Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tellyaddict 2


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

Tellyaddict
Final (17/16/1); Ended Fri, 9 March 2007 19:08 (UTC)

- Tellyaddict is a very experienced user on wikipedia who has been here since November. He has made thousands and thousands of edits, listened and helped all who have asked, knows all the policies, guided new users; whilst also he has created many successful wikiprojects. He is very friendly. I, being an adoptee of him; think he would be very good with the sysop tools and would certainly not abuse them. Retiono Virginian 17:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I gratefully accept this nomination, although its a little early than what was suggested on my previous failed Rfa in Early Jan by fellow editors, I would also like to thank Retiono Virginian for his kind words and all who vote here, whether you oppose, support, or remain neutral!Regards - Telly  addict  20:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC) I withdraw my nomination because the opposing and supporting are too almost equal, I doubt it would succeed, see my user page for more info, cheers! Regards -  Telly  addict'''  17:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

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: There are many ways in which I would like to help anticipating being a sysop here, although some of my edits here do not require sysop tools, the majority of them do, here are some of the main areas in which I would like to help Wikipedia.

These are just some of the areas in which would proudly anticipate with as an administrator, however my other minority edits which do not require sysop tools are reviewing articles at Articles for creation and cleanup/copyedit etc of articles and other areas of wikipedia, mostly by clicking random article.
 * Requests for page protection - Firstly, but not the most important I would like to help with Requests for page protection and reaching a decision of whether it is necessary, although this is very rarely backlogged there are almost always at least two requests waiting in which I would gladly help out with.
 * CAT:CSD - This in my opinion is one of the most important areas for speedy deletions of nonsense(G1), attack(G10), pure vandalism(G3), Biography(A7) and other types of pages fail the criteria.
 * AIV - I regularly post there, I have made approximaely 200 reports there, however at first I kept accidentaly posting a few requests there before the vandal received the last warning or has not vandalised after last warning, this was because I was reading some information incorrectly on the VandalProof screen however it was my fault for not looking properly, however I feel I have overcome this problem, I have noticed on regular occasions this is backlogged which cannot be helped and is normally cleared quickly but I would like to help to hopefully stop it from being an Admin backlog, This is one of the main areas I would like to participate in if granted sysop tools.
 * WP:ANI - Although I have very few edits to this area, I feel it is important for administrators to actually commnicate with other users through means such as the administrator noticeboard, I feel I could give a helping hand there participate in the recent "goings-on" which need no immediate administrator attention.
 * WP:XFD - I would regularly close debates by reaching rough concensus on XFD debates as I am a regular to AFD, TFD, MFD and more recently WP:RFD.
 * The Upload log - I have very recently (just today actually) began monitoring the new images uploaded to wikipedia, I spotted about 25 within half an hour in which had no licencing tag and I left the appropriate template about it on the images, I intend to continue monitoring this and deleting any images or media which meet the CSD of Images and Media,
 * New Pages - I would regularly participate in monitoring these as I have marked a large number of pages for deletion according to the subject, I would help delete any inappropriate article in which just created or add the PROD template or if its disputed list it on AFD


 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A: There are no particular contributions to wikipedia in which I look at as unique or special, I am proud of all my contributions to Wikipedia no matter how minor they are, my contribtuions to UK Fire and Rescue Services I am proud of but I do understand that by saying this, some may think I do not understand Adminship is not a trophy, however I feel I do and that I have taken the advice left on my previous failed RFA by editors. I have made many adoptions of new users as part of Wikipedia's Adoption programme, however I am most proud of my adoption of my nominatior - Retiono Virginian, I feel I have helped him become a regular wikipedian who participates in a range of topics from changing the WDefCon level and message to writing articles, I also feel that he has come a long way since his/her arrival at wikipedia in prior months.


 * 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: Yes, unfortunately I have been involved in one just recently, however it was not as serious as others in which you hear about, upon answering a questions at the Help Desk about a user who was repeatedly removing speedy deletion tags and the user who placed them was understandably becoming frustrated and needed some help, so I answered the question there and left a comment on the talk page of the user who apparently had been removing deletion tags, in which he/she later removed against the talk page guidelines of archiving comments. I placed DB-Bio and the Notability tags on the article as I felt the article met CSD and the notability policy. These were instantly removed in which I repeatedly reverted the removal of the tags, then my nominator Retiono Virginian helped in this matter, I also realised by viewing the page history that many accounts were removing the tags and upon checking the User creation log they were all created within a short period of time of each other. I then reported one of the users to AIV and told the viewing sysop that I believed the account was a sockpuppet of the original user reported, he/she kindly told me that it belonged at Wikipedia:Suspected Sockpuppets but the page (Fran Timbers) had then been speedily deleted and it calmed down so I deemed it inappropriate to report as of the changed circumstances, I was then contacted by one of the users saying it was people being nasty about him who he knew in the articles information, I contacted (if I remember rightly) the page deleting administrator and he said he/she said they would keep an eye out on the new pages and I told the new user who contacted me that I would as-well, fortunately the article was later deleted and protected from re-creation. This appeared to be the end. Although this caused me little, if any stress. I think I dealt with it in the best possible circumstances but anyone who disagrees I encourage to say so. In the future I would deal with edit conflicts/wars by firstly and always remaining calm and civil - this is one of the most important things for a sysop, because if the sysop gets annoyed the situation is much more likely to more aggreseive or hurtful, I would ask the involved users the circumstances if it was unapparent from the events and if necessary warn them using appropriate UW templates and if persistent, a temporary block, however sometimes blocking is not the answer, sometimes people need to know the exact circumstances before reaching a decision and blocking can deter users who deep down have good intentions.Regards - Telly  addict  20:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4. Your previous RfA was about two months ago. One of the main reasons for opposition was lack of experience. What experience have you gained since then? ChazBeckett 21:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * A: Well, I have tried to take the advice from the people who took the time to leave their comments on my previous RfA. Although I was not expecting to re-run this early, two users have pointed out they believe I am now ready for the mop and bucket. I believe I have gained experience in policies and guidelines and have made other chanegs such as daily votes to most of the XFD debates, however experience in policies and guidelines or edit count is not everything, I believe that administrators need to know how wikipedia actually functions and how to behave and what to do in the case of unexpected and possibly bad circumstances, I have been here since October 2006 but my main edits began in December 2006 and I have been here since then, the above is how I feel I have gained experience here. Thank you! Regards - Telly  addict  21:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * General comments


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


 * I am aware that my Wikipedia talk edits are low so I am asking this to be overlooked as I am currently working on increasing them and about half of my article talk page edits are adding templates for articles which fall within the scope of (newly created at the time) WikiProject Tyne and Wear. Again, this is a little sooner than what I had planned for my RfA but many users have said they beleive I am ready and I feel more experienced now with Policies and Guidelines and Wikipedia in general and I too feel I am ready.Regards - Telly  addict  20:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion



Support
 * 1) Support - You are a fine user. --Garfield the Cat 21:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Strong support → An excellent user, particularly active in XfDs. Snowolf (talk) CONCOI  -  21:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Me too. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, contribs, odometer) 21:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. Great user. Will be a great admin. Rettetast 22:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support, won't abuse sysop tools. Has a great understanding of what it takes to make the encyclopedia. Helps many other users too! Cremepuff222 (talk, sign book ) 22:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support - I see Tellyaddict a lot; reverting vandals, and updating Template:Wdefcon. Great vandalfighter with a good understanding of policy. With all the AIV reports, and with the backlogs that have been building up there lately, this user will make good use of the tools. CaptainVindaloo t c e 22:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support A civil, polite user who seems to have quite a bit of experience now. Simply south 22:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Strong Support Nice long answers to questions, great range of experience, terrific display of dedication to Wikipedia. -- P.B. Pilhet 22:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support Not the perfect candidate,but I can see that he'll do much more with the admin tools after he gets them. Nice long answers to questions showCanadianshoper 00:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 10)  Oppose. Support. I just don't know if I can vote for a candidate who wants the job... seriously, I was very desirous of adminship for months before I got it, and months before I would ever have even had a slim chance of passing RfA (by early 2006 standards, no less!), and I haven't done anything bad. Assuming this user is coming where I come from, I'll have to AGF and give the thumbs-up. RyanGerbil10 (Упражнение В!) 23:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. I often see Tellyaddict reverting vandalism when I am monitoring recent changes and he seems a very competent user. I disagree with User:Nick that there is "no real indication of what Tellyaddict would do with the tools". Quite to the contrary, I would say that his valuable contributions to WP:AIV give a very good indication of this. Furthermore, I disagree with  the link that User:Picaroon9288 makes between voting delete, albeit in quick succession, on WP:AFD and misuse of WP:CSD. Whilst I could understand this link if Tellyaddict was adding speedy notices inappropriately, I see no evidence of this, and I would argue that a familiarity with AFD might well reduce the chances of inappropriate deletions. I also have no objection to someone stating early in their Wikipedia life that they wish to become an administrator in the future. Whilst becoming an administrator should not be considered an award, it can nevertheless be perfectly validly seen as an aspiration to aim at. Will (aka  Wimt ) 01:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Support Good user, will use the tools well. -Mschel 01:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Very strong support - You have been an active vandalism fighter and a good editor. For the life of me, I cannot make heads or tails of the oppositions here.  If I am to divine some themes from those opposing, the perfect candidate should not want to be a sysop, should not be too active on AfDs, should want to fight vandals but not too much in case one gets accused of being "obsessed" over them, and should have a completely unimpeachable edit record.  I often wonder if we're electing the next sysop or the next Pope. L uis 1972   (Talk  •  My Contribs)  05:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Support. Causesobad → (Talk) 06:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Support. Tellyaddict is a very active vandalism fighter, who has demonstrated a firm grasp of policy. His answers are also very good. Yes he seem a little eager, but I do not consider this to be a bad thing - he has shown his willingness to dedicate huge ammounts of time to vandal hunting, the suggestion that he only wants the tools for the kudos seems a little unfounded to me. The diff's provided below are not problematic, they are all perfectly valid interpretations of policy. Rje 12:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 16) support --dario vet (talk) 16:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 17) Support - Looks Worthy Enough..-- Cometstyles 16:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose. With the very first revision of his userpage, the nominee declared his hope for adminship. Everything s/he's done since appears to have been in fulfillment of that goal. That is highly not cool. Besides, I seriously question this user's judgment and maturity. Though I am sure s/his vandalfighting is superb. - NYC JD (objection, asked and answered!) 22:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How is that not cool, again? Not to be rude, but I think this is a very petty reason to oppose, if it can even be called a reason.  Could you please explain further why the candidate doesn't deserve adminship for wanting to be a sysop?  Thanks. -- P.B. Pilhet  22:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I find it rather odd that a person wanting to be a sysop is used as the reason to deny him sysop tools.  I would hope that all of our sysops wanted to be sysops (or maybe NYC JD is right and they don't, which would explain our huge backlogs). L uis 1972  <font color="Darkred" face="Papyrus"> (Talk  <font color="Darkred" size="3">• <font color="darkred" face="Papyrus"> My Contribs)  05:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) The fact that you made six afd votes, (yes, I said votes),, , , , and  in a period of eight minutes leads me to believe you're likely to delete things that shouldn't be deleted while going through special:newpages or CAT:CSD. Besides that, your behavior at this RfA leads me to question your judgement and ability to handle criticism, and the banners on your userpage about your "positions" in various projects just don't strike a good chord. Picaroon 22:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose NYC JD basically addresses my main concern. This user seems to care a great deal about getting adminship on Wikipedia, and although I think Tellyaddict has made progress on Wikipedia, I still don't think that the user's judgment is not always accurate. I'm a bit worried about the AfD links provided by Picaroon, again for the question about your judgment. I still think you need to wait a while to learn the ropes and participate more on Wikipedia, especially with articles.  Nish kid 64  22:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose due solely to his "greenness" and "keenness" - although neither are the latter is not a bad thing, I think he is not ready to be an admin. His positive attitude to Wikipedia is a good thing, but one must not try to run before walking.  I wish there were a half-way status for the likes of me and TellyAddict to 'reward' a healthy approach to Wikipedia, but without as much responsibility as Adminship.  I guess a few more months of gnoming is needed to really learn the ropes, as I know it's all too easy to go flying in with size nines - learning not to do that takes experience. —  superbfc  [  talk  |  cont  ] — <em style="font-size:10px;">23:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose per Nishkid64 and concerns about judgement. Addhoc 23:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose Deputy Chief of United Kingdom Operations on WikiProject Fire Service and Manager of WikiProject Tyne and Wear and there's no real indication of what Tellyaddict would do with the tools other than add an admin badge to his user page alongside all of the other positions. There's also a clear indication of preparing for this RfA through the AfD process and tagging pictures recently, which I dislike, but I know it needs to be done to please some people, so I do congratulate you for trying to and partially succeeding in fostering trust in your actions but I don't think your quite ready to deal with the horrors of being an admin, the vandalism to your userpage, the people sending you new passwords for your account, the little things which tell you that there's one more person out there that's not your friend. I've probably rambled on enough, but when you start questioning whether you want to be an admin, but take a deep breath and think, yeah, it'll be a nuisance but there's loads of good things I can do, then your ready to rock and roll. I'd give it another few months and see how things go. -- Nick  <sup style="color:blue;">t  00:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Oppose Not yet there. User:Mholland's rundown (with diffs) on your recent editor review gives fine examples of how you don't quite have the grasp of Wikipedia policies & guidelines I'd like to see in an admin. You've done some solid article work and you're a very active vandal fighter, but I'm not yet confident that you've shown enough recently and consistently to justify handing you a few more tools. I'll be looking forward to your next RfA after a few more months of solid contributions. -- Scientizzle 01:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose per Picaroon, Nishkid64. Continue to edit, continue to improve, and work to address the concerns raised in your editor review and in this Rfa.  You're a valuable contributor; I merely believe that you need to address a few concerns before you're ready for adminship. · <b style="color:#709070;">j e r s y k o</b> <i style="color:#007BA7; font-size:x-small;">talk</i> · 04:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Don't trust this users judgement.  Daniel Bryant  04:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose I agree with Daniel.Bryant.  I also think the user's a little too obsessive with vandalism, seemingly always wanting to get the DEFCON template to level 1 (see Template_talk:Wdefcon and Template_talk:Wdefcon).  Metros232 04:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose per Nishkid64 and the rest. Needs more experience and more administrative work. Needs some more time before becoming an administrator. Terence Ong 07:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Oppose per concerns raised above, and this edit does not help me to trust this candidate's judgment. Prolog 11:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 12) Oppose as insufficiently mature, per the diff provided by Prolog. Sandstein 12:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 13) Oppose Reactions like this and this make you wonder how the candidate would react in a real crisis. And per all above. Sorry, can't fault the workrate, but not at this time. Bubba hotep 13:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 14) Oppose mostly for concerns regarding judgement. However, I also really dislike "adminship grooming"—I rather prefer reluctant admins to overly eager ones—and this user looks to be establishing a new reference example of the practice. —Doug Bell talk 17:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 15) Oppose per above. Also he seems to only joined in October 2006. — CharlotteWebb 19:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Neutral leaning towards weak support, pending more votes. the diffs provided by Picaroon make me question your judgement. It also seems like you're really seeking adminship as somewhat a trophy. It has only been two months since your last RfA. - <font color="Black">An <font color="Grey">as <font size="-4"><font color="DodgerBlue">Talk? 23:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Why are you waiting on more votes before making your vote? Shouldn't you make this decision yourself?↔<span style="font-size:11px; font-weight:bold; font-family:verdana, sans-serif;">NMajdan &bull;<span style="font-size:9px; font-family:verdana, sans-serif; color:#000000;">talk 00:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I should and will, but it was late yesterday and I was feeling sleepy, so I decided to wait for others to research the user's contributions and history. I shall take a look now. - <font color="Black">An <font color="Grey">as <font size="-4"><font color="DodgerBlue">Talk? 09:55, 9 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.