06:59, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Umm, he has been on Wikipedia not too far off two years, and has 4000 edits. He is already an experienced Wikipedia admin. All we are doing is extending his admin status to another language project. En: is not an entirely different world, it's just bigger and probably has slightly more rigid policies in place. If anything he is probably at an advantage over the average en: admin because he's been more closely involved in the actual development of policy. As he himself says: "I have deleted, blocked, protected, unprotected & reverted more often than I care to know about. Considering all this it makes me feel a bit odd to read it here that I don't have janitorial experience." I don't forsee this experienced user being "overwhelmed with Wikistress." &mdash; Trilobite (Talk) 16:36, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I respect all your opinions. All I'm saying is that I'm not comfortable with giving him the keys to the admin tools on en until he has a few more edits under his belt -- especially janitorial tasks. If I see a major jump in work here on en.wikipedia before the voting deadline, I might change my vote. Zzyzx11 | Talk 22:04, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It also says that adminship should be no big deal. Isn't Wikistress his own damn business?  If he is a good admin on the Icelandic project, you need very good reasons to insinuate that he will abuse his powers on the English project.  All other excuses for not supporting him are invalid.   :) &mdash; Helpful Dave 12:34, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't believe I ever said anything about the possibility that he might abuse his powers. Based on his work on is.wikipedia, the chances of that are almost none. Zzyzx11 | Talk 22:04, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I am quite amused by all the neutral and oppose comments saying Biekko doesn't have enough edits here or there. People are using very strange measures (to my eyes at least, that is). So a question to those using numeric requirements: could you explain why/how you think such requirements "work" at getting good admins? Kim Bruning 17:11, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, while the question is a valid one imho, it might be too complex to go into here. Feel free to answer on my talk page, if you have some time for me anyway :-) Thanks! Kim Bruning 17:16, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I think that the number of edits is taken far too much into account. A vandal or a troll or even a newbie can rack-up a very large number of edits, but of course wouldn't be nominated for admin.    One of the nominees above made 500 edits in one day. What should be noted is that Biekko is already and admin, has had a lot of experience, and will bring something of value to the english wikipedia by improving our articles on Iceland.--Chammy Koala 11:38, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Edit Counting

Why are there so many folks here doing edit counting? This disturbs me. Please explain why this is useful?

And would you be happier if Biekko were to just not use the preview button for a while?

Kim Bruning 22:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. I will of course continue to revert on sight any instances of vandalism I come across, with admin rights and responsibilities I might start to seek out vandalism more actively. I have mostly stayed away from VfD but perhaps I will start taking an occasional look at it now.
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. My single largest contribution to English Wikipedia was probably the history section in Reykjavík which I wrote, it hasn't changed much since then. I have made considerable contributions to a number of other subjects, mostly Iceland-related.
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
 * A. I like to think that almost all of my interactions with fellow Wikipedians have been positive. I don't remember participating in a edit-war and I can sleep just fine at nights even though someone out there doesn't agree with me on some Wikipedia issue.