Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hexatekin


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

Hexatekin
Final (3/9/3); ended 04:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC) - Withdrawn by candidate. S warm   we ♥ our hive  04:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination
– SELF NOMINATION Hexatekin (talk) 18:05, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I am an account creator Education Program campus volunteer, 2 years 4 months old, with 8,494 edits. I have run many Edit-a-thons as Wikipedian-in-Residence at the Metropolitan New York Library Council, and as an organizer for Wikimedia New York City. I am also a contributor to Commons, Meta, and Outreach, in addition to having created many articles, and contributed references and content to others. But I’d like to get more involved in the nitty gritty, and that’s why I’m here, as an admin I think I’ll be a better IRL organizer because I’ll have a more discreet knowledge of how things work, but I also want to participate, as a woman that follows Wikipedia’s rules, to closing the gender gap among admins, and working specifically on Admin tasks related to topics that interest me including biographies, art and artists, history, literature, and publishing. Thanks for your questions and comments! Hexatekin (talk) 19:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
 * A:


 * I would plan to start my Administerial duties by participating more actively in the Deletion review process, including viewing and restoring deleted pages, closing AfD discussions.


 * I would also be interested in doing things like performing requested moves, and protecting or unprotecting pages.


 * The IP block and block exemption user right would also be very useful as I’ve been the organizer of events where we have had IP blocks because of previous vandalism from an institution’s computers, for vandalism, or because of misunderstanding, and unless an administrator is physically present, this can be a serious logistical block to deal with the day of the event.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A:


 * I’m created a lot of stubs and small articles using archival resources and institutional research. Here are some of my favorites:
 * List of New York Public Library branches
 * Timeline of LGBT history in New York City
 * Paul B. Preciado
 * Neapolitan Novels (series)
 * Lloyd J. Reynolds
 * Writing about lesser known figures in the arts in always interesting practice in policy, specifically notability, but its also rewarding to contribute knowledge to the encyclopedia that required significant research within print archives, thus making that information more open.


 * But I think a lot of my work has been focused on building the infrastructure for campaigns and projects which seek to be more inclusive of underrepresented voices on Wikipedia, including building resource pages for the ArtAndFeminism project, and Wiki Loves Pride.


 * 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:


 * On Wikipedia, I’ve seen again and again, articles about or prominently featuring women, that I’ve either created, contributed, or watched get flagged for notability or flagged for deletion, and sent to an AfD for murky reasons that don’t seem to have a basis in policy. This has led me to learn more about these processes as I will try to follow these articles to AfD and leave productive comments. I’ve learned to have a hard shell on Wikipedia and use policy to back up my editing decisions.

When I have run into conflicts over editing in the past, including sockpuppeting and trolling behaviors, I have usually contacted Administrators to whom I’ve had some relationship or knowledge of on-Wiki instead of going through: Administrators' noticeboard.


 * Additional question from user:Anthony Bradbury
 * 4. When would you think it appropriate for an admin to grant an IP block exemption?
 * A:


 * Additional questions from User:DESiegel:
 * 5. What is your view of Process is important?
 * A:


 * 6. How strictly should the literal wording of the speedy deletion criteria be applied?
 * A:


 * 7. What sort of thing constitutes a "claim of significance" in assessing an A& or A9 speedy deletion?
 * A:


 * 8. What is the place of WP:IAR in carrying out administrative actions?
 * A:


 * 9. An admin is often expected or requested to help others, particularly new users, and to aid in calming disputes, either resolving them or pointing the participants to proper venues for resolution. How do you see yourself in this aspect of an Admin's role?
 * A:


 * Additional question from Supdiop
 * 10. If a new user creates a biographical article with no reliable sources and a new page patroller marks it as patrolled, what would you do as an admin?
 * A:


 * Additional question from Miniapolis
 * 11. Thanks for submitting an RfA. I'm curious about why you blanked your talk page, since I (and perhaps others) look at a candidate's talk page when I'm not familiar with their work.
 * A:

General comments

 * Links for Hexatekin:
 * Edit summary usage for Hexatekin can be found here.

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review her contributions before commenting.''

Support

 * 1) Support for a clueful, helpful editor with a clean block log, edits that include reliable sourcing of content, and a clear need for the tools. Like the candidate I've run a few outreach editathons, and I've supported many run by others. Having admin tools is extremely useful at an editathon, if you can set your attendees as confirmed users it means you can tell them to all hit save now even where there are more than six in the class. When you get an attendee who wants to know why their article was deleted two years ago you can see the article and tell them what was wrong.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  22:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Moral support - You get an "A" for bravery. All who come to RfA get an "A" for that and there should be a ribbon for it. You may not get enough support this time round. So, for next time: Try to always use edit summaries. Make this look like this (or even better, like this). Get experience in lots of different areas. Finally, "clue". Coming to RfA with 0 AfD !votes shows you should be more "clued-in". Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Support WereSpielChequers provides a good rationale for supporting this candidate. I'm not that concerned about lack of experience in some admin areas as long as an editor has substantial experience building content. --I am One of Many (talk) 23:39, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Oppose . I don't believe you're qualified.  Among other things, your userpage doesn't even have the right email link.  I think that shows you need to be more careful. — Soap — 21:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. Self-involved, agenda-based rationale for wanting the mop. Doesn't fly. Keep up the good work on the Edit-a-thons, and other activities. The mop is not needed for the kind of work you do on Wikipedia. If you want to be involved in wiki policy matters, run for Wikimedia Foundation in the annual elections. Best, Softlavender (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2015 (UTC) ETA: I also feel compelled to note that the candidate changed her username 1-1/2 days ago, from : . Softlavender (talk) 23:40, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * There's also User:Vaughn88 and User:OR drohowa to look at. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You beat me to it; I was just posting that. Softlavender (talk) 23:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - I don't see the need for the extra tools. You lack experience in the fields you want to work in as an admin. So, sorry, cannot support you for now. &mdash;  Yash! (Y) 22:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose - Sorry, I do not believe that you are qualified enough to become an administrator. Your userpage doesn't have the email link. I do not believe you have any experience in the fields. -- Eurovision Nim (talk to me)(see my edits) 00:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose per User:GregJackP/Admin criteria, no GA/FA content creation. Soap, Softlavender, Yash! and Eurovision also have good reasons listed. (I will not address nor answer any questions on my criteria. If you really want to discuss it, you may comment on the talkpage here or at my talkpage. GregJackP   Boomer!   00:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose. With zero edits at WP:SPI and WP:AfD (important area for any administrator), I have to oppose this candidate. But, otherwise I see no mistakes, the only reason I'm opposing is the lack of experience.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  02:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose - Lack of overall experience inclines me to not see the need for extra tools yet, especially in SPI and AFD, where zero edits have been made. The e-mail link is invalid, and no improvement or creation of content to GA or FA, like GregJackP stated, seems troubling as well. Racer -Ωmegα  03:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 6) Goodness gracious. Ordinarily I'm inclined to support self-noms based on their courage alone, and this would be an entertaining adminship for sure. But the candidate clearly has no idea what purpose admins serve, so better for everyone's long term sanity to put this one to sleep early. Townlake (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. I hate to pile on, but a combo of the above oppose reasons plus an overall uneasy feeling (can't quantify) land me squarely in this section. Good luck though, and thanks for your many contributions. L235 (t / c / ping in reply ) 03:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Neutral

 * 1) Neutral. Failure to transclude the RfA correctly and the lack of AfD experience is troubling. Esquivalience t 21:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral. I don't say that you wouldn't make a good admin in due course.  I just don't get the impression from your history and your comments that you are ready.  I'm prepared to reconsider if something comes up to change my mind. Deb (talk) 21:32, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral, pending answers to the questions. Nakon  02:37, 30 July 2015 (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.