Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/LessHeard vanU 2

Comment by the "candidate"
Just a comment; I realise this request may provoke a meta discussion regarding standing admins re-applying/requesting reconfirmation of the mop. This is not the venue for it. When it is decided where it might be held, I might participate - but not until this process concludes. LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Added a header here. NW ( Talk ) ( How am I doing? ) 00:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit Stats
Username: LessHeard vanU User groups: sysop First edit: Mar 08, 2006 11:13:44 Unique articles edited: 7,345 Average edits per page: 2.69 Total edits (including deleted): 19,752 Deleted edits: 660 Live edits: 19,092

Namespace totals Article	4995	26.16% Talk	1306	6.84% User	475	2.49% User talk	6148	32.20% Wikipedia	5160	27.03% Wikipedia talk	954	5.00% File	1	0.01% File talk	2	0.01% MediaWiki talk	1	0.01% Template	17	0.09% Template talk	6	0.03% Help	1	0.01% Category	23	0.12% Category talk	3	0.02%

Month counts 2006/03	190	2006/04	329	2006/05	265	2006/06	150	2006/07	133	2006/08	114	2006/09	174	2006/10	471	2006/11	69	2006/12	318	2007/01	527	2007/02	389	2007/03	357	2007/04	581	2007/05	387	2007/06	539	2007/07	551	2007/08	810	2007/09	667	2007/10	635	2007/11	542	2007/12	684	2008/01	595	2008/02	428	2008/03	814	2008/04	685	2008/05	856	2008/06	574	2008/07	600	2008/08	572	2008/09	654	2008/10	449	2008/11	544	2008/12	586	2009/01	625	2009/02	735	2009/03	529	2009/04	579	2009/05	385

Logs Users blocked: 2411 Pages deleted: 364 Pages moved: 7 Pages patrolled: 1422 Pages protected: 255 Pages restored: 44 Users unblocked: 65 Pages unprotected: 9 Files uploaded: 1 Top edited articles Article * 93 - The_Beatles * 91 - Paul_McCartney * 56 - John_Lennon * 47 - Ringo_Starr * 45 - George_Harrison * 44 - Siouxsie_&_the_Banshees * 40 - Steven_Severin * 40 - Penzance * 34 - Usana * 30 - Autogyro

Talk * 170 - The_Beatles * 84 - Paul_McCartney * 71 - John_Lennon * 68 - Usana * 33 - Jahbulon * 29 - Autogyro * 28 - Universities_and_antisemitism * 26 - Steven_Severin * 21 - Siouxsie_&_the_Banshees * 20 - Ringo_Starr

User * 166 - LessHeard_vanU * 130 - LessHeard_vanU/sandbox * 35 - LessHeard_vanU/sandbox2 * 11 - LessHeard_vanU/Admin_log * 7 - Jimbo_Wales * 4 - Barneca/Requests_for_Jimboship/Barneca * 4 - Giano/Complaints * 4 - Markjamesslater * 3 - Axel8 * 3 - SirFozzie/Investigation/Sandbox

User talk * 734 - LessHeard_vanU * 194 - Jimbo_Wales * 121 - Andreasegde * 107 - Lar * 80 - Giano_II * 45 - Vera,_Chuck_&_Dave * 42 - Crestville * 40 - Jimbo_Wales/Credential_Verification/Archive_2 * 38 - Kingboyk * 33 - LessHeard_vanU/archive

Wikipedia * 1528 - Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents * 771 - Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism * 739 - Administrators'_noticeboard * 178 - Village_pump_(policy) * 91 - Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop * 81 - Requests_for_arbitration/Sarah_Palin_protection_wh... * 80 - Arbitration/Requests * 74 - Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Workshop * 48 - Requests_for_arbitration/Privatemusings/Workshop * 42 - Requests_for_comment/Arbitration_Committee

Wikipedia talk * 73 - No_personal_attacks * 57 - WikiProject_The_Beatles * 57 - WikiProject_Visual_arts/Infoart_articles * 56 - WikiProject_The_Beatles/Policy * 48 - Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism * 37 - Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Proposed_d...   * 36 - WikiProject_The_Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue_...    * 36 - Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Proposed_dec... * 26 - Private_correspondence * 20 - WikiProject_Cornwall

File * 1 - Self_Portrait_(A_Study_Upon_The_Effects_of_Aging.)...

File talk * 2 - Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands.jpg

MediaWiki talk * 1 - Deletereason-dropdown

Template * 2 - Football_in_North_Cyprus * 2 - Country_data_North_Cyprus * 2 - Politics_of_North_Cyprus * 1 - Fatimah * 1 - Britney_Spears * 1 - Romanian_historical_regions * 1 - Update_after * 1 - AIV * 1 - Football_in_Northern_Cyprus * 1 - Cricket_deliveries

Template talk * 5 - Update_after * 1 - WPBeatles

Help * 1 - Modifying_and_creating_policy

Category * 4 - Alternate_Wikipedia_accounts_of_LessHeard_vanU * 2 - Sport_in_North_Cyprus * 2 - Environment_of_North_Cyprus * 2 - Football_in_North_Cyprus * 2 - North_Cyprus-related_lists * 1 - Sport_in_Northern_Cyprus * 1 - Fauna_of_Northern_Cyprus * 1 - Turkish_Cypriot_society * 1 - EMI * 1 - Politics_of_Northern_Cyprus

Category talk * 2 - Pre-Islamic_heritage_of_Pakistan * 1 - Wikipedia_administrators

Admin Actions

 * Deletions: 364
 * Undeletions: 44
 * Protections: 255
 * Unprotections: 9
 * Protection modifications: 19
 * Blocks: 2411
 * Unblocks: 65
 * Block modifications: 18
 * User rights modifications: 0
 * Total: 3185

Opposes
Right now, there are two opposes per improper venue. You guys should either go neutral or sit it out. The oppose section isn't for recognizing the process, its for removing his bit. Unless you seem to think this process was an error in judgment?  Syn  ergy 00:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If the opposers are arguing that this reconfirmation RfA is such a gross misjudgement that LessHeard really, really does not deserve to keep the bit, I think they should come out and say so, with cogent and defensible reasons. Rodhull  andemu  01:04, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I posted to WP:BN about the need to consider how !votes were to be weighed in this (and hopefully) future instances, whether comments specifically about admin actions by the candidate should weigh more heavily than those placed on process or general (un)trustworthiness. Rodhullandemu makes a good point - damn him - about whether poor use of process is itself an indication that the tools may need removing. LessHeard vanU (talk) 01:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If you really want to do it the full knackers-dangling-in-the-lion-cage way, ask the nearest steward to desysop you and then run for RFA from clear. –  iride scent  01:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec) I said the above because the idea of a voluntary reconfirmation RfA is not yet such an embedded process- even if considered necessary- that it is bound to raise such issues. Opposing on the basis of novelty of process itself seems unconstructive; you have chosen to be judged on your merits as an admin, which I have no problem with; and it is those merits which should be under discussion, not the perceived lacuna in our processes. Rodhull  andemu  01:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * To Iridescent, hmmmm... It took me several weeks of soul searching to go for this - your variant would be too scary for me, yet apart from not having the mop during the process there would be no difference. Like admin recall, the vast majority who would do this voluntarily are not those who one would wish to have had the bits removed. I would comment, however, that there is no coincidence that I have run this on the second anniversary of my being given the mop - should this not be stillborn, perhaps after accepting it as voluntary a consideration might be advocated of it being compulsory after a certain period. LessHeard vanU (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's really a case for arguing against anomalous procedure when the page itself is anomalous procedure. Pot and kettle, you know, gander and goose. ;) I'm sure both of us are fully versed on where you're "supposed" to put votes. Yet, we put them there. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 01:55, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, things were getting boring around here anyway.  Dloh  cierekim  01:59, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps; but conflating the shortcomings of the process with those of the candidate seems to me to be missing the point, and I stand by my above remarks on that. If this is such a gross misjudgement, I'd like to hear cogent reasons why it is thought to be so. The candidate deserves nothing less, in all fairness. Rodhull  andemu  02:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Only you are saying this, and LVH is not a candidate for anything but some extra kudos. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 04:27, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I disagree. You've opposed on the basis of process; this is an RfA, after all. If it goes one way, he will lose his bit. If you have a serious, conduct-based objection that LessHeard is unfit to be an admin, I'd rather you came out and said it. Likewise, if you think that the invocation of process, which is neither forbidden nor deprecated, makes him unsuitable to have the mop, equally, I'd like to hear cogent, argued reasons. Thus far, I remain to be convinced that you aren't just reacting against a novel use of established process "because there is no need for it". Rodhull  andemu  04:43, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Rod, you're wasting your own resources taking this more seriously that you should. There's no chance of losing this vote, and it's not launched under pressure or disrepute. There's thus no clear procedural precedent that means a loss here would mean desyssoping. Crats aren't even able to do that. Incidentally, if I wanted LVH removed I'd just say something like "per Durova" or something. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 05:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I made the point that I was launching this on the second anniversary of my sysopping. I do not recall where we may have interacted previously, but whenever it was you seem to have taken a whole lot of inferences of my motives out of it - and got it very wrong, too. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

←Hey, we're using less than 3 Gigabytes out of a possible 3 terabytes of en-WP resources. If someone feels this/these particular page(s) are a waste of time, they're free to keep on goin'. I personally don't see a problem here. Especially after the Q&A where Mark offers to give up the tools if the community thinks he's doing a bad job. I like the idea that a long-term experienced editor will step up and ask for a "Check-Me" evaluation. I think this reconfirmation idea has legs, and I'd like to see more of it. I can't think of a better venue to stand before the community and seek acceptance. — Ched : ?  19:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I hope the Bureaucrats are going to discount votes that say "oppose, rfa is not a pat on the back" but otherwise say nothing about LHVU's worthiness as an admin. By the ordinary threshold percentages, these votes may make the difference between LHVU being confirmed or not. It would be the height of ridiculousness if LHVU was desysopped for initiating a reconfirmation process that people didn't like. 140.247.125.131 (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC) (unless of course the bureucrats have no power here in which case make all the silly votes you want)


 * One of the qualities of being an admin just might be having the self awareness of your own administrative record, and the standing knowledge of the Rfa process, to know that just putting yourself up for Rfa for no particular reason other than it being the anniversary of your Rfa and a bit of nagging self doubt, is not an astounding example of having a clue. Still, the biggest crime here would still be just being a bit unconventional. MickMacNee (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * He could have done something like this, in which he probably wouldn't have gotten any attention at all. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 10:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That looks more like a (non-standard) WP:RECALL page, rather than an active solicitation of feedback. (he has after all not linked to it from anywhere but his user page). MickMacNee (talk) 00:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Miscount!!!
Iz gotz 154 supportz! Iz been writinz thankz withz wrungz numberz!! Quickz, needz Oversize!!! LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think my support was counted, for the same reason the opposes per no on reconfirm process were discounted.  Sy  n 19:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * LHvU, I think this entire process may have had an even more profound impact on you than expected. In fact, you may be suffering from a rare, but serious medical condition.  user: J  aka justen (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually LHvU, you're probably right. He seems to have made a mistake then if he purposely ignored the oppose votes, yet kept them in the count, and discounted one vote (which might not be mine, but the last one) in the support section (I assumed it was mine because I use Comment and not Support). Eh.  Sy  n 23:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, is the software that sensitive? I missed it too - and the neutral vote count was correct but the formatting chopped the penultimate one in half and left the last one an orphan. I would fix it and invoke IAR but... it really isn't that important, is it? LessHeard vanU (talk) 10:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

You're telling me I got the tally wrong too? I guess I was a lot more tired than I thought I was. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 09:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally? And truthfully, I am grateful you stepped up. Thank you. LessHeard vanU (talk) 10:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)