Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Stevage


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

Stevage
 Final (1/8/3) ended 09:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

– Self nomination Stevage 21:04, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I accept this (self) nomination. Stevage 21:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

''Ack! I didn't realise that I was supposed to write an introduction explaining why I wanted to be an admin. That's a bit frustrating - the only place that seems to be mentioned is in the very terse instructions created when you click the button at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate. It produces the text: "Description=YOUR DESCRIPTION OF THE USER"'' Would someone be able to fix this?

In the meantime, I withdraw my nomination, thanks. Stevage 09:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) moral support as to avoid a shutout. Suggesting withdrawl and trying again later. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 04:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Uh.... no. Obvious reasons. NSL E (T+C) at 00:27 UTC (2006-03-31)
 * I think you better expand on that, for the benefit of the rest of us. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If it's a self nomination I expect to see... well, a self-nomination. There's absolutely no description of himself. This is ridiculous. NSL E (T+C) at 01:05 UTC (2006-03-31)
 * 1) Oppose Your participation has dropped off significantly since December with surprisingly inactive months in between. I would probably support you in June, in about two months, if you stay active. joturner 01:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose: per NSLE, Joturner, and HtH. Jonathunder 02:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose. No reason given L e idiot 03:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose There is no nomination here. Xoloz 04:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Per obvious reasons. M o e   ε  04:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose: Umm, well, the proper format isn't really used, and no information is given; plus, edits and experience seem low; come back in a while and I'll gladly support.   _-M     o     P-_     07:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose. Is this a joke? --Darth Revert (AKA Deskana) (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral. Edit count, edit summary count, and time spent here are low. % of article edits and % of policy edits are high. On the other hand, he seemed so eager to delete pages. I should say that except for a/c/tfds and userspace subpages, most stuff isn't deleted. It's kept as archival material. And it can be undeleted because it is still saved in the server backup archive. Just...make a few thousand more edits, spend another month or three editing...your time will come.--HereToHelp 00:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Neutral Agree with HereToHelp and NSL E  (T+C).  A self-nomination is commendable and takes guts.  But you really need to properly introduce yourself to others.  Other than that, a few months more of seasoning and you'll be ready.  Might even get nominated at that point.  Who know....  --Mmounties ( Talk )  [[Image:pawprint.png|20px]] 01:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral. More use of edit summaries and experience would be much better.--Jusjih 04:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments


 * Edit summary usage: 91% for major edits and 41% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 22:15, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * See Stevage's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.


 * For "various" read "all". Policies are not one sentence long. And the unfortunate template is scattered widely throughout policy pages, so you hardly "let [me] have [my] way". I would observe that one of the reasons I removed a number of these tags was because they were very wrong in the one sentence they chose. -Splash talk 22:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Splash. I made those summaries in an attempt to rapidly convey the basic, essential meaning of the policy to newcomers, so they aren't confronted with 40 policies, some of which span many pages. The summary doesn't replace the policy - it helps digest it. But we've had this discussion before :) In any case, I didn't insist on any of the pages from which you removed the template - those ones don't have a summary. Stevage 22:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

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 voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
 * A: Tasks requested by users that simply require a bit of common sense and experience, such as undeleting pages for review, deleting pages after AfD, and unblocking users. I would also anticipate occasionally protecting or preferably semi-protecting pages to resolve problems with edit wars/vandalism respectively. Editing monobook.css etc would also be particularly interesting - I've been playing with greasemonkey scripts to modify the user interface.


 * Vandalism fighting is possible, especially with rollback privileges. I haven't done much so far because it's pretty tedious to have to manually rollback the edit. But no promises :)


 * Thus, I do not expect to be a heavily active admin, but armed with my exhaustive knowledge of Wikipedia policy (I have read and summarised every single one), I hope to be able to use admin powers when I run into situations that require it, or when editors request my help.


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: I've reworked quite a few Wikipedia policies, including "the big one" WP:RULES, and created List of policies, Template:Policy in a nutshell, and made an intermediate template Template:Guideline with shortcut which encouraged someone else to merge Template:Guideline and Template:Shortcut :)
 * Editing: German grammar, Category:Racing formulas, Paris (a while ago), various others...
 * De-POVing: Safe Speed, Melbourne University student organisations
 * Writing, researching etc: Smile (Queen), Tour métallique de Fourvière...
 * Photos: You can see some at User:Stevage.


 * I couldn't see where to put this, but I thought I would mention that I'm a very active member on the Wikipedia-en mailing list. Some would say too active...:)
 * 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 how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A: I don't do edit wars. At all. In fact I pretty much live by the One revert rule. However, I have come into various conflicts and generally come out alive, with dignity intact:
 * Paris, October 2005, spent a month attempting to mediate two very different editors arguing about something relatively trivial. I think I helped a little bit :)
 * Melbourne University student organisations: a very complicated situation involving two editors relatively well known in real life. I attempted to enlighten them on Wikipedia policy, and, like quite a few other people, copped a few angry reprisals. Somewhat proud that despite accusations of "POV" and "bias", no one attempted to actually define my supposed bias as either left, right etc. Don't think I lost my cool either.
 * Template:Guideline one liner: User Splash! took serious exception to me placing this template on various policy pages. I let him have his way.
 * Rooster: Despite a bit of entrenched opposition, managed to get consensus to rename from Cock. :)


 * I can't honestly say that any user has caused me stress, other than the frustration of trying to understand certain viewpoints, or trying to explain my point of view. It's irritating when your hard work is replaced - but that's all, this is a wiki after all. I generally deal with conflicts by making a good faith attempt to reason with the person, then if that fails, letting them have their way. On an admin-level conflict, I would probably simply handball the issue to someone who really wants to fight it out :)


 * The above 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.