Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BlackBear


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

BlackBear
Final: (1/9/3); Ended 10:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

- This was a quote from Runningcupcake03 "Thanks for all of your help with one of my first articles. I am very new neophyte to wikipedia and BlackBear has helped me. They[he] not only should[showed] me the guidelines for articles and other things but also showed me different ways about wikipedia and other tips and trick to help improve wikipedia. They[he] have[has] just been a great help to me! Thanks! --Runningcupcake03 01:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)" I came across her article via Special:Newpages. When I first came across the article, it looked like another non-notable article. But when I started talking to the user, she really seemed dedicated to helping Wikipedi, instead of adding nonsense articles. She wanted to know how to contest the deletion, and I helped her. I started showing her tips and tricks around Wikipedia, and about the administration. I believe that all editors should try to help other editors succeed, and not just place the db-tag or the vandal tag on the talk page, but actually build rapport with the user, and channel the user's motives to motives that could help Wikipedia. Although the user, in this case, did have good intentions, it's good to know that you helped the user, and, who knows?, maybe this user will someday be an administrator. But there are certain cases where this cannot be accomplished, unfortunately, and we should work to keep Wikipedia vandal-free. This is one of my main motives. Another idea I have is to create a specialized program (if we already don't have one) where users that speak foreign languages can get together and help bring over articles to the English Wikipedia, or help our smaller Wikipedias, by translating some of the most important articles. I am currently learning French, and I already know some, so I would be glad to help with this. Thank you. BlackBear 01:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Accept

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? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A: One chore I intend helping out with is using administrative tools against vandalism and newpage patrol. But I also intend to help out with any situation which may arise, or any situation that requires intervention. I am sort of looking forward to using administrative vandal-fighting tools, however, because I have done all of my past reverts by hand.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: There is not one particular contribution, but actually the whole contribution of vandalism-reverting is one gigantic part of my edits, and that is definitely the major contribution that I am proud of. This is because I enjoy reading about the articles myself, and I wouldn't want to read about some guy talking about his pet bird on the France article, or whatever. BlackBear 01:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * 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: There have definitely been situations where I have been frustrated. There was one situation where I was actually searching for that bar that says Stressed out/I quit. But that's just one of the things that comes with vandal-reverting, and, esp., Newpage patrol. There was one situation with the article Cosmo4 at the time. I was still fairly new at the time, and didn't exactly understand all of the policies, yet. I was doing my usual NP Patrol, when I came across a page called Cosmo4. I tagged it, and started patrolling again. A few seconds later, the orange bar popped up saying "new messages". The user was all in my face, and alerting me every second about how he disagreed, etc. I just decided to remove the tag, and place a newly-found cleanup tag (I like testing out new tags that I find), and put it on the article. I later got a message informing me about how to handle situations, like that, (I was fairly new at the time), and that gave me the knowledge that you can always go to fellow Wikipedians for support. To my knowledge, the Cosmo4 article is still there, and I'm sort of glad it is, because it taught me how to handle further situations, and introduced me to AfD. In the future, I really don't want to argue, but compromise instead, so it makes everyone happy, instead of mad. BlackBear 01:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Optional questions from
 * 4 Given that you've read the instructions on filing an RfA, why have you chosen not to answer the standard questions above?
 * A: Sorry about that. I realized that after I pushed the button, and am doing my best to answer them in a timely manner right now. Thank you for your patience.
 * 5 You rarely use edit summaries. Can you explain the value of edit summaries, and why you choose not to use them?
 * A Well, I agree, that edit summaries are very important, but I usually use them on edits to the direct article, rather then on vandal-reverting or on NP patrol, which does take up a large part of my contributions. But now, if I get my admin powers, I will start to work more on my WikiProjects and such and hopefully start to use this question as support to use my edit summaries more often than not. BlackBear 02:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * General comments


 * See BlackBear's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.



Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support
 * 1) Moral support.  Don't be disheartened by this bashing. You're definitely on the right path and everybody will support you later when you gain more experience. Max S em 05:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * Uh, can you sumbit the answers to the Q's first befoe putting this here? Okay, now that that' done, I still have to oppose, you don't seem ready for adminship.-- Wizardman 02:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - you've made it look as though Runningcupcake has nominated you when in fact it's a self-nomination. This candidate used to be known as User:Wikipedian27 - see here. The candidate has one edit to CfD -, and his only edits to AfD have been 2 vandal-reversions, and this, which he added to a daily log but did not nominate. To paraphrase User:Xoloz, Lack of participation in AfD suggests unfamiliarity with wiki-deletion-policy. - Richard Cavell 02:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Weak Oppose: No edit summaries when listing this RfA (apart from the odd WP automatic summary) and general muddled-up-ness with the RFA suggests someone unfamiliar with policy and process. Sorry. -- Nick  t  02:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose This user makes it seem like when they get adminship, their editing will become much better; adminship doesn't make your contributions to Wikipedia better. Also, I feel that edit summaries are very important for adminship. Gutworth 02:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose for multiple reasons, not least of which is the intense focus on vandalism reverting and new page patrol, to the exclusion of other useful activities on Wikipedia. YechielMan 02:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose per many concerns cited above. Captain panda   In   vino   veritas  02:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose per the above. Acalamari 03:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Strong Oppose as the candidate does not seem to have the experience necessary to even fill out the basic form of this RfA in an easy-to-read format. I think several months or more are required to gain more experience before I reconsider my opinion. I suggest withdrawing your RfA per WP:SNOWBALL. ••• 日本穣 ? • Talk to Nihon joe 04:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose per the above. Kjetil r 04:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Per the many concerns by other users. You should probably withdraw, and consider reapplying in 4-6 months after continued contributions. Good luck. – Riana talk 04:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Riana. Real96 04:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral BlackBear has been around since May 23, 2006. I think that you have some good qualities but may need some more experience with the different areas of Wikipedia. Editor Review is a way that any user can have his/her contribution to Wikipedia evaluated by peers. You may wish to withdraw your RfA and consider posting a request at Editor Review. -- Jreferee 06:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.