I have been here since about February 2003, but only started editing one year later, after I felt I knew enough to avoid making mistakes (that even
confused another user a little bit). Now, another year later (plus a few months), I feel I am ready for the responsability of being a Wikipedia administrator.
I still feel I have to improve in some areas; I'm not good at creating new articles, I feel I might not
be bold enough, and I became concerned lately I might have been abusing the minor tag a bit (specifically when adding/removing categories). I think none of these would cause problems with the extra admin abilities.
Support he seems like an excelent user who learns from his mistakes, though an admin needs to be bold. Overall a support.
Howabout103:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. While I would have expected more edits over a year, Cesar has done some good work and looks to know what an admin should attempt to do.
Harro5 04:36, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
Support. I admire this user's abilty to think before he acts, and admire the ability of someone to wait a year before making an edit. Just don't take that long to delete nonsense on RC patrol!
Harro5 09:44, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
Well, I didn't wait an year before making any edits — if you look you can see some minor edits before that time. And didn't you vote already? --
cesarb13:23, 28 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. I like what I'm seeing here. A good amount of edits is nice, but I'm really liking your ability to admit when you're wrong (as you said yourself with the bad faith). Admins must be able to realize that they're human and that they make mistakes. You've got my vote. PS: Use Gentoo! ;-)
Linuxbeak |
Desk 03:03, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
Support. Very experienced user: excellent contributions in general, plenty of janitorial and behind-the-scenes work. Active against vandals.
—
Gwalla |
Talk05:20, 29 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. That's the worst wrong assumption of bad faith you've made? And you're willing to admit the un-dashing shortcoming of not being bold enough, and you're a selfnom? I want to have your baby!
Bishonen |
talk11:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. And some extra support for being a
Debian user.
utcursch |
talk 13:37, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
[1] This diff, CesarB needs to learn what
Wikipedia:Patent nonsenseis not as defined in that article before assigning an article to Pol Pot. When he has a better grasp on the definition of nonsense and vandalism he should come back and try again.
The comment above by
64.62.161.12 (
talk·contribs), who is a reincarnation of banned user
BeBop (
talk·contribs)
[2]. And I did reread the
Wikipedia:Patent nonsense definitions after you said it wasn't, and I still think the second paragraph was nonsense and the first paragraph didn't give any context that could help me understand what it was all about; so, I believe I was on the right tagging it as nonsense. --
cesarb15:29, 30 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Don't worry. First off, as a banned user, he is shunned from the Wikipedia community and everything he says is ignored. Second, he didn't sign his vote, meaning the vote doesn't count. Third, as an anonymous user, he's not allowed to vote in RfA anyway.
Linuxbeak |
Talk |
Desk 16:04, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
That article was written in plain english. It was silly, but plain english. If you cant understand that maybe your just stupid, another fine reason to not consider you for admin. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
64.62.161.12 (
talk •
contribs) 13:21, 30 May 2005
LinuxGeak; "Anyone can contribute to the discussion and vote, anonymous users as well as pseudonymous users. What is important is not your name, but whether your contribution and voting is in good faith." My good faith is a matter for other editors before they cast their vote and for bureaucrats at the end of the vote. Not YOU. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
64.62.161.12 (
talk •
contribs) 13:21, 30 May 2005
Try again. I'm getting snippy here, but do your homework before you say something that is false.
Voting
To add your vote, edit the section for that candidate. All Wikipedians with an account are welcome to vote.
Oh, yeah. A silly article is patent nonsense. Calling people stupid is also called trolling. If you do not stop, I will open an RFC against you.
Linuxbeak |
Talk |
Desk 16:33, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Neutral
Comments
CesarB currently has 2726 edits. First edit Feb 13, 2003, regular editing began Jun 21, 2004. No big ghosts in his user talk closet. —
Ben Brockert(42)UE News 03:17, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. I am mostly interested in cleanup; being able to delete articles from the
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, close VfD discussions (I know I can close them already, but I don't feel right closing them except on the most non-controversial cases while not being an admin), and handle more complex moves (like moves over a redirect with minor history and merging page histories) would be useful.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I have not made many major contributions, and only created 3 articles on all this time (I do believe this is my weakest point, and I'm working to improve it). Of these, the one I like the most is
Advanced Simulation and Computing Program.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. My greatest blunder on Wikipedia was to
assume bad faith on the part of
User:Pioneer-12 on the
List of incidents famously considered great blunders VfD. After I found out I was wrong, I apologized and I believe I learned the lesson. My second greatest blunder was creating
Category:Dewey Decimal Classification, while I was still a newbie (I asked for its deletion about an year later). Since I am always ready to admit I could be wrong, I manage to avoid being stressed most of the time.
I have been here since about February 2003, but only started editing one year later, after I felt I knew enough to avoid making mistakes (that even
confused another user a little bit). Now, another year later (plus a few months), I feel I am ready for the responsability of being a Wikipedia administrator.
I still feel I have to improve in some areas; I'm not good at creating new articles, I feel I might not
be bold enough, and I became concerned lately I might have been abusing the minor tag a bit (specifically when adding/removing categories). I think none of these would cause problems with the extra admin abilities.
Support he seems like an excelent user who learns from his mistakes, though an admin needs to be bold. Overall a support.
Howabout103:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. While I would have expected more edits over a year, Cesar has done some good work and looks to know what an admin should attempt to do.
Harro5 04:36, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
Support. I admire this user's abilty to think before he acts, and admire the ability of someone to wait a year before making an edit. Just don't take that long to delete nonsense on RC patrol!
Harro5 09:44, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
Well, I didn't wait an year before making any edits — if you look you can see some minor edits before that time. And didn't you vote already? --
cesarb13:23, 28 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. I like what I'm seeing here. A good amount of edits is nice, but I'm really liking your ability to admit when you're wrong (as you said yourself with the bad faith). Admins must be able to realize that they're human and that they make mistakes. You've got my vote. PS: Use Gentoo! ;-)
Linuxbeak |
Desk 03:03, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
Support. Very experienced user: excellent contributions in general, plenty of janitorial and behind-the-scenes work. Active against vandals.
—
Gwalla |
Talk05:20, 29 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. That's the worst wrong assumption of bad faith you've made? And you're willing to admit the un-dashing shortcoming of not being bold enough, and you're a selfnom? I want to have your baby!
Bishonen |
talk11:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. And some extra support for being a
Debian user.
utcursch |
talk 13:37, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
[1] This diff, CesarB needs to learn what
Wikipedia:Patent nonsenseis not as defined in that article before assigning an article to Pol Pot. When he has a better grasp on the definition of nonsense and vandalism he should come back and try again.
The comment above by
64.62.161.12 (
talk·contribs), who is a reincarnation of banned user
BeBop (
talk·contribs)
[2]. And I did reread the
Wikipedia:Patent nonsense definitions after you said it wasn't, and I still think the second paragraph was nonsense and the first paragraph didn't give any context that could help me understand what it was all about; so, I believe I was on the right tagging it as nonsense. --
cesarb15:29, 30 May 2005 (UTC)reply
Don't worry. First off, as a banned user, he is shunned from the Wikipedia community and everything he says is ignored. Second, he didn't sign his vote, meaning the vote doesn't count. Third, as an anonymous user, he's not allowed to vote in RfA anyway.
Linuxbeak |
Talk |
Desk 16:04, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
That article was written in plain english. It was silly, but plain english. If you cant understand that maybe your just stupid, another fine reason to not consider you for admin. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
64.62.161.12 (
talk •
contribs) 13:21, 30 May 2005
LinuxGeak; "Anyone can contribute to the discussion and vote, anonymous users as well as pseudonymous users. What is important is not your name, but whether your contribution and voting is in good faith." My good faith is a matter for other editors before they cast their vote and for bureaucrats at the end of the vote. Not YOU. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
64.62.161.12 (
talk •
contribs) 13:21, 30 May 2005
Try again. I'm getting snippy here, but do your homework before you say something that is false.
Voting
To add your vote, edit the section for that candidate. All Wikipedians with an account are welcome to vote.
Oh, yeah. A silly article is patent nonsense. Calling people stupid is also called trolling. If you do not stop, I will open an RFC against you.
Linuxbeak |
Talk |
Desk 16:33, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
Neutral
Comments
CesarB currently has 2726 edits. First edit Feb 13, 2003, regular editing began Jun 21, 2004. No big ghosts in his user talk closet. —
Ben Brockert(42)UE News 03:17, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. I am mostly interested in cleanup; being able to delete articles from the
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, close VfD discussions (I know I can close them already, but I don't feel right closing them except on the most non-controversial cases while not being an admin), and handle more complex moves (like moves over a redirect with minor history and merging page histories) would be useful.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I have not made many major contributions, and only created 3 articles on all this time (I do believe this is my weakest point, and I'm working to improve it). Of these, the one I like the most is
Advanced Simulation and Computing Program.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and will deal with it in the future?
A. My greatest blunder on Wikipedia was to
assume bad faith on the part of
User:Pioneer-12 on the
List of incidents famously considered great blunders VfD. After I found out I was wrong, I apologized and I believe I learned the lesson. My second greatest blunder was creating
Category:Dewey Decimal Classification, while I was still a newbie (I asked for its deletion about an year later). Since I am always ready to admit I could be wrong, I manage to avoid being stressed most of the time.