Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ZooFari 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 23:29, 4 October 2009 (Signing comment by 98.234.169.63 - "→Support: cmt"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

ZooFari

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (7/6/2), Scheduled to end 22:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Nomination

ZooFari (talk · contribs) – Howdy! I was on the IRC channel the other day and my adoptee encouraged me to run an RFA. So here I am! I've been here at Wikipedia for some quite time preceding 2 unsuccessful RFAs. The first one was what I like to call the "Newbie RFA", which ran late last year. You've all seen them around :-). The second one was basically clarification for me. At the time I had already started vandal-fighting and all those good stuff, thus I used the RFA for feedback. I think I've improved significantly, acting more mature and gained more experience. I work with SVGs at the Graphic Lab, stub-sort, and do some huggling here and then. More about my contribs in question 2. I have a few adoptees, but only three are active: User:Srinivas, User:Zink Dawg, and recently adopted User:Ontoyinsimon. Srinivas has reached a high level in Wikipedia and we've know each other for months now. He is running an inspection so you may view the progress I've been doing to help teach editors to keep a good behavior.

Additionally I could use some more buttons when I work in new page patrolling using AWB (which I believe has a delete button disabled to non-admins). I usually just skip those pages but with the aid of AWB, I would easily delete those pages immediately. More in question 1. ZooFari 20:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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 I mentioned above, I intent to CSD work with the aid of AWB, which has integrated tools for history, what links here, and a wide edit box for improvements as opposed to deleting straight forward. The delete button is disabled for me, obviously, thus I'm asking for the extra buttons. Additionally, I do huggling late at night where hardly anyone is around to keep a clear backlog at AIV. Hence I could use the block button on those certain occasions.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: The tool server sums it up well so you may take a look. I work in image-related areas and occasionally help out at the Graphic Lab. I recently became interested in stub sorting (taxonomic stubs to be specific) in which I've made many mistakes in template creation (that's where the tools could come in handy). For admin-related contributions, I do huggling, CSD and CSD "sorting" (some CSDers can be careless sometimes), with the exception of reporting.
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 with many Wikipedians, I've handled several arguments. They don't turn severe and fortunately I've never been on the noticeboard, but some have been a hassle and admittedly lose my temperament slightly. Such discussions can be resolved safety if you know the five pillars of Wikipedia. I don't feel comfortable mentioning any discussions but you can browse my contributions and dig out what you can find.
Additional question from Malinaccier (talk)
4. Are you a native speaker of English?
A. Absolutely, and speak advanced Spanish as well.
Question from Ched
5. Have you ever edited under another account? If so, would you be willing to disclose that information? (Note: I have not researched any previous RfAs or contribs yet) — Ched :  ?  21:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A: No, I've never edited under an alternative account or IP.


Questions from ArcAngel

6. What is the difference between a ban and a block?
A:
7. When should cool down blocks be used and why?
A:
8. Could you please provide examples of inadequate reports to WP:AIV (that you would decline and remove from that page without blocking the user reported)?
A:


Questions from FASTILY
9. What, in your opinion, are the several most important non-free content criteria? Please explain why you think these criteria are the most important and give a detailed explanation of each.
A:
10. A user uses their digital camera and takes a picture of a copyrighted Disney character, for instance, Ariel from The Little Mermaid and WALL-E from WALL-E as well as other such characters. The user then creates a collage from the images and uploads the collage to Wikipedia with the license tag {{PD-self}} (public domain). Specifically, what is the problem with the situation and why is that an issue?
A:
11. Photos from press agencies (like that of the AP) are predominantly prohibited on Wikipedia. Is there ever an instance in which usage of these images is permitted? Explain.
A:
12. Would you ever consider blocking a registered user without any prior notice or warning? If so, why?
A:

Optional question from Graeme Bartlett

13. Why should some kinds of files should be moved to commons?
A:

General comments

RfAs for this user:

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

Discussion

Support
  1. I've seen you around - excellent image work. I think you'll do fine. ceranthor 21:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Seeing you around leaves me with a good impression. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs, review) 21:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Weak support - I haven't done a look-through of your contribs, but I get a generally positive impression of your work from prior interactions and what I've seen of you. Nice image work, you seem to be a good and pretty reasonable editor - you might be light on experience in certain deletion areas (see neutral #1), but nothing is a negative at this point. Will revisit this soon (I haven't done much research, tbh), but since you seem good, I'm starting off in the support column. Good luck, JamieS93 21:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support not every admin, or admin candidate has to be involved in AfD. The mop has many uses. Candidate seems entirely suitable.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Seen him around. I actually thought about nominating him once but didn't have the time. Good luck! Timmeh 21:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. clean block log, civil editor, and takes nice photos commons:Category:Images_by_ZooFari ϢereSpielChequers 22:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. I am not convinced by either Pedro or Majoreditor; IRC isn't necessarily bad (though I don't use it), so long as it isn't used to discuss things that should have transparency (i.e. admin actions). I guess I can understand the argument IRC user - immature admin, but I don't buy it; for me to be convinced that somebody's not mature enough to be an admin, I'd have to see examples of immaturity and poor judgment. I see his comment about RfA candidates as a good thing, because it shows he's cautious of biting newbies - which is a huge plus when considering that he's going to work at CSD, where a trigger happy admin can turn away many potentially valuable editors. Master&Expert (Talk) 23:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you elaborate on how Zoofari is overly cautious about biting newbies? The majority of Zoofari's talk page edits to 'newbies' are automated Huggle edits – See this. -FASTILY (TALK) 23:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.169.63 (talk) [reply]
Oppose
  1. "I was on the IRC channel the other day ..". Nope. Bad thing. Rational arguments against my oppose only please. Pedro :  Chat  21:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Though I know there are issues with IRC, isn't it a little harsh to hold mere participation against the candidate with no proof of him taking part in any controversy there? Not everything that happens on IRC is "omgz you called Cyclonenim a gayboy, no RfA for yous". There is (believe it or not) some constructive activity there. If you could elaborate on your oppose, it'd be much appreciated. I should note that I have not yet made my mind up on this candidate, and haven't looked over them at all, so please don't consider this badgering. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  21:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Active participation is not the issue. The headlining of it at RFA, whilst honest, is a deep concern. 'Crats are welcome to disregard my opinion of course. As to general IRC stuff, frankly after this weeks dramaz the more we can keep on wiki the better. IRC heavy and tool dependent candidates are not, in my view, where we want to be. That was also the "red flag to the bull". On even more review the candidates Q1 reliance on automated tools is very concerning (his lack of actual article related CSD nominations being a major consideration in asking for an AWB delete interface). Pedro :  Chat  22:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    You are of course entitled to that opinion. Thanks for elaborating :) Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  22:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose. Your recent comment at RFA talk disturbs me: "I would like to ask RFA to moral support or don't vote at all." Suggesting that editors shouldn't provide an honest assessment just doesn't feel right. Sorry. Majoreditor (talk) 21:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I admit that I screwed. ZooFari 21:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose I am concerned that this editor sees adminship as a goal in and of itself. Wanting to be an administrator for the sake of it does not a good administrator make. Crafty (talk) 21:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose Agree with above, it seems the "adminship" is just the next level up in his work. KiraChinmoku (T, ¤) 22:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    EDIT: Given the fact that this is now the users 3rd adminship attempt, whats new? KiraChinmoku (T, ¤) 22:19, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I immediately had a bad feeling when I saw this RfA for an initially unknown reason, until Majoreditor posted his oppose. That thead struck me as slightly clueless in regards to this users knowledge of this process, and I'm concerned that his involvement in RfA only began recently, far too close to opening this request. It almost feels to me like ZooFari is trying to jump through hoops to get the mop. To top it off, I don't see any creation work. Feel free to point some out, but I don't think it'll convince me to switch from this oppose. Best of luck, anyway. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  22:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    You said to feel free to point out creation work: 149 articles, according to X!'s tool. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs, review) 22:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose With 56% of this candidates edits being automated, I have concerns that this candidate is too dependant on AWB, and I see little interaction with others (approximately 5% of his edits), plus I see very little CSD work, or deletion work in general. ArcAngel (talk) 22:57, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
  1. Neutral - Hard to get a feel for your knowledge of deletion policy, as there are very few AfD !votes in your contributions.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 21:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been active in Mfd if it makes you comfortable. ZooFari 21:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Scratch that, it has nothing to do with articles :-/ ZooFari 21:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Honestly, AfD is a bit more important then MfD. I saw that, but, I'm just not sure. I'll come back later, since I'm not very good at coming up with questions...--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 21:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I am currently undecided on this candidate. My instinct is to oppose, but I have no reason yet. It may merely be my memory of the event Majoreditor notes above. I'll switch soon. Switching to oppose. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  22:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I am interested in neither supporting nor opposing. @harej 22:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ZooFari_3&oldid=317933799"