Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/1ne


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for bureaucratship that did not succeed and was withdrawn.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

1ne
Ended (15/5/0) Ending 07:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

– I would like to nominate 1ne for bureaucratship on Wikipedia. (Yes, you can nominate other people for b'crat, see Requests for bureaucratship/Quadell.) On IRC, he has given me the impression that he would be a good bureaucrat. He wants "RfA's backlog and turnover rate to be lower." He will be able to do that, since he has the time to make it happen. He has told me himself: he wants more work; he wants to help Wikipedia more than he can now. If you're going to let at least one more person become bureaucrat, let him. ★ MESSED ROCKER ★  02:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept! I sincerely hope that the community trusts me as much to be a bureaucrat as Messedrocker does. :-) 1ne 02:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I've taken the step of withdrawing my withdraw, as weird as that may seem. I've talked over the matter at hand with Mailer Diablo, and I feel that I can keep this RfB going. 1ne 23:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I am MessedRocker and I approve that message. ★ MESSED  ROCKER ★  23:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I hereby withdraw for good. Despite getting no diffs, apparently I still have much to learn. 1ne 00:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Support as nominator.  ★ MESSED  ROCKER ★  02:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support everything is in order here †he Bread  02:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. G .H  e  04:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Support- no matter what any1ne (hehehe) says, we can never have too many bureaucrats.  J o r c o g α  05:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Support - he can take my crap, all we're giving him is a little multiple select menu, and he gets it. I think he's even smarter at !voting than a bot (sorry ArbBot).  Oh, and his name starts w/ an A - heck, that must mean he makes "A" decision :) (ok bad pun) but seriously.  He will even "  let me answer your 32897432876423786437864782647238647823642783463278462387462783463278 questions" so there, I'm convinced he'll read thru all RfA's nice and carefully.  Oh, and more people who will assign bot flags on an IRC request are always a good thing.  I support now :) -- Tawker 06:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Approval, I think this guy is fit for the job. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  {L} 07:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Any1ne knows that hes fit for the job. :) --CableModem^_^ 07:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't copy my pun! How dare you!:)  J o r c o g α  08:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Support.  The guy needs a bit more patience sometimes, but I think he'd make a good bureaucrat.  JDtalk 09:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Seems capable of gauging consensus and making good decisions -- he goes where the evidence leads him, from what I've seen, and that's important. I agree with J Di that a little more patience wouldn't hurt from time to time, but apparently we both agree that 1ne is nevertheless reasonable and in control. So, yes. Luna Santin 09:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Support We NEED more bureaucrats!!! And ne1 would make a great crat! Mike (T C) [[Image:Star_of_life2.png|20px]] 09:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Weak Support I don't know this user very well but I can see that they're not likely to abuse the position. &mdash;Xyrael / 09:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Support – Gurch 10:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. We do need more bureaucrats, no doubt about it – 1ne just make sure you do check the backlogs regularly. To me, the opposes seem rather vague – might change my mind if any user comes up with some compelling diffs. -- Majorly ( Talk ) 23:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Support. Trustworthy user, lots of experience and we need more crats. --Rory096 00:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Support per everyone above. Wikipedia really needs more bureaucrats. 1ne is a good user with a good track record, and if he's willing to do the job, then I commend him. Mike 00:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose


 * 1) 1ne = Sushigeek? Hate me for doing this but if so, then strongest oppose possible for intolerance, severe incivility, and off-wiki personal attacks over IRC, and hence questionable competance for the job. I recall him hurling abuses at me unprovoked through a private IRC message (including the F-word if memory does not fail me), and I last expect to see it coming from a long-standing sysop, which greatly disappoints me. It is unacceptable to attack someone off-wiki just because you disagree with 1FA. I also have a feeling that some IRC cliquishness is going on, and giving him greater powers is simply not going to help matters in accountability, transparency and integrity of our RfA. Some clues can be found in most unlikely of pages, Brandt's IRC logs : "Oh well, mailer diablo is another filler for phaedriel's list" (June, search "1FA"), "or Mailer diablo's retarded 1FA to get his point". (June, search "mailer_diablo") - Mailer Diablo 12:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This oppose troubles me. Not only is this user citing incidents that happened off-wiki, they're in IRC PMs, which makes them totally unverifiable, and, while Mailer is an upstanding user and this is unlikely, he could be making this all up. In addition, he's publishing logs, a bannable offense from all Wikimedia channels (see IRC guidelines), and asserting that "cabalism" is going on, but not backing this up at all. I would like to see evidence for the claims you make. --Rory096 23:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Geez, the irony. Publishing IRC logs is a bannable offense, while IRC logs is the demand for proof. - Mailer Diablo 23:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The moral of the story seems to be that things that happen off-wiki are just that, off-wiki. --Rory096 00:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Now, even if we were to use IRC guidelines as the yardstick, it says keep in mind that the same basic standards of behaviour do apply. I am more than happy to stake my Freenode IRC ID, permissions, etc. to vouch for my statement because my sole purpose is for coordination in Wikimedia channels only - I stand by my statement; I expect basic courtesy on a Wikimedia-affiliated IRC channel - if this cannot be fulfilled, what more about on-wiki projects? - Mailer Diablo 00:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) While he's come a long way in his dealings with other users, I think that 1ne does not yet handle criticism or disagreement with the even temper and calm reason I would want to see in a bureaucrat; since this along with a "feel" for community sentiment is to me an extremely important criterion, I oppose this nomination. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 23:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * May I ask for a few diffs? 1ne 23:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose This user has certainly matured a lot. But I've had civility issues with him in the past - and that's just not good enough in a crat. I have to agree with Kat above. --Docg 23:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How far in the past? See my response to Kat. 1ne 23:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) All our bureaucrat-dependent processes are running as smoothly as can be expected at the moment; we can therefore afford (and indeed ought) to be exceedingly picky about whom we add. In times of need, the decision may depend more on who's willing, but such is not the case at the moment. I have known 1ne (under one of his former names - I don't remember which) to be a complete pest on IRC, from which at some point he was regularly banned. Now I'm willing to consider that he might have matured, but for this position, someone whom a year ago I would have rejected out of hand as an administrator is not the ideal candidate. &mdash; Dan | talk 00:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I should also note that nowhere on 1ne's userpage does he mention his former identities. I thought I had never encountered this user, until somebody mentioned that he used to be called WikiFanatic. This is irritating. It would be nice if he'd pick a name and stick with it, and list all his past names, lest he be accused of distancing himself from his past. &mdash; Dan | talk 00:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * WikiFan04, WikiFanatic, SushiGeek are the previous usernames what I know so far. - Mailer Diablo 00:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's all there are. Please stop talking about me like I'm a troll. I'm not trying to distance myself from my past at all. I've learned from my mistakes. My IRC "pest"-ness was last evident in July of 2005. And I turned from a mild pest in my WF RfA to a complete pest now? 1ne 00:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose per Kat. I haven't seen the kind of extremely mature behaviour from this editor that being a b'crat requires. pschemp | talk 00:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments
 * RFAs: Requests for adminship/WikiFan04, Requests for adminship/WikiFanatic – Chacor 05:50, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. Have you read the discussions on when to promote and not promote? What do you understand the criteria for promotion to be?
 * A. Yes, I have. I expect the criteria for promotion to be a 75-80% support threshold.
 * 2. How would you deal with contentious nominations where a decision to promote or not promote might be criticized?
 * A. First, I would discuss the matter with fellow bureaucrats. Fellow bureaucrats have plenty of experience in this matter, and would definitely give me insight into how to treat the matter.
 * 3. Wikipedians expect Bureaucrats to adhere to high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and the ability to engage others in the community. Why do you feel you meet those standards?
 * A. I feel that my year of serving Wikipedia as an admin has proven that I am diplomatic, calm and fair when it comes to resolving disputes. If I am made a bureaucrat, I will continue to honor the same high standards of fairness, knowledge of policy and resolving disputes that I already do as an admin.
 * 4. If you become a bureaucrat, will you pledge not to discuss promotion or non-promotion of potential admins on any other forum during the course of nominations and especially when making a decision? And to discuss issues of promotion or non-promotion only with other bureaucrats, in their talk, where such discussion would be transparent?
 * A. Of course! :-) I consider promotion and non-promotion a very serious matter, and I would be sure not to advertise it or make light of it.
 * 5. Do you have the time and do you have the desire to visit WP:RFA on a regular basis to see to the promotion or delisting of candidates in a timely manner?
 * A. I definitely do. I have a very good amount of free time, especially around the holidays, and I already visit RFA regularly as an admin. I pledge to always be right there when something arises on RFA.

Question from Chacor: Why bureaucrat? Why not simply remain sysop? – Chacor 05:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * A. See the nomination. I want to be able to help Wikipedians even more than I can now. 1ne 05:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * >_> I really need to read these nominations more carefully. – Chacor 06:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL! :P 1ne 06:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Question: Do you see yourself more of a cow or a cat - do you meow or moo. Why do you see yourself this way? -- Tawker 06:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no idea... I guess I meow because I like cats? 1ne 06:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) If you could change any one thing about Wikipedia what would it be?
 * I've always wanted there to be a 'new messages' box when something happened to an item on your watchlist. I realize the software isn't capable of reasonably doing that, though. 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) If you were constructing a level of editor between user and admin, how would they be choosen and what privileges would this new class have?
 * Probably a class that could do half of the things that admins can do; maybe only protect pages or the equivalent of godmode. I'd call it "protect". 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) Why did you decide to join Wikipedia?
 * I don't really know! I think it was because I liked the message of the project - that it's the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) A considerable number of "Geeks" have experienced, or are close to, burnout due to a mixture of stress and vitriol inherent in a collaborative web site of this nature. Do you feel able to justify yourself under pressure, and to not permit stress to become overwhelming and cause undesirable or confused behaviour?
 * Yes, I can justify myself. I rarely crack under pressure, but when I do, I make sure that the problem is solved quickly. However, I take steps now to prevent myself from cracking. 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) In your view, do 'crats hold a technical or political position (or are they simply hopefully non hackable human voting machines)
 * I believe they hold a bit of both; they have the technical ability to promote admins and the like, but since they decide how RfAs turn out, they're a bit political, as well. 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) How do you respond to the fact that like so many of our 'crats your name starts with the letter A
 * I guess it's a good decade for the letter A! :-P 1ne 07:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Optional questions from Majorly: 1. Because I thought I had it protected; I would have protected it on October 19 if I hadn't known it wasn't. 1ne 23:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC) 2. Of course. In fact, I forgot to state that; I'd lend a big hand in cleaning up backlogs. 1ne 23:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Can I ask why you fully protected your user page just yesterday, despite it not being vandalised since 18 October?
 * 2) Do you plan on visiting Changing username on a regular basis, as I have noticed there has recently been a huge backlog there, with no bureaucrats around (or willing) to do it?