Final: (84/17/7) - closed as successful by Acalamari at 01:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC) reply
StringTheory11 ( talk · contribs)
Dear all, it is my pleasure to nominate StringTheory11 for adminship. He has written three Featured and five Good Articles, having been an editor here since April 2010. I am confident he'll be a net positive to the 'pedia. He has an interest and experience in discussing aspects of notability with respect to marginally notable articles, and has shown a commitment to cleaning up article-space. I've been seeing backlogs in requests for protection and admin-closing of debates, so I think his services are needed. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
"I have some concerns about the level of his experience in AfD and other Adminny areas, but those concerns did not rise to a point where I felt obliged to oppose the nominee."I agreed, which is why I !voted neutral, initially. But your subsequent statements (as well as those from Secret and others) sounds to me like WP:NOTNOW, but we'll accept as they promise to let us rehab them. Perhaps that's not what you intended but no matter how many times I re-read those statements that's what I come away with.
Neutral The Nominee is clearly an outstanding content contributor with a lot of promise as a future Admin. Unfortunately I am not comfortable with the level and quality of participation in Adminny type areas, especially AfD, which is just too thin for me to be able to pull the Support trigger. This is not a fatal issue though. I would suggest a few months of working primarily in AfD so we can get a better picture of the nominees approach to article retention or deletion. -
Ad Orientem (
talk) 12:24, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
reply
While we certainly should not sacrifice quality of content to retain new editors, we should not just pepper them with automated messages, and instead leave them messages saying why we are, for example, nominating multiple articles for deletion. At User Talk:D A R C 12345, see where I left a message stating why I was nomming lots of his articles for deletion. I think it's importnat to do stuff like that to retain the new editors instead of appearing cold with repeated automated messages.Although the candidate provides one example of leaving a non-template message on a user talk page, looking through the candidate's contributions, the vast majority of the messages the candidate has left on new user's talk pages have been templated warnings via Twinkle. To me, there appears to be a disconnect between the candidate's words and their actions; the candidate knows what to say or do but appears to not be doing that themselves. Also, looking at the candidate's contributions and user analysis, its fairly clear to me that the candidate doesn't engage on article talk pages, either. With so little information about how the candidate actually interacts with other editors, I can't tell whether this candidate would be a good admin when it comes to helping editors resolve disputes, helping newbies, and blocking editors. I don't think this is necessarily enough to Oppose the candidate but it's enough for me to not !vote Support. -- Ca2james ( talk) 03:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply
Final: (84/17/7) - closed as successful by Acalamari at 01:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC) reply
StringTheory11 ( talk · contribs)
Dear all, it is my pleasure to nominate StringTheory11 for adminship. He has written three Featured and five Good Articles, having been an editor here since April 2010. I am confident he'll be a net positive to the 'pedia. He has an interest and experience in discussing aspects of notability with respect to marginally notable articles, and has shown a commitment to cleaning up article-space. I've been seeing backlogs in requests for protection and admin-closing of debates, so I think his services are needed. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:
Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.
RfA/RfB toolbox | |
---|---|
Counters | |
Analysis | |
Cross-wiki |
"I have some concerns about the level of his experience in AfD and other Adminny areas, but those concerns did not rise to a point where I felt obliged to oppose the nominee."I agreed, which is why I !voted neutral, initially. But your subsequent statements (as well as those from Secret and others) sounds to me like WP:NOTNOW, but we'll accept as they promise to let us rehab them. Perhaps that's not what you intended but no matter how many times I re-read those statements that's what I come away with.
Neutral The Nominee is clearly an outstanding content contributor with a lot of promise as a future Admin. Unfortunately I am not comfortable with the level and quality of participation in Adminny type areas, especially AfD, which is just too thin for me to be able to pull the Support trigger. This is not a fatal issue though. I would suggest a few months of working primarily in AfD so we can get a better picture of the nominees approach to article retention or deletion. -
Ad Orientem (
talk) 12:24, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
reply
While we certainly should not sacrifice quality of content to retain new editors, we should not just pepper them with automated messages, and instead leave them messages saying why we are, for example, nominating multiple articles for deletion. At User Talk:D A R C 12345, see where I left a message stating why I was nomming lots of his articles for deletion. I think it's importnat to do stuff like that to retain the new editors instead of appearing cold with repeated automated messages.Although the candidate provides one example of leaving a non-template message on a user talk page, looking through the candidate's contributions, the vast majority of the messages the candidate has left on new user's talk pages have been templated warnings via Twinkle. To me, there appears to be a disconnect between the candidate's words and their actions; the candidate knows what to say or do but appears to not be doing that themselves. Also, looking at the candidate's contributions and user analysis, its fairly clear to me that the candidate doesn't engage on article talk pages, either. With so little information about how the candidate actually interacts with other editors, I can't tell whether this candidate would be a good admin when it comes to helping editors resolve disputes, helping newbies, and blocking editors. I don't think this is necessarily enough to Oppose the candidate but it's enough for me to not !vote Support. -- Ca2james ( talk) 03:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC) reply