Wikipedia:RFA
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:RFA".

"WP:RFA" redirects here. You may be looking for requested articles, recently featured articles, requests for arbitration, or requests for assistance at Wikipedia:Help desk.


content
v • d • e
Requests for adminship sections
Administrators
Shortcuts:
WP:RFA
WP:RFB
Bureaucrats
Nominate
Current admin count: 1,604 (list all)
Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Wikipedia community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list, how-to guide, and guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request.

This page also hosts Requests for bureaucratship (RfB), where new bureaucrats are selected.

Contents

About RfA

The community grants administrator status to trusted users, so nominees should have been on Wikipedia long enough for people to determine whether they are trustworthy. Administrators are held to high standards of conduct because other editors often turn to them for help and advice.

Nomination standards
There are no official prerequisites for adminship, other than having an account and having a basic level of trust from other editors. The community looks for a variety of things in candidates, and everybody has their own opinion on this; for examples of what the community is looking for, look at some successful requests and some unsuccessful ones.
Decision process
Any user may nominate another user with an account. Self-nominations are permitted. If you are unsure about nominating yourself for adminship, you may wish to consult admin coaching first, so as to get an idea of what the community might think of your request. Also, you might explore adoption by a more experienced user to gain experience. Nominations remain posted for seven days from the time the nomination is posted on this page, during which time users give their opinions, ask questions, and make comments. This discussion process is not a vote (it is sometimes referred to as a !vote using the computer science negation symbol). At the end of that period, a bureaucrat will review the discussion to see whether there is a consensus for promotion. This is sometimes difficult to ascertain, and is not a numerical measurement, but as a general descriptive rule of thumb most of those above ~80% approval pass, most of those below ~70% fail, and the area between is subject to bureaucratic discretion.
Bureaucrats may also use their discretion to close nominations early, if a promotion is unlikely and they see no further benefit in leaving the application open. Only bureaucrats may close a nomination as a definitive promotion, but any user in good standing can close a request that has no chance of passing; please don't close any requests that you have taken part in, or that are not blatantly unpassable. In the case of vandalism, improper formatting or a declined or withdrawn nomination, non-bureaucrats may also de-list a nomination, but they should make sure they leave a note with the candidate, and if necessary add the request to the unsuccessful requests.
In exceptional circumstances, bureaucrats extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination so as to make consensus clearer. If your nomination fails, please wait a reasonable period of time before renominating yourself or accepting another nomination. Some candidates have tried again and succeeded within a month, but many editors prefer several months before reapplying.
Expressing opinions
Any Wikipedian with an account is welcome to comment in the Support, Oppose, and Neutral sections, but IPs are unable to place a numerical "vote". The candidate may respond to the comments of others. Certain comments may be discounted if there are suspicions of fraud; these may be the contributions of very new editors, sockpuppets, and meatpuppets. Please explain your opinion by including a short explanation of your reasoning. Your input will carry more weight if it is accompanied by supporting evidence.
To add a comment, click the "Voice your opinion" link for the relevant candidate. Any Wikipedians, including users who do not have an account and/or are not logged in ("anons"), are invited to participate in the comments section and ask questions. Always be respectful towards others in your comments. You may wish to review arguments to avoid in adminship discussions.

Nominating

Nominations must be accepted by the user in question. If you wish to nominate a user, contact them first before making the nomination page. If they accept, create the nomination and ask them to sign their acceptance. To nominate either yourself or another user for adminship, follow the instructions on this page. The nomination may be considered "malformed" and removed if you do not follow these instructions or transclude the request properly. Users interested in becoming administrators may add themselves to Category:Wikipedia administrator hopefuls. A list of these users including additional information is automatically maintained at Wikipedia:List of administrator hopefuls.


Current nominations for adminship

Current time is 13:18:24, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Purge page cache if nominations have not updated.

JPG-GR

Voice your opinion (talk page) (22/1/1); Scheduled to end 04:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

JPG-GR (talk · contribs) - Every time that I decide to take a look at the admin backlog, one of the most consistent areas where help is sorely, sorely needed is Wikipedia:Requested moves. So I've looked at it for a little while now, and since I'm not that great at move issues I generally don't do it myself, and presumably others are in the same boat? So who's doing the moves? Well, a non-admin is doing those where admin intervention is not needed, and is basically a staple of the RM page. That person is JPG-GR. With over 5000 page moves done, he is clearly an asset to his area of specialty. His 2000+ edits to the RM page have to be either the most or nearly the most out of all Wikipedia users, which shows his dedication. Obviously, he would be a great help to handling that move backlog, and making sure those are taken care of. His edits are, of course, more than just that. His specialty in article writing and discussion is radio stations, as seen by his frequent discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Radio Stations. Examples of his work include [1] and [2], which isn't a major edit but shows that he clearly understands policy. He also does some vandalism reversion as well. All in all, since he would be a specialist contributor as an administrator, and he shows that he would clearly be dedicated to that area, he would make a good admin. Wizardman 04:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination.


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: As Wizardman indicated, I spend a lot of time working on move proposals at Wikipedia:Requested Moves and intend to continue doing so. Thanks to my use of {{db-move}}, I am well aware that the backlog at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion can sometimes get out of control and I'd be glad to help out there. As for the other staple areas admins work (WP:XFD comes to mind first and foremost, naturally), I have a help-where-needed attitude. I don't have any intention of jumping full force into any particular area or areas that I don't already spend time in without first spending plenty of time "feeling" my way around.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I helped spearhead the initiative to clean up the mess that were the United States radio lists (articles of the type List of radio stations in STATE) by working to coordinate the best format for said lists and then creating/fixing/updating them with info from the FCC database. A large portion of my content-related edits are to those lists and to the greater WP:WPRS-related framework. In general, I am much more "maintenance"-intensive than "content"-intensive (which should be clear from my work at WP:RM). I can't boast of any FAs written or impressive DYK counts. I account that to being much more of a math/science guy vs. a literature/arts guy.
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: I fear that if an admin knows me and it's not for something WP:RM-related, it's probably something User:Neutralhomer-related. We had a period late last year where we were both working toward the betterment of WP:WPRS but with slightly different perspectives. We butted heads more than once and both suffered from the need to have the last word. I pride myself that during all that chaos, while the CAPSLOCK may have been selected here or there, I never crosses the policy line. NH and I have since made peace. In general, I definitely have a "walk-away when angered" position now and find it's better to say nothing at all rather than to let the verbal venom fly.
Optional questions from jc37
In order to illustrate that you have at least a passing knowledge/understanding of the policies and processes in relation to the tools and responsibilities that go along with adminship, please answer the following questions:
  • 4. Please describe/summarise why and when it would be appropriate for:
  • A: If said editor is in violation of Wikipedia policies. Personal attacks, violations of WP:BLP, continued vandalism after warnings, etc.
  • A: If said page is currently the victim of an edit war, IP vandalism from multiple IPs, etc.
  • A: If one or more of the criteria at WP:SPEEDY apply to said article. Be it something as complicated as a good looking though confirmed hoax or as simple as an article which has "uze guyz sux" as it's sole content.
  • A: Succinctly, if a policy prevents the maintaining or improvement of the encyclopedia. I can't cite a particular example - though if there were a common example, there would probably then (logically) be an associated rule, and then we would have a paradox.
  • 5. How does one determine consensus? And how may it be determined differently on a talk page discussion, an XfD discussion, and a DRV discussion.
  • A: Sometimes the only thing more difficult than defining "consensus" is coming to a consensus. Article-wise, it's a combination of the actual editing and the content-related discussion on the talkpage. (I've always been a fan of Image:CCC Flowchart 6.jpg, despite it's less than descriptive name.) With the deletion-related discussion, there is obviously much more discussion. In those cases, the presence of a consensus is determined by input from both the involved parties and some uninvolved editors and weighing the strength of the arguments. It's debate class on a worldwide scale.
  • 6. User:JohnQ leaves a message on your talk page that User:JohnDoe and User:JaneRoe have been reverting an article back and forth, each to their own preferred version. What steps would you take?
  • A: Firstly, my natural curiosity would cause me to question why an editor has returned after not making an edit in over five years. All kidding aside, it would depend on the particular situation. If either editor has broken the three-revert rule, a short block for the offender(s) may be in order. If more editors have joined in, full page projection might be necessary temporarily. Either way, I would inform the involved editors on their talkpage that they would be best to take their seesaw battle to the article talk page to discuss the situation (and gather additional input) as back-and-forth reverting is more a game of tug of war than anything else.
  • 7. Why do you wish to be an administrator?
  • A: "Wish" is almost too strong of a word. For instance, I wish that I'd win the lottery (probably would have to play first...). Basically, I've had a small handful of people comment in the last couple of months that I would make a good admin. I believe in the Wikipedia project and am willing to dedicate a portion of my free time to its benefit. If having a few extra tools would do that, as I believe it can, then I'm for it. If the community disagrees, sobeit. JPG-GR (talk) 06:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Optional question from Blooded Edge
8:: As an administrator, you will most probably come across rash users/IPs, who will not take kindly to reversions by yourself, for whatever the reason. Indeed, you may already have been in such situations before. I want to know what exactly your personal stance is on the cool down block. Wikipedia generally discourages admins from taking this course of action, due to the belief it only inflames the situation. However, there is still the small chance that the subject will indeed take the oppurtunity to review his/her actions, and may change his/her way of acting to something more appropriate. Assuming that Wikipedia had no clear policy on this, would you use such a block? Or wait until the IP/User simply becomes too irksome to ignore?
9.:This isn't really to do with your work on Wikipedia, but is important if you indeed gain the requested status. Is your password alphanumeric? Formed by at least 8 characters? Not by words in the dictionary? Not in the weakest password list? A hiijacked admin account can do widespread damage across the site, it is important to confirm the security of your account.
Question from How do you turn this on
10. What made you decide to run now, instead of when I asked you if you would?

General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/JPG-GR before commenting.

Discussion

  • Any chance that you (JPG) are likely to enable e-mail? Not a deal breaker, so not a question for the above section. Pedro :  Chat  07:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Support
  1. Beat-the-nom support; specialist admins are okay, and this candidate has no warning bells attached. — Coren (talk) 04:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. Absolutely Go help that backlog at WP:RM. good candidate. Protonk (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support. Definitely. —Wknight94 (talk) 04:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. I've seen this editor in action over at WP:RM and I respect his work. EdJohnston (talk) 04:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support. No problems here. Tan | 39 05:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support - Specialist candidate. Wisdom89 (T / C) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  7. Support, Most Definitely. RockManQ (talk) 05:14, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support. I see no problems. DiverseMentality(Boo!) 05:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  9. Strong support - I run across this user frequently via his G6 tagging for requested page moves and have always found his work to be accurate, clueful and per consensus. WP:RM and Wikipedia in general can only benefit from JPG-GR getting the bit. Nancy talk 05:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support No reason to oppose really, although the issue bought up by Aude is somewhat concerning I don't really find it too concerning to the point where there's evidence that the candidate will abuse the tools, which is what I do care about when considering RfA candidates. We all have our learning experience and I think the user will learn from it. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 06:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  11. Support Already knows how to handle the backlog, why don't we give JPG-GR the tools to help out more? per my RfA criteria Foxy Loxy Pounce! 07:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support - While not perfect (who or what is?), I liked a fair part of your answers, and my quick look over your edit history didn't ring any alarm bells. And from what I can tell you have a fairly good handle on consensus. We simply need more admins who understand that it's about weighing arguments, and not about counting "votes". - jc37 08:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support. A fine candidate. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  14. Support Clearly a specialist in a sorely under "staffed" area that we urgently need to grant the bit to. Also the answer to Q7 was particularly pleasing - an excellent attitude / outlook. Pedro :  Chat  08:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support Yes, we need more page movers, always more people moving pages, the faster the better </sarcasm> MBisanz talk 08:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  16. Support - We need more admins in this area, but I'd like to see email enabled. — neuro(talk) 08:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  17. Support. Looks like a fine hard-working candidate willing to take on tedious duties. I read the opposition by Aude, and while I can understand the annoyance, it is mostly a result of someone trying to work efficiently, not a lapse in judgment. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  18. Excellent moving work. —Ceran [speak] 11:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  19. Support Looks good from what I can see and I think specialist candidates are fine. After all, we are all specialists in some area of admin work that we take part in and that is no bad thing. He does what he knows best to do and I am more than happy to support him to continue doing it - just a bit more effective. And as for the oppose, well, the candidate said he would learn from it. That's good enough for me. Also, I like the answer of Q7, admins need a bit of humor ;-) SoWhy 11:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  20. Strong support - I assumed he already was one, he behaves professionally and manages janitorial tasks few want to bother with. Orderinchaos 11:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  21. Support net positive. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  22. Support Great track has been around since Aug 2006 and over 19000 mainspace edits with over 40000 overall.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  23. Support. Good track record as Pharoah says above; help always needed at RM. Caulde 12:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  24. What Sjakalle and Orderinchaos said. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Oppose
  1. Oppose - I am concerned about how JPG-GR handles the requested moves page. On September 23, I added a move request tag [3] to the talk page of the Islamic terrorism article. JPG-GR came by 18 minutes later and removed the tag from the talk page [4], with the edit summary "rm move request template - page not listed at WP:RM", because I hadn't yet added it to the requested moves page. Clearly a requested move was intended by my adding the tag, and removing it was impolite. I'm sure it was unintended, but JPG-GR also blanked most of the page along with removing the tag. Instead, the thing to do would be to add my request to the Wikipedia:Requested moves or leave a note on my talk page, or be patient. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and don't trounce on other users for procedural mistakes or not following the three requested move steps quick enough. Such actions only frustrate other users and have the potential to drive away contributors. Removing the requested move tag from the article talk page was enough of a problem, but easily reverted. Although admin actions are mostly reversable, more damage can be done. Speedy deletions, which JPG-GR appears interested in handling, is one area where being too quick and focused on process, can be a problem (see Frog Legs Rag which was subject of a recent Not the Wikipedia Weekly episode). I don't like opposing anyone at RFA, but given my experience, I'm not ready to trust JPG-GR with the admin tools. --Aude (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
    Firstly, I assure you that the blanking of a good portion of the page was not intentional and am somewhat disturbed such a large portion of text was removed and I didn't notice. As for removing the template, I do a run through of CAT:RM as part of my WP:RM "routine" and often find pages tagged with {{move}} only - with no discussion on the talk page nor proposal at WP:RM. Accordingly, it is possible that one of my random cleanings of CAT:RM will catch someone in mid-procedure. In the future, I will do a more consistent job of comparing the time of the addition of {{move}} to the talk page vs. the current time. JPG-GR (talk) 04:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
    It took me 20 minutes to do step 2 of WP:RM, which is create a place for discussion with my move rationale (along with finding sources to support my request). [5] You need to be more patient with people. I'm concerned about the ramifications of such impatience when it comes to using admin tools to handle speedy deletions, and other tasks. If this RFA doesn't pass, I would be happy to reconsider at a later time. --Aude (talk) 04:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Neutral
Neutral - waiting on question responses. - jc37 05:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
For the first half dozen, can we just point to the appropriate policy/guideline and save a boatload of time for everyone? Tan | 39 06:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
As I've mentioned elsewhere, my evaluation of the responses isn't wholly reliant on the quoting of policies/guildeines. - jc37 08:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Mvjs

Voice your opinion (talk page) (14/9/2); Scheduled to end 06:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Mvjs (talk · contribs) - I love Wikipedia. I think I could go as far as calling myself a Wikipedia adherent. My aim is to make Wikipedia the best it can possibly be and I believe that adminship is the next step in my Wikipedia journey. I hereby present a self nomination of Mvjs. I've been an editor since August 2006 but my active involvement in Wikipedia really didn't start till March this year. My primary contributions are (and probably always will be) in the mainspace with the vast majority of my edits being there. I believe thoroughly in consensus and consensus is what makes Wikipedia what it is and I utterly respect that. I've noticed a lack of administrators in the Australia-field and I think I can back up the hundreds of WP:AUSTRALIA members. I no doubt, as any user would, have had some learning at the beginning but I strongly believe that my Wikipedia skills, knowledge and ability have matured to the point of adminship.

I've been an active Twinklier and revert any vandalism I come across. I occasionally patrol new pages and recent changes. The admin tools would allow me to more effectively patrol these facilities. I intend to help out any new or established editors with anything, and utilise the administrator tools in anyway I can. I've been approached by numerous new editors and have attempted to help them wholeheartedly.

I would like to thank all the people who have guided me through the Wikipedia process and have taught me the ropes, particularly Bidgee and Michellecrisp whom I look up to immensely. I would be glad to take any advice on board and any suggestions are much appreciated. Cheers and thanks for considering me. Mvjs (talk) 06:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: I plan to initially focus on four main areas. I intend to partake in the blocking of users that are obvious vandals at WP:AIV. Initially, I intend to focus on straight, simple and non-controversial vandalism only accounts. As my skills grow, I will branch out to the more complex cases. After some initial teething, I've become quite acquainted with the WP:CSD process and would like to help out there, particularly with blatent image copyvios. I take Wikipedia's copyright policy extremely seriously. I have plenty of experience in this field. It would be my aim to keep WP:PER under control, as there's quite a backlog developing there. In fact, it was my recent frustration with the edit protected action timeframe that has provoked me to look at adminship. I intend to help out at WP:RM as it seems to be usually underserved by admins. I've started and participated in a few requested moves, notably this one. Initially, I hope to close and move simple runaway moves (or close runaway opposes) that are non-controversial. As my skills grow, I will tackle the more complex cases. It seems that these simple, mundane administrator tasks are developing large backlogs. Hopefully, I can work to clear these areas. Finally, down the track, as my administrator abilities grow and mature, I hope to participate in WP:RPP to ensure this fantastic project is not tarnished.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My proudest contribution so far has been the promotion of Melbourne Airport to good article status (additionally, it recently narrowly missed featured article promotion and is currently having an A-class review). I've also created around a dozen start and stub articles, lists and templates on more niche topics. These are listed on my user page. I undertook a significant cleanup of Xavier College which I am proud of. I intend to continue my mainspace contributions after adminship more than ever. The articles of Wikipedia are after all what makes this encyclopaedia what it is.
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: I have had several encounters with users and have dealt with them extremely successfully. I received a heated comment from someone and I responded calmly and the other editor calmed down and apologised. I've had some other minor encounters with editors in which I kept my cool and the situation has been resolved every time. I see no reason why this can't continue after adminship.
Optional question from Blooded Edge
4:: As an administrator, you will most probably come across rash users/IPs, who will not take kindly to reversions by yourself, for whatever the reason. Indeed, you may already have been in such situations before. I want to know what exactly your personal stance is on the cool down block. Wikipedia generally discourages admins from taking this course of action, due to the belief it only inflames the situation. However, there is still the small chance that the subject will indeed take the oppurtunity to review his/her actions, and may change his/her way of acting to something more appropriate. Assuming that Wikipedia had no clear policy on this, would you use such a block? Or wait until the IP/User simply becomes too irksome to ignore?
A: In almost all situations, I would not apply a cool down block. If a user is in the frame of mind to blatantly vandalise Wikipedia and is in need of a cool down, they are in most cases going to be rash, hasty and injudicious. In this state, blocking the user is just going to inflame the situation and cause the user to be even more disgruntled. I am certain that if in the above conflict the user had been blocked, he would get even more enraged that there was a conspiracy against the Government. I would much prefer to template the user with successive warnings about the edits he is making and eventually she/he will take a nap and regret the edits he/she had made. As happened with the above documented conflict, the user came back in apology asking how his edits can be better. This is a much better course of action. Mvjs (talk) 10:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
5.:This isn't really to do with your work on Wikipedia, but is important if you indeed gain the requested status. Is your password alphanumeric? Formed by at least 8 characters? Not by words in the dictionary? Not in the weakest password list? A hiijacked admin account can do widespread damage across the site, it is important to confirm the security of your account.
A: Without going into the precise details of my password, my password is a randomly generated 25 character string combining letters, numbers and symbols. It was generated using the 1Password application.
Optional questions from LAAFan
6:: In your own words, why do you deserve the mop?
A: This is a really difficult one as I'm not the narcissistic kind of guy. First and foremost, I've made some fantastic contributions to the WP:AUSTRALIA and to a much lesser extent WP:MAC. Melbourne Airport is one of the best airport articles on Wikipedia. I think my contributions to what is the heart of this project is very important. I've done a heck of a lot of speedies, particularly with copyright violations. I'm not sure if there's any record of this, but I've successfully identified and speedied dozens of copyvios. I'm certain I'm ready to participate in those at an admin level. As I've written in my lead, I take Wikipedia's copyright policy very seriously. Despite what may come across in my edit counts of particular areas of the site, I'm well aware and knowledgeable on the admin areas I intend to work in. As has come up in a recent RfA, I don't believe there is a correlation between the number of edits project namespace and knowledge of Wikipedia policy and guideline. I have a good understanding and participation of WP:RM and WP:PER and have a decent understanding of how WP:RPP works. I have a aspiration and desire to learn and refine any aspect of Wikipedia that I am not immediately familiar with - possibly participating in a new admin mentoring programme.
7:: If you see an established user start to vandalize, what steps would you make to insure it stops?
A: I would never template an established user. I would first make a polite note on his/her talk page asking why he/she is making these unconstructive edits. There is a possibility that it was not the established users we are thinking of but rather his computer or account being compromised. It could be something as simple as his brother was drunk and thought it'd be a good joke to do some damage. If it was a compromisation, I would converse with him about how we can make this not happen again. If it was not, I'd work with the editor to ensure he is aware of what this project is about and discuss with him Wikipedia's vandalism policies. I think any rational user who had made the effort to positively contribute to Wikipedia in the past will cease his/her vandalism at this point.
8:: If you see one IP address repeatedly vandalizing one page, but none other recent vandalism has occurred, would you protect the page? Why or why not?
A: I would definitely not protect the page. I would give the user the successive warnings to the user about his/her vandalism and an eventual final warning. If his/her vandalism continues after the final warning, I would dish out a block. Protecting the page would do nothing but discourage constructive editors.

General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Mvjs before commenting.

Discussion

  • To all that have brought up concerns about my experience in administrator related tasks. I fully understand your concern. I would most definitely not want to jump straight into complex, difficult and potentially controversial cases at AIV. I don't think it requires too much know-how to see that an account is a blatant vandalism only account and to dish out to appropriate block. Nor does it require to much know-how to close and move a runaway RM or a specific, non-controversial and sensible PER request. It seems that these simple, seemingly mundane administrator tasks are being neglected. It took seven days for my simple referenced destination change at PER in regards to LAX get actioned. One for that page sits there now. I would like to change that. MvjsTalking 22:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I've been making a concerted effort to participate in admin related tasks more to hopefully bring some confidence to those who are concerned about my admin-related tasks experience. MvjsTalking 06:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Support
  1. Weak Support per WP:WTHN. This candidate is clearly eager and trying their best to improve the project and a quick look through the contribs reveal no major flaws. I do suggest using edit summaries all the time (Best to check the box in your preferences to force you to) though and to be a little bit more careful with {{uw-vand4im}}, for example in this case it was simple test-vandalism, nothing so grave it required to assume the bad faith needed for 4im warnings. But with some guidance, maybe by a senior admin (there was a proposal for something called WP:ADMENT some time ago, maybe we should put it to use?), I think this candidate can grow to be a good admin. SoWhy 07:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Thanks very much for your comment and support. I attempt to use edit summaries all the time and have now, under your suggestion, enabled the blank edit summary prompt. Thanks for your guidance in regards to {{uw-vand4im}} template. I used it today on two users editing Talk:Australia in which content that was not a simple editing test was added. [6] [7] It seems that exactly which of the three vandalisers (WP:SOCK?) was adding that content became unclear. I shall be more careful in exactly who I {{uw-vand4im}} in the future. Mvjs (talk) 07:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. Strong support, excellent encyclopedia contributor. Giggy (talk) 09:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  3. Australian Cabal support. Daniel (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support. He seems mature enough to warrant the tools, so why not? Blooded Edge (talk) 11:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Weak support - Good contributor, not seeing that leaps out at me as being something to make me oppose. That said, if someone opposes with some new evidence, I will most likely change my stance. — neuro(talk) 11:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Neutralling, due to valid opposes. — neuro(talk) 20:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support Why the hell not? Good candidate, looks like a net positive. SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 12:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  6. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 14:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  7. Weak Support I know that you want to help Wikipedia and that is why I am supporting, but you also say you want to work in AIV, but as pointed out, you have zero edits there. You may want to consider gaining some experience there. Anyway though, Good Luck! America69 (talk) 15:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  8. As if AIV needs more than two brain cells. naerii 16:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support I trust him with the tools.   jj137 (talk) 17:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support I do note the opposes, but I'm sure before diving in the deep end you'll start with the blatant vandals first, then work your way up to more "complex" cases. Per Naerii, it's not rocket science, and certainly not worthy of a strong oppose. Otherwise, a good editor with a lot of experience. -- how do you turn this on 18:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  11. Support Jj137 said it all. Sure, I would feel more comfortable if the user had more contributions in admin-related articles, but I trust the user with the tools. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support. Adminship shouldn't be a big deal. —Mizu onna sango15Hello! 19:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support Good mainspace contributor and virtually no experience in admin areas, now that is a plus point. RMHED (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    How on earth does that constitute a valid rationale? Whilst a !voter may !vote for any reason, and per any rationale, this doesn't even make sense. — neuro(talk) 22:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    It makes about as much sense as opposing for the same reason IMO. RMHED (talk) 23:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    This should be stricken as a WP:POINT violation. Comment on the opposes themselves, don't support for a fake reason to spite them. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 23:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    I've added an extra rationale Erik, I do so hope it meets with your approval. RMHED (talk) 23:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Much better :) Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 23:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  14. Support Per nom. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 00:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support WTHN; per my RfA criteria Foxy Loxy Pounce! 07:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  16. Oh come on! This applicant's application is really well written, the applicant clearly wants to improve Wikipedia and has the ability to do so. They have stated that they aren't going to jump in at the deep end, I think benefit of the doubt and why the hell not is called for here. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 12:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Oppose
  1. Oppose (and I hate to be the first). Not enough experience. You want to participate in WP:AIV, but you have no edits to that page whatsoever. 81 edits to the project space in total (12 of which are to this page) just isn't really enough. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Thanks for your thoughts. I have attempted several times to list a user there - so I'm perfectly aware of the process but I find that the user has already been listed in the time it's taken me to submit the nomination. I would most certainly want to deepen my familiarisation with AIV before I jump head first into it. I have made several participations in WP:PER and WP:RM and dozens of participations in WP:CSD. I understand your concern but I wish to reassure you of my desire to learn and familiarise myself in any procedures that I am not currently fully acquainted with and I feel that my current experience is adequate to begin my adminship journey. I would be very enthusiastic in participating in the new admin mentoring programme or equivalent. Mvjs (talk) 11:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    It isn't adequate enough - you cannot demonstrate any experience at all. I'm not negating the understanding of AIV you may have yourself, but it would be completely inappropriate to grant adminship and the block button on an essentially completely preemptive basis. WilliamH (talk) 16:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    I've taken a more proactive stance at submitting users to AIV and have submitted several through thus far. I shall continue and hopefully will be able to prove to you my trustworthiness and ability to perform AIVs. MvjsTalking 10:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Not enough work in admin-related areas. AdjustShift (talk) 15:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  3. Strong OpposeAlmost no edits to admin related areas. Sorry.--LAAFansign review 17:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Needs more experience with the admin areas, as stated above. --Banime (talk) 19:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Little to no experience in admin related areas candidate plans to work on. DiverseMentality(Boo!) 19:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose You want to participate in AIV, but you've never reported anyone or dealt with a report. You've got no experience in AIV, AN3, ANI, and haven't done anything with your Wikipedia-space edits (that I've reviewed) to make me think you've proved yourself trustworthy and knowledgable.--KojiDude (C) 20:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  7. Oppose learning on the job is okay, but learning everything on the job is not. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 20:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  8. Oppose, low level of Wikipedia-namespace edits indicates a likely lack of policy knowledge, and deleted contributions indicates a lack of recent work on new page patrol, speedy deletions, etc. Stifle (talk) 22:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
    Despite what may come across in my edit counts on particular areas of the site, I'm well aware and knowledgeable on the admin areas I intend to work in. As has come up in a recent RfA, I don't believe there is a correlation between the number of edits project namespace and knowledge of Wikipedia policy and guideline. Recently, my focus has diverged from new page patrolling because of my work in the Melbourne Airport featured article candidacy. However, prior to that, I did a lot of work in the new pages patrol as you'd be able to see in my deleted contributions. MvjsTalking 00:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
    Mvjs, just letting you know, Stifle will always oppose for this reason if your Wikipedia: space edits are low (see his userpage). -- how do you turn this on 00:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  9. Oppose - Does not meet my criteria. Vacant experience in the project space - nearly all areas that candidate wishes to work. Wisdom89 (T / C) 01:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  10. Oppose - With only 3500+ edits, I see few that are outside of vandalism reverts. While I understand that anti-vandalism is a much needed service, I just personally feel that it alone does not give you enough needed experience to be successful as an administrator. Another concern was the lack of CSD tagging, though the few that Mvjs's has done appear fine. Personally the only button I may feel comfortable giving you at this time would be block, seeing as you have little experience in any other areas related to the other tools. Tiptoety talk 02:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
    I am utterly gobsmacked to hear you say that I have few edits outside vandalism reverts. Sure, this morning I was conducting a vandalism blitz but the vast majority of my edits have not been a mechanical vandalism revert. I suggest you review my contributions more thoroughly. If you confer with any of the editors that I come across daily in the Australian-field, they will more than assure you that I am not just a vandalism fighter. My experience is your judgement but I feel I have to experience to begin my adminship journey. MvjsTalking 03:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Neutral
  1. Neutral. Good contributions. However Mvjs doesn't really show activity in the areas where he intends to use admin powers. Axl ¤ [Talk] 20:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral - Sorry, you seem like a good, mature contributor that could potentially make a good admin in the future, but some of the opposes (Erik especially) make a valid point. — neuro(talk) 20:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Jac16888

Voice your opinion (talk page) (50/0/0); Scheduled to end 15:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Jac16888 (talk · contribs) - Dear All, I'm pleased to offer up Jac16888 for consideration. A long term account, Jac started editing around March of last year. Very much a content creator Jac has also been highly active in the project space of late. So, as ever, the rationale and headlines;

Main Space

  • Around 68% total edits are to the main space - a commited encyclopedia builder.
  • Substantial Talk Page entries show a desire to colaborate.
  • Realtively large number of template edits.

Project Space

  • Substantial input at WP:AFD - not just drive by comments but adding real value and creating discussions
  • Around 300 or so deleted edits are due to accurate speedy tagging / PROD's
  • Substantial input at WP:ANI and the village pump - Jac is not afraid to get his hands dirty
  • A review of talk pages shows less experienced editors asking questions and getting answers - the additional tools will help this even more so.

Editing Tools

  • Accurate use of rollback and undo
  • Accurate use of Twinkle but with most edits good "old school" editing

House Keeping

  • Clean & sensible User Page
  • Clean block log
  • Sensible signature
  • E-mail enabled

Jac16888 declined an immediate nomination a few weeks ago due to other commitments (see here). Jac is in no haste for the tools, and modest and demuring as to wether a request would pass - an excellent attitude to the role. I believe that only a Net Positive will be forthcoming by giving him access to the bit. I hope the community agree with this course of action. - Pedro :  Chat  13:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:I accept this nomination, and thank you Pedro--Jac16888 (talk) 15:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
One more thing, since i've heard of it coming up lately, I am currently 20 years old, and writing that makes me feel ancient--Jac16888 (talk) 15:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: If this Rfa passes, i don't intend to immediately throw myself into every possible admin related activity, instead i'm simply going to ease myself into it gently, starting of with the things i'm confident i can do, and as time goes by moving into other areas of adminship;
  • Speedy deletion, as Pedro said, i have a considerable number of correct taggings, there have not been to many cases where a speedy tag i have placed has been declined, and from the ones i can remember, many of those were eventually deleted anyway and as an added bonus i plan to set myself an informal rule whereby i will only delete articles that others have tagged(when valid) and tag ones i find myself for other admins, although i won't apply this to obvious cases, i.e. Attacks, vandalism and copyvios.
  • Checking and deleting expired prods, and closing Afds, which as i understand it, the only task for an administrator is to gauge which way the consensus goes and act accordingly, starting of with the more clear-cut nom's.
  • I will also try to be active at WP:AIV. Although i have not used that page a significant amount, its mostly because the vandals i come across are not often committed, just ones who make one or two bad edits then never come back, although i try to keep tabs on them anyway, checking their contribs regularly for a few weeks after.
  • Finally, i hope to remain active at AN/I and AN, that won't change whichever way this goes, although it would be nice to have an increased ability to help.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Unfortunately, I have no really significant contributions i.e. FA/GA's, hopefully i'll be able to change this sometime soon, i have a few ideas up my sleeve. As for my best contributions, i have none that stand out in particular, instead, i'm simply proud of the time i've spent on wikipedia, i feel that i have in general been a net gain for the 'pedia, i've done a fair amount of work in cleanup, tidying and improving articles to just to get them to a decent level. I'm also quite proud of some of the work i've doing with newer editors, helping them to improve their articles by talking through it with them rather than simply jumping in and doing it for them, i feel that helping them do it themselves will help their confidence here and hopefully convince them to stay on and do more good, the most recent example of this is the work i'm doing here Nicole Lai.
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: As anyone here will no doubt soon discover i was at one point fairly deeply into the whole "TTN/fiction" thing that caused so much drama across wikipedia, and yes, once upon a time i was dead against everything the so-called "deletionist cabal" were doing. However i dealt with this simply by stepping back from it, and trying to work out compromises, working to get the two "sides" to work together. I do however feel that i have shown myself to be able to see past my own likes/dislikes and work with them, particularly User:Eusebeus, with whom i managed to negotiate something of a truce, and i believe that edits such as these, [8],[9], [10], show that i'm willing to make edits that need to be done regardless of how i feel about it.
As for other disputes, none especially come to mind, i've generally learnt to avoid major conflicts, and i find that the more recent ones have come to amicable conclusions

Optional question from User:Jac16888

4.Why do you have only one image upload and so few edits in Image space
A: I'm asking myself this because i'll be surprised if it doesn't come up. Yes i do have barely any edits in the imagespace, to date the only image i've uploaded was this Image:Aspire Sculpture Artwork - Nottingham.jpg (since moved to commons) which took me several hours to understand and sort through organizing the copyright OTRS stuff for it. The reasoning behind this is that i simply cannot comprehend all the copyright policies we have going on, it seems like a lot of technical mumbjo jumbo to me. Perhaps someday i'll have a spare few days and force myself to learn it all, but in the meantime i simply intend to avoid that area of wikipedia, if i don't touch it, i can't break anything. Hopefully you won't think any less of me for this

Question from Stifle

5. Under what circumstances may a non-free image of a living person be used on Wikipedia?
A.As i said above, i have little to no understanding of the image policies, although from a quick look at WP:Nonfree, i can say that they shouldn't be, unless it is a person who is notable for their appearance, who is no longer in the public sphere, and the only images that illustrate the person properly as they were at the time they were active are non-free. To give what i think is a valid example, sort of, If Gene Simmons(first thing that came to mind, no idea why) had retired 20 years ago, and the only photo of him in his Kiss outfit and make up was non-free, it would be acceptable. Hope that's right
Questions from Jameson L. Tai
6. I see that you are 20 years old. Do you have any personal commitments which may hinder your work as an administrator? (Look, I'm 21, and I have assignments, design projects, lab reports, etc to deal with on a daily basis. How comfortable are you in handling your personal affairs along with administrative duties?
A. Well I'm currently at university, so that doesn't take up of my time(joke). I do have real-world commitments, i think it would be more worrying if i didn't> I have my university studies, so similar to you in that i have assignments, design projects and lab work to do(plus the related social life), and I'm also looking for a part-time job, but no i don't think any of that would really hinder any admin work i undertake, I've long been able to balance Wikipedia with real-life stuff, and since i don't intend, if i get the bit, to suddenly triple the amount of time i spend on here i don't think i'll have any trouble.
7. How do you see Wikipedia in five years?
A. This is quite a difficult question, i can barely imagine myself in 5 years never mind Wikipedia, but I'll have a stab at it. I think/hope, that it will continue to improve, particularly if it continues to spread through the academic world, obviously for a student its the font of all knowledge(or rather a good base point), but i have now had several lecturers, not just the younger ones but some very high ranking, emeritus ones, who not only refer us to specific Wikipedia articles, but use them personally. This, i believe, is absolutely vital to the project, the biggest task we face is convincing the academic world that we are in fact a reliable source, and i think that this is starting to happen. If we achieve this, and get them not only reading, but editing, then i think we will be well on our way to perfection
8. How do you view the role of an administrator and how do you see yourself as one?
A. Now obviously, the smart thing to say is that an administrator is nothing more than a janitor, a person tasked simply with the maintenance of wikipedia, they are not above or beyond any other user and do not have any authority. However, this should be taken with a pinch of salt. Anybody who has been here for a while, probably everyone reading this, knows that adminship is not a big deal, that admins are not automatically right, but new users? Throughout the internet forums, chatrooms and community sites all have admins. And they are all figures of authority, their word is law and when people come here for the first time they expect the same, its not uncommon for new users to go to an admin for help because their page was deleted, they have an edit dispute etc, how many times do you see "resolved - no admin attention required" on AN/I? What i'm trying to say here is that while an admin is not special, not higher than others, they are often seen as so, and therefore need to be willing to help out users even if its not the admin "powers" that are needed, but simply some experience of the community.
I have no idea how to answer the second part of this question, could you rephrase it please?
Sure! :D OK, now that you've described how you view the role of an administrator, describe how you fit that description. Feel free to describe an experience you had with a new user, a dispute you (helped) resolve, essentially, how you fit the big shoes of being an admin. Feel free to ask me for another clarification if you should require one! :D - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 17:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Optional question from Juliancolton (talk · contribs)
9. In your acceptance statement, you pointed out that you are 20 years old. Do you feel that age is a deciding factor in regards to adminship?
A. Not in the slightest. Being at university the last year I've met people of different ages, 16-30, and I've found that a persons age often has no bearing on how mature a person is, in fact in more than case older people tend to be less mature than you would expect, and that is what is relevant to adminship, how mature a person is, maturity being completely separate to age. The reasoning behind my indicating my age was because, although i don't often follow RFA's, i have been aware of recent cases where a persons age is taken into account, and since I've never revealed my age before, it seemed like a good idea to disclose it.
Optional question from Blooded Edge
10:: As an administrator, you will most probably come across rash users/IPs, who will not take kindly to reversions by yourself, for whatever the reason. Indeed, you may already have been in such situations before. I wanted to know what exactly your personal stance is on the cool down block. Wikipedia generally discourages admins from taking this course of action, due to the belief it only inflames the situation. However, there is still the small chance that the subject will indeed take the oppurtunity to review his/her actions, and may change his/her way of acting to something more appropriate. Assuming that Wikipedia had no clear policy on this, would you use such a block? Or wait until the IP/User simply becomes too irksome to ignore?
A. A cool down block is simply a bad idea, in almost all cases, as you say there is a small chance that the subject will actually cool down, but its a very small chance, and its more likely that it will really inflame the situation. However, if a person is really overreacting to a revert, then a block may be necessary, not as a cool-down because they actually warrant a block, i have seen cases where a reverted user goes out of control and starts attacking other users or vandalising, although if i had reverted the user, it would be foolish for me to block them, and would take to AN/I or AIV dependent on the situtation, and let some others look at it .
Optional Question from Pedro
11. I am 34, a company director and father to two children under three. Do you think my self evident real life commitments impact on my ability to be an administrator?
A. Erm, ok then. Yes, of course your job and your little Pedrinos are going to impact on the time you have free to be on wikipedia, nobody could expect otherwise, but o