Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/The Determinator


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

The Determinator
'''1/17/0. Closed per WP:SNOW/WP:NOTNOW. WilliamH (talk) 20:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)'''

Nomination
– I had been editing Wikipedia from whatever IP address I would log from, and most these were minor changes. I made my account last year and I started off with a very strong deletionist bias. A couple of great Wikipedians guided me and pointed out my bias. Then I spend a couple of months just following users and watching their edits and reading about the policies. Once I restarting editing, I was adopted by User:Bmusician. I have been very actively involved in fighting vandalism and patrolling new pages.

I know my edit count is lower than what is normally expected of an admin. Nonetheless, I here making a bold move and asking the community's approval to allow me access to tools that will allow me to continue on with my work. I trust you will give my RfA proper thought and not discount it due to "low" edit count.

Again, I thank you for taking the time to give me your input, regardless of how you choose to !vote. The Determinator  p  t  c  15:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Disclosure: I have been known as User:CapMan07008 in the past and User:Determinator (public) is my public account. I do not remember all the IPs (home, school, library and cafes) from where I made small contributions from before I signed up. They were about 500 total over a matter of 6 years and were generally small (noting controversial), never added more than a couple of sentences to any article. The Determinator  p  t  c  15:55, 15 June 2012 (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 intend to work WP:AIV and WP:UAA, becasue these are the 2 areas where I feel ready and expect to make very little to no mistakes.  Eventually, Once I feel ready, I will also work on WP:CSD


 * 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * A: So far my best contributions to Wikipedia has fighting vandalism.  I intend to continue to fight vandalism because it protects the integrity of Wikipedia.  Vandals, even if left unchecked for a few minutes, can do a significant amount of damage to the hard work of a lot of hardworking Wikipedians.


 * 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: Regrettably, I have. When I first started editing Wikipedia and I did not have a complete understanding of the policies, some of my actions were contrary to what is acceptable in the Wikipedia community.  I learned very quickly that I was not getting along with other and immedietly ceased editing and started reading and watching.  Now, I know more than I did when I first joined Wikipedia.  IF I'm ever( or should I say when) involved in a dispute again, I intend to use WP:AGF and WP:BRD (Along with other proper dispute resolution methods) to make sure that little disagreements never stop me from moving Wikipedia forward again.


 * Additional question from Riley Huntley
 * 4. Are there any areas of administrative work you have little intention of taking part in or are not comfortable taking part in, and for what reasons?
 * A:I would want to get involved in CSD and AFD, but when I fee I'm ready. The reason I don't feel I'm ready for this is because as an admin I would expect my mistakes to be less than 1% of my actions.  Once, I reach that level I will start participating in them.  As of now I'm learning my making some very bold moves, instead of just agreeing with people above.  An example of this is here, where I went against the people before me and the convinced the others.  The Determinator   p  t  c  16:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Riley Huntley
 * 5. How would you deal with a unhelpful user adding threats of violence to specific user pages? Who would you report the threats to if it was a "real world" threat?
 * A: Threats are not welcome on Wikipedia. I would immediately remove threat(s), block the user, and ask them to withdraw the threat and rectify the situation, if they comply I think they can be unblocked. The Determinator   p  t  c  16:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Additional question from Riley Huntley
 * 6. Under what circumstances would you semi-protect or fully protect a user's talk page or user page?
 * A: Short answer: at the request of the user. Thanks, for these questions. If you need any clarifications of have nay followup questions, I'd be happy to answer them.  Thanks again. The Determinator   p  t  c  16:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Additional Questions from Electriccatfish2
 * 7. When would it be appropriate to block an editor?
 * A: There are several reason that can warrant the block of a user. WP:3RR, WP:Vandalism, WP:sockpuppetry, WP:editwar, WP:SPAM, attacking, copyright vilation or in general whenever you perceive an imminent harm to Wikipedia, you can prevent it by blocking the user. The Determinator   p  t  c  19:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

General comments

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

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

Support

 * 1) Moral Support- Per WP:GUTS. Self-nomination for critical evaluation by others. Please take the suggestions for improvement as constructive criticism rather than reading too much into them. Dru of Id (talk) 18:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If(I'm trying to get off work) I see you next month I'll buy you 10 kegs of beer. Not to worry, no ego on the line here. I enjoy wiki, and I won't let the WP:SNOW success of my RfA get to my head. I'll still be as humble as before. LOL...   The Determinator   p  t  c  19:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Oppose
style="color:green">c ''' 16:53, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Intends to work AIV and UAA. As of this oppose, edits to AIV: 16. Edits to UAA: less than 3 (doesn't show up on the edit counter). You'll need to make a better argument for wanting the tools. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 15:53, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you looked at the revers and warnings before a user gets reported to AIV. Not being an admin, I can't do much once the user is reported to AIV.  Thanks for your time and comments. The Determinator   p  t  c  16:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, but I'm looking for you to be doing some of that reporting, if that's what you intend to work with. Also, as a general rule, don't badger the opposes. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 17:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't mean to badger. I guess I was just being a little too aggressive about trying to persuade you. The Determinator   p  t  c  19:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) With regret, I do not see enough general edits to feel confident in your ability to be an effective administrator, and as Strange Passerby says, there is specifically nowhere near a suitable level of interaction at the pages you have said that you want to work on. Keep up the good work, but alas you are not ready for adminship at the moment --  Phantom Steve .alt/ talk \[alternative account of Phantomsteve] 16:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Looking on your talk page, I see several declined speedy deletion requests from this week. That suggests to me that a little more time getting comfortable with the CSD criteria would be beneficial prior to getting the delete button. 28bytes (talk) 16:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, I don't plan on working on CSD yet. The Determinator  p  t  c  16:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Per WP:NOTQUITEYET (and no, I don't care that such an essay doesn't exist yet). It seems like you're doing good work, but a lifetime appointment to Adminship requires a longer record of edits, so as to build trust. Lack of work in the WP and WT namespaces, specifically in areas you've stated you'd like to work in, is also concerning. Achowat (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. From my understanding Adminship is not lifetime. It can and it has been taken away before. To me it is nothing more than the tools I need to do What I think I can contribute effectively. The Determinator   p  t  c  16:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Lifetime appointment? Petrb (talk) 16:06, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Members of the Supreme Court of the United States can also be removed from office. It doesn't make their appointment any less "lifetime". Achowat (talk) 16:16, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Good point. However, I don't get to make any everlasting decisions. I just get more tools to works with.  My work can be undone by at least a thousand people at will. (Any chance I can convince you, or should I stop trying ) The Determinator  ' p  t''  <span
 * Not really. User:Achowat/RfA Process is a good place to find out how to get me to support your candidacy. Achowat (talk) 17:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - I like boldness, and try to reward it when I can, as it shows independence and a willingness to take calculated risks, traits I approve of. For that, I commend you.  However, I think you are not quite ready to play the role of janitor and you need to have more experience to benefit from the use of the tools.  I will be happy to reconsider your candidacy in the future.   Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  16:06, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Even next week, lol... The Determinator  p  t  c  16:08, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If you choose, but as this was a singular promise to reconsider, use it wisely. And adminship is forever, as it is very difficult to remove once given, which is why some of us take granting the admin bit more serious than others, and treat RfA in a more formal fashion than other venues.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  16:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your vandalism reversion work Determinator. So do continue that. It's been just around 30 days since you were granted rollback rights, if I'm right. So experience, and with it maturity that you gain to respond to situations, are extremely important traits that you should possess. Indulge yourself for a few months in the areas that interest you and then come back. Kind regards. Wifione  Message 16:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Regretful oppose - There is no doubt that you are a great editor but there are many concerns. Like, your CSD success rate is pretty low compared to the normal standards and many declined requests are there lately. On the other hand, lack of experience is my major point in the oppose because showing only 5 months of proper editing and just over 1800+ edits doesn't give the true reflection of your understanding of policies. I'd love to support you after a good span of 8-10 months. Sorry for now.  →TSU tp* 16:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose - Anti-vandalism is needed work, but you can do quite a bit of that without the admin bit. I agree with Dennis Brown's points about more experience in wider areas of Wiki being needed. Intothatdarkness (talk) 16:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose User currently fails to meet criteria 2, 3, and 4 at this time.— cyberpower Chat Limited Access  16:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I can see how you can come up with failure of 2&3, but when have I betrayed your trust by misusing the tools that I have been given? Or am I looking at the wrong criteria.?  Please do tell, If I have done something to violate 4. The Determinator   p  t  c  16:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) User:Cyberpower678/RfA Criteria. Achowat (talk) 17:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Unfortunate Oppose I think that you need to be at least an editor with a full years service and at least 4,000 edits to apply. --Chip123456 (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose but please do come back when your answer to Q4 indicates that you do feel ready. -Scottywong | verbalize _  16:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I am ready to do what said I will do. the question was about what I won't do. Just an illustration.  I'm not ready to fly a Boeing 777 and I'm not going apply for that job, I'm ready to work on AIV and I have applied to work on AIV The Determinator   p  t  c  17:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose. Needs more experience. Glrx (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Just piling on with a WP:NOTNOW. Get some more edits under your belt, get more experience with the relevant admin processes (reporting to WP:AIV, WP:RFPP and WP:UAA, participating in deletion discussions at WP:AFD or one of the other XfD venues, etc.) and you'll be fine. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose Per WP: SNOW. Electriccatfish2 (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose - I'm sorry, but I believe that Wikipedia admins need to uphold an excellent level of professionalism, something you are failing to show with your typographical errors, such as "when I fee (sic) I'm ready" in A4, and frequent use of the "LOL" acronym. This can be easily fixed, so please do so and gain a little more experience, and I'll be happy to support you in the future. Rotorcowboy $talk contribs$ 19:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I'm sorry you feel that way, I don't think that I need to sacrifice humor to be productive on Wikipedia.  I will try to be more careful with my typing to make sure that there are not too many typographical errors.  I will continue to work on wiki to gain more experience. Thanks again. The Determinator   p  t  c  19:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose and applause for your attitude in responses here. You're making a good impression. However, I have to agree with the comment that since adminship is an all or nothing deal . . . and you never know what you will wind up doing after you get the tools . . . it isn't really realistic to ask to be evaluated only on your intent to work in one specific area. Also, I'll add this: one thing admins have to do a lot of is communicate with other users, including new editors and people who are worked up about something. The ability to write clearly is rather important. Plus . . . this is a writing project. So, I'm concerned by the usage errors in your answers to the questions here, and I've found problems in the articles you've written, too. Plus, most of them badly need sources and/or expansion. I was pleasantly surprised to find so many articles, but I'd like to see you work on writing better - and making your articles better - before your next RfA. Which I will be looking for :-) [Edit conflict, so someone's already said this. Oops.] Yngvadottir (talk) 19:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose Some candidates here will probably never be chosen; some are shoo-ins; and some have obvious potential but need a little more time and a little more experience. This last is you. Carry on as you are, but spend more time in the admin-related areas available to you, and apply again in a few months. If you show improvement then, as requested in these oppose comments, you will probably succeed.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 20:04, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Neutral



 * Please, prefix the replies to comments with #, for example:
 * 1) support this user bought me 2 beers on last wikimania ~ << comment
 * Thanks ~ << answer
 * It makes it easier for us to count and read the comments, thanks :-) Petrb (talk) 16:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * 1) Comment Adminship isn't granted (or do I mean 'imposed'?) just for one area. After the mop is in your hand, you can chose to sort out one area or wander through the lot. You show promise in what I've seen of you - but you do need to get more visible experience in as wide a field as possible (including content creation to keep the 'creationists' content). I've seen you in CSD - work on getting a good percentage there. In AIV and the other admin areas, you can make helpful comments and do some of the background work. (Is that really a username that violates policy, or is it an Indian, Thai or Japanese name? Is User:BloggsCo representing a company, or is there no outfit called BloggsCo out there in the real world? And so on...) So far, no-one's discovered the skeleton in your cupboard, or found out that you are only eight years old. Give it a bit more time of working widely, and try again. And don't get any skeletons... Peridon (talk) 18:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback. Question: Is there a tool that you use to calculate CSD percentage? - The Determinator   p  t  c  19:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably. Anthony Bradbury reckoned I'd got some fantastic percentage correct at CSD and AfD when he nominated me. I wasn't worried about it - I'd judged by seeing how many things I'd tagged were still in my contribs list, and working out why. Sneaky trick, that. Apparently, most of my tags that survived had been rescued before the axe fell - also a good thing to learn from. It weighs with the content brigade that you have rescued things - not as much as creating 20 stubs on obscure subjects, but it is helping the encyclopaedia grow. My view is that growing is the main purpose, but someone has to do the weeding and look after the compost heap... ask AB about the tools for finding out things like that. There are dozens of them for all sorts of things, and about the only ones I use are the little bot that archives talk pages (and then a nice young person comes in and puts them into the right month box), and Twinkle - neither of which I'd used before I got the mop. Peridon (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Forgot to add AfD as an area to work in. Study it, and do a non-admin closure or three when ready. (Ask for Details...) Don't be afraid of going against the flow in discussion if you are sure you have a good point, and equally be prepared to change your !vote. I've been the only keep on occasions (or only delete), and on others I've been the first to go against the flow, and the result has been what I chose - because I found something the others hadn't. Rules are to be followed (except when they're to be ignored), but in discussion never be a rubber stamp. Peridon (talk) 20:06, 15 June 2012 (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.