ProhibitOnions (
talk·contribs) – I have had contact with ProhibitOnions and his good and calm editing style stuck in my memory - thus when I saw him as being interested in administration on the
list of non-admins with high edit counts, I thought 'Why Not?'. He has been completing non-admin 'janitorial tasks' such as welcoming users and fulfilling page requests already. He's bilingual and has been very active on Wikipedia for a while now, registering over a year ago in January 2005. His contributions are wide ranging and he is a more than competent editor who would benefit the community if given admin tools
Robdurbar14:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, just about. A little short of my usual standards but from my interactions with him, I would be confident he will be a good admin.
Stifle20:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Well rounded contributions, has been here for a while, a good editor, seems like a polite and calm guy, etc. Should make a good janitor. Also more bilingual admins is a good thing. --
W.marsh21:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support meets most, if not all, of my criteria; fairly well diverisified, solid answers, polite, and the above reasons. — Deckiller21:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
SupportHaven't had a great deal of conduct with him, but the question answers impressed me
Cynical 22:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Changed to oppose on the basis of John Reid's comments
Cynical 22:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Happy to change back to ‘’’Support’’’ per answers to JayZ’s questions below
Cynical22:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose anti-onion POV warriorSupport, wonderful editor. Has a keen mind for policy, has a solid history of interaction, general neat guy.
Lord Bob22:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Seems like a decent candidate, and I don't buy the oppose arguments. If the user is trustworthy it follows he can be trusted to close AFDs. It's not even as if an AFD result is secret or absolutely final. --
kingboyk00:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Was leaning toward neutral but I looked around this page a bit more and decided strong support. Also the name is catchy... blocking those legions of
Tor IPs would be a most fitting task. — Apr. 3, '06 [03:46] <
freakofnurxture|talk>
Totally biased fellow English-speaking Berliner support. Even if he does have peculiar views about vegetables, he will make a fine admin.
Angr (
talk •
contribs)
10:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - so what if he's a deletionist by nature? Many admins are. What's important is whether the user happens to be trustworthy, sensible, and comprehends the nature of consensus. ProhibitOnions seems sensible, good-natured, and seems to understand consensus; ergo supporto, as they say in Latin.
Proto||type11:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Believing in something does not mean that you can't follow consensus. I would like to see more deleted edits, though. --Rory09617:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, satisfied PO is ready for the mop. Surprised by the deletionist label, if anything I've seen inclusionism in recent AfD activities.
Deizio22:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, random sampling of AfD was pretty balanced - and consistent with personal observations. Well spoken when defending his opinons.
Kurutalk02:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Calm headed and experienced are what sold me. --
Patman2648 19:58 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Support Has shown the ability to remain calm on contentious AfD issues. In response to opposition, I just don't anticipate ProhibitOnions ignoring consensus at closing and deleting out of process. That would be very out of character from what I've seen.--
Isotope2320:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I saw him on the list of high edit counts and saw him on several AfDs, and thought he was worth nominating. And now I see he's up for nomination. --
Elkman - (talk)02:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Keep. No, wait: Support. Well, honestly. Has all the skills an admin needs, so let's give him the keys to the cupboard. ➨
❝REDVERS❞22:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- Strong deletionist bias displayed on AfD. While I find this acceptable in an editor and participant in AfD, I do not want this user to be closing.
John Reid22:14, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Neutral I am the world's biggest inclusionist, so I can't vote Support. I can't oppose because he deals with the n00bs and is very active iwthin the Wikipedia community.Jonathan23516:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Comments
I don't really see what (allegedly) being a deletionist has to do with closing AfDs. You can close AfDs fairly regardless of your personal opinions about deletion, because a good closing of an AfD is all about determining consensus and not at all about your personal opinions. Does anyone have evidence that the candidate would do things against consensus? That's the only thing that should really be relevent here. --
W.marsh23:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Onions are nice. Onions are your friends. Prohibit tomatoes! Tomatoes taste horrible! Tomatoes have a secret plan to conquer the world and enslave mankind!
JIP |
Talk11:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Onions taste good, but they're not likely to endear others to you. Mmm, onion breath. And besides, he could be
Jain and it could be religious. Tread lightly! -
TaxmanTalk12:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.
Mathbot20:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. There are several things I can see myself doing with gusto, including contributing to and monitoring the Main Page, working on
speedy deletions, determining consensus on
articles for deletion,
protecting and unprotecting pages, and helping with persistent
vandalism (see my third answer). As I am not yet an admin, I can't predict which activity, if any, will become my "specialty"; I intend to play things a little safe at the beginning, deferring to experienced admins as appropriate, while gaining admin experience in all areas.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Yes, there are several articles I am pleased with. I'm slowly adding articles about the day-to-day culture of
East Germany, such as
Ein Kessel Buntes or the article I am probably most happy with,
Puhdys; I was given a barnstar by
TexasDex for
Silly (band). In other instances, I'm happy that by creating an article I have helped rescue something important from being near-forgotten;
The Music for UNICEF Concert and
The Edsel Show are two examples. I've also created short articles or stubs for subjects that were far more obscure than they deserved, such as
Mass games, the
GRiD Compass (probably the first
laptop), and
Ryszard Siwiec, the first person to self-immolate in protest at the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia. But I'm just as happy to have added smaller details to numerous other articles (did you know that the sound at the beginning of the
Sugababes' "
Freak Like Me" is the sound made by the video game
Frogger when a coin is inserted?).
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A. I'm glad to say that most of my time on Wikipedia has been a pleasant experience. I was one of the users who documented the
abuses of the infamous
Shran, after he repeatedly vandalized
Ich bin ein Berliner (at one point using the username "Prohibit0nions" with a zero). It's always a shame to see this happen, as his vandalism evinced a certain amount of intelligence and persistence that might have been put to really good use here (and perhaps he has indeed "gone straight" under a new username, as the vandalism seemed to have stopped). The way I dealt with him was to discuss the vandalism, first on the article and user talk pages, and then elsewhere, and by so doing other users and I were able to compile a list of Shran's sockpuppets, putting a stop to his naughtiness. I've also occasionally encountered POV warriors but have avoided getting entangled in revert wars, usually leaving the page alone for a few days by which time the problem is often solved.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
ProhibitOnions (
talk·contribs) – I have had contact with ProhibitOnions and his good and calm editing style stuck in my memory - thus when I saw him as being interested in administration on the
list of non-admins with high edit counts, I thought 'Why Not?'. He has been completing non-admin 'janitorial tasks' such as welcoming users and fulfilling page requests already. He's bilingual and has been very active on Wikipedia for a while now, registering over a year ago in January 2005. His contributions are wide ranging and he is a more than competent editor who would benefit the community if given admin tools
Robdurbar14:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, just about. A little short of my usual standards but from my interactions with him, I would be confident he will be a good admin.
Stifle20:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Well rounded contributions, has been here for a while, a good editor, seems like a polite and calm guy, etc. Should make a good janitor. Also more bilingual admins is a good thing. --
W.marsh21:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support meets most, if not all, of my criteria; fairly well diverisified, solid answers, polite, and the above reasons. — Deckiller21:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
SupportHaven't had a great deal of conduct with him, but the question answers impressed me
Cynical 22:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Changed to oppose on the basis of John Reid's comments
Cynical 22:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Happy to change back to ‘’’Support’’’ per answers to JayZ’s questions below
Cynical22:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose anti-onion POV warriorSupport, wonderful editor. Has a keen mind for policy, has a solid history of interaction, general neat guy.
Lord Bob22:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Seems like a decent candidate, and I don't buy the oppose arguments. If the user is trustworthy it follows he can be trusted to close AFDs. It's not even as if an AFD result is secret or absolutely final. --
kingboyk00:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Was leaning toward neutral but I looked around this page a bit more and decided strong support. Also the name is catchy... blocking those legions of
Tor IPs would be a most fitting task. — Apr. 3, '06 [03:46] <
freakofnurxture|talk>
Totally biased fellow English-speaking Berliner support. Even if he does have peculiar views about vegetables, he will make a fine admin.
Angr (
talk •
contribs)
10:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - so what if he's a deletionist by nature? Many admins are. What's important is whether the user happens to be trustworthy, sensible, and comprehends the nature of consensus. ProhibitOnions seems sensible, good-natured, and seems to understand consensus; ergo supporto, as they say in Latin.
Proto||type11:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Believing in something does not mean that you can't follow consensus. I would like to see more deleted edits, though. --Rory09617:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, satisfied PO is ready for the mop. Surprised by the deletionist label, if anything I've seen inclusionism in recent AfD activities.
Deizio22:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, random sampling of AfD was pretty balanced - and consistent with personal observations. Well spoken when defending his opinons.
Kurutalk02:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Calm headed and experienced are what sold me. --
Patman2648 19:58 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Support Has shown the ability to remain calm on contentious AfD issues. In response to opposition, I just don't anticipate ProhibitOnions ignoring consensus at closing and deleting out of process. That would be very out of character from what I've seen.--
Isotope2320:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I saw him on the list of high edit counts and saw him on several AfDs, and thought he was worth nominating. And now I see he's up for nomination. --
Elkman - (talk)02:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Keep. No, wait: Support. Well, honestly. Has all the skills an admin needs, so let's give him the keys to the cupboard. ➨
❝REDVERS❞22:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- Strong deletionist bias displayed on AfD. While I find this acceptable in an editor and participant in AfD, I do not want this user to be closing.
John Reid22:14, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Neutral I am the world's biggest inclusionist, so I can't vote Support. I can't oppose because he deals with the n00bs and is very active iwthin the Wikipedia community.Jonathan23516:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Comments
I don't really see what (allegedly) being a deletionist has to do with closing AfDs. You can close AfDs fairly regardless of your personal opinions about deletion, because a good closing of an AfD is all about determining consensus and not at all about your personal opinions. Does anyone have evidence that the candidate would do things against consensus? That's the only thing that should really be relevent here. --
W.marsh23:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Onions are nice. Onions are your friends. Prohibit tomatoes! Tomatoes taste horrible! Tomatoes have a secret plan to conquer the world and enslave mankind!
JIP |
Talk11:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Onions taste good, but they're not likely to endear others to you. Mmm, onion breath. And besides, he could be
Jain and it could be religious. Tread lightly! -
TaxmanTalk12:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.
Mathbot20:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. There are several things I can see myself doing with gusto, including contributing to and monitoring the Main Page, working on
speedy deletions, determining consensus on
articles for deletion,
protecting and unprotecting pages, and helping with persistent
vandalism (see my third answer). As I am not yet an admin, I can't predict which activity, if any, will become my "specialty"; I intend to play things a little safe at the beginning, deferring to experienced admins as appropriate, while gaining admin experience in all areas.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Yes, there are several articles I am pleased with. I'm slowly adding articles about the day-to-day culture of
East Germany, such as
Ein Kessel Buntes or the article I am probably most happy with,
Puhdys; I was given a barnstar by
TexasDex for
Silly (band). In other instances, I'm happy that by creating an article I have helped rescue something important from being near-forgotten;
The Music for UNICEF Concert and
The Edsel Show are two examples. I've also created short articles or stubs for subjects that were far more obscure than they deserved, such as
Mass games, the
GRiD Compass (probably the first
laptop), and
Ryszard Siwiec, the first person to self-immolate in protest at the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia. But I'm just as happy to have added smaller details to numerous other articles (did you know that the sound at the beginning of the
Sugababes' "
Freak Like Me" is the sound made by the video game
Frogger when a coin is inserted?).
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A. I'm glad to say that most of my time on Wikipedia has been a pleasant experience. I was one of the users who documented the
abuses of the infamous
Shran, after he repeatedly vandalized
Ich bin ein Berliner (at one point using the username "Prohibit0nions" with a zero). It's always a shame to see this happen, as his vandalism evinced a certain amount of intelligence and persistence that might have been put to really good use here (and perhaps he has indeed "gone straight" under a new username, as the vandalism seemed to have stopped). The way I dealt with him was to discuss the vandalism, first on the article and user talk pages, and then elsewhere, and by so doing other users and I were able to compile a list of Shran's sockpuppets, putting a stop to his naughtiness. I've also occasionally encountered POV warriors but have avoided getting entangled in revert wars, usually leaving the page alone for a few days by which time the problem is often solved.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either
this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.