Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Poeloq


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

Poeloq
Final (2/9/1); Closed per WP:SNOW 23:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

- A serious editor who also likes to go on vandal and new page patrolPoeloq 16:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
 * 1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * A: I especially enjoy keeping Wikipedia clean. That means I enjoy the tidying up after vandals, banning them if it gets too much (give everybody a fair chance and warning first, not too quick on the button) and then working on the articles I stumble upon while doing this work. I would also take part in other areas, such as page protection etc.


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: I am mainly active on China-related articles, especially concerning transport and railways. Lately I have been working on the bigger articles, cleaning them up, rewriting paragraphs, researching information. I must admit I don't have any article I am very proud of at the moment, but I am working on it and hope that soon I can say: Wow, I started that article.


 * 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: Well, sometimes I make mistakes. But I have never been in a conflict. If a editor does something I do not agree with, I will most of the time leave a message on his talk page and then wait for a reply. Then take things for there. A good example is the renaming on the Chinese locomotive articles that have just all been renamed, wrongly in my opinion. Instead of just renaming again and again, I asked the user why he had done so and informed him that I think he should rename them back and discuss it on the project talk page first. See User talk:Wrightbus


 * Optional questions from Nat
 * 4. What is the difference between blocking and banning?
 * A: A block is blocking someone temporarily from editing, for example blocking their username and know associated IP numbers. A ban is the removal of ones editing priviliges, a social construct. A ban is often enforced with the help of a block. Poeloq 17:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 5. If you ran into a extreme POVist, and he/she was not committing any vandalism, what steps will you take to deal with him/her?
 * A: Is knowingly being an extreme POVist not being something like a vandal? Of course, first I would discuss it with the editor in question, but if he/she is knowingly going against known policy, especially such an important one, several times after informing them, then I would treat them similar to vandals.Poeloq 17:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 6. Would you be willing to add yourself to Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall if promoted? Why or why not?
 * A: Yes, I would be. Becoming an admin requires the trust of the community. Once being an admin, you still only have the power given to you because people trust you. If a significant amount of people believe I am not trustworthy, so be it and I will go for re-confirmation.Poeloq 17:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)


 * 7. How do you understand WP:NFC as it applies to promotional images and other non-free portraits of living people used for the purpose of showing what the subject looks like?
 * A: Non-free content is a big problem. Sadly, not all content can be free. However, I believe that non-free content should be limited to products, logos and other 'static' objects that can not be obtained any other way. Pictures of living people should not be NFC, because it is possible to get a free picture of them if someone tried. Summary: NFC should not apply to living people, if there is the possibility of getting a free alternative (which probably is 99% of cases)Poeloq 17:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

General comments

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


 * Links for Poeloq:

''Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Poeloq before commenting.''

Discussion


Support
 * 1) Moral Support — participation in the Wikipedia namespace is important. Drop by AfD (or any deletion discussion of your preference) a few times a day and give your opinion; that should prepare you sufficiently. I also appreciate your contributions to the mainspace, but articles like Luoding Railway are not really helpful to our goal, as it is unreferenced. WP:V is one of our most important policies; learn it, live it, love it. Please work on these areas and try again in the future. Best regards,  Ag ü  eybaná  21:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Moral Support - Poeloq, you are a good editor, you just need some more experience. Learn from what the editors here are telling you and try again in few months. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 22:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose On the right track, but I would like to see more experience both contributing as an editor and in reverting/warning/reporting vandals. Cheers, :) Dloh cierekim  17:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose To be honest, your answers were somewhat weak. Although that might be the case, you were on the money. I would suggest that you participate a lot more on the admin noticeboards, as well become more active on Wikipedia as most people would make their decision on an RfA based on the number of mainspace (article) edits and the number of Wikipedia namespace edits; in your case you currently have under 600 mainspace edits and 80 Wikipedia edits. If you become more active, and are renominated in a few months, I will be willing to support you. nattan g 17:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. I agree with the above comments.  You are a good editor, but more experience is necessary, especially in the Wikipedia namespace.  I recommend partipating more in WP:XFD, that's one of my favorites.  As a point of reference, it's a rare day when an editor was made an administrator with fewer than 2000 edits.  Useight 18:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) No NHRHS2010  Talk  19:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Commentary in RfAs should be constructive; the above comment is not. Please outline the rationale for your opposition; candidates cannot improve themselves if they are unsure of what they should focus their attentions on. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 20:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've seen this oppose before and in this oppose vote, it said "No" instead of "Oppose". NHRHS2010  Talk  21:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It wasn't that you said No in the Oppose space, it was that No was all you said. You need to provide some reasoning. GlassCobra (Review) 21:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll just agree with your (GlassCobra's) oppose. NHRHS2010  Talk  21:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Not enough to judge by yet. Keep trying. Ronnotel 20:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose per Ronnotel. Insufficient experience. Stifle (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose due to insufficient edits (under 1,200) to judge character. Sorry, but please try editing mainspace articles and Wikipedia space, such as WP:AFD.  See you here in a few months. Bearian 21:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose but Moral Support You're definitely on the right track, keep it up! Get some more experience and come back in a few months. GlassCobra (Review) 21:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Per Stifle... but keep it up, and try again a little bit later on! :) Jmlk  1  7  21:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral - Don't want to pile on, but you need more experience. Of course AFD, but also try WP:RFPP, WP:UAA, and other such pages. -- Eye of the minD 21:29, 10 October 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.