This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tamzin. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You're not funny, but here's something that's definitely not a laughing matter - why aren't you an admin yet? Once you're back, I'm sure there's plenty of people who'd nominate you ~TNT(talk)19:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
No doubt about that. When I've seen your talk page comments I have always been really impressed and feel like someone with those skills would fit perfectly in the role of an admin. --Trialpears (talk) 19:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I already am an admin, on the very prestigious testwiki and testwikidatawiki, thank you very much! No, but in seriousness, thanks for the kind words, y'all. I had this conversation with Tavix and Ritchie333a few years ago, and think I was right to not take either up on his offer then; I don't think I was quite ready. Despite having been around a while, I feel like I only came to really understand Wikipedia in the past year. And, to paraphrase John Wick, people keep asking if I'm ready to be an admin, and yeah, I'm starting to think I'm ready.
As I've said before, I consider my account's rename last October to be a soft clean start (redlinking to remind myself to write that wrote it!), not because I necessarily had anything to be ashamed of, but just because I didn't really like the person I'd been. My philosophy with this has been that I wouldn't speak much of past accomplishments, and in return would ask people not hold past failings against me. (The failings may well be more numerous in my mind than in reality, but either way.) I couldn't really ask the latter of RfA voters, so I'd be willing to run at least partly on my pre-User:Tamzin record, but primarily I'd want to run on my work in this incarnation. Work I'm very proud of, but which I feel is a bit incomplete, and a bit short-lived.
Excluding this mental health leave, which is thankfully coming to a close (which is good because I've been itching to fire up AWB and fix the 170ish articles that mislabel a Swedish source (ISO 639:sv) as being in Northern Sami (ISO 639:se)), I've been continuously active since January, so I think I'd want till at least this coming January to build up a bit more of a recent track record, as well as show my commitment to maintaining a reasonable activity level, especially given that I was almost completely inactive from March of 2018 through September of 2020. I'd also want to wait till I've done a bit more quality content work and gotten 'zinbot approved at least for the task I've already coded for it and hopefully for a few others. But I'm reasonably confident that I can get all that done by January.
On that note:
In general, yes. I'd like to run, shooting for January.
To the person who recently emailed me offering a nomination, if you're reading this: I'll get back to you presently about what that might look like (a.k.a. try to talk you out of it ;) ).
@Firefly: We all know you're overdue for adminship yourself, and you've been active again about as long as I have. Wanna flight it up? Can flip a coin on who goes first, or run at the same time.
I'm always very worried about echo chambers and groupthink, so if anyone's reading this and thinks they'd be landing on the oppose side of things or would be on the fence, please feel free to let me know your concerns, here or by email, so I can either adjust my parameters of what I should do before running, or at least draft a good response to a potential tough question.
@TheresNoTime: I'm the funniest person you've ever met, and you know it. :P
I’m immensely flattered that you think I’m qualified to run! I would definitely be up for an ‘RfA flight’ as and when the time came - assuming I could find anyone silly enough to nominate me and they thought I was ready around the same time. :) I absolutely echo point 4 of your post and invite anyone with concerns about my eventual suitability to let me know. Mostly though I’m just glad you’re up for running! firefly ( t · c ) 18:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't mean to be a buzzkill but I'm still bearing the scars of my own RfA and that was six years ago this week. It was brutal. My advice is
a) make sure that those people who believe in you are aware that you are having an RfA...some people don't look at their Watchlists and may not even know that an RfA is happening;
b) start an RfA at a time when you feel strong and can be present 100%. You shouldn't respond to every criticism but you'd be surprised how often an editor starts an RfA and suddenly becomes busy and disappears from Wikipedia for a few days. Those are never successful. You have to be present;
c) Stick with it through the entire week. There is generally a burst of support at the beginning and then the opposers show up after a few days. I think there are some editors who would be admins right now but they withdrew their nomination after the critics began speaking up. But unless it's an unexpected tidalwave of "No"s, the close votes can go back and forth and it could turn in your favor if you hang in there and don't throw in the towel.
I have a fairly non-trivial COI here, but can you please hurry the heck up and run before the end of 2021 Tamzin? This has been a slow year, Eostrix notwithstanding, and we could do with another Blablubbs-esque RfA.... ~TheresNoTime(to explain!)01:21, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your work at EFFP. You might want to consider making a request for EFM access at WP:EFN so you can edit the filters directly to implement fixes yourself (if you're comfortable implementing them). Or just run for adminship, which would include EFM access. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:25, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Good luck
Hey - I was very pleased when I clicked on the link at the top of my watchlist that appeared this morning. Off to a strong start - good luck! GirthSummit (blether)08:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm glad to see this. I can't remember when it was that I asked you (as PinkAmpersand) about RfA and you declined. Must have been quite a few years ago now. Anyway, looks like a slam-dunk pass from where I'm sitting. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)18:42, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Heh, Tavix linked it in his vote. I did plan on taking y'all up on that at some point, but then wound up dropping off activity-wise for a bit (see Special:Diff/1084656730). But I do appreciate both of you for having suggested it back then. :) I'd actually forgotten about it until someone looking through my talk archives found it in June or July, and it's what got me to start thinking about going for it. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)20:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I was wondering when you would be nominated, and I think (and hope) that it will pass. As an unrelated side note, on the 2022 Vector the foundation seem to have moved the table of contents to the left sidebar. Zippybonzo | talk18:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm becoming concerned that the number of supports is increasing fast enough that it might endanger my record if this goes on for 7 days. Please consider either withdrawing the request, or loudly and publicly saying something boneheaded as soon as possible to slow the support, or violating some bedrock WMF policies and at least earning it. Thanks. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Floquenbeam:loudly and publicly saying something boneheaded as soon as possible to slow the support Well if you insist...
Y'know, Floq, you really jynxed it. Because I'm not gonna beat that record, but I might give you a run for your money on the record for most controversial RfA with above 250 support. I didn't look all the way back, but I'm pretty sure the list goes you, Dihydrogen Monoxide, EvergreenFir. And I've already surpassed Evergreen for third in that dubious ranking. So, thanks a lot, jerk. /s<3-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)
I'll have to console myself with "highest number of opposes but still passed". I think even "highest number of participants" is in jeopardy. I don't know about "most controversial RfA with above 250 support"; that sounds like one of those made-up baseball statistics, like "highest OBP in second game of a doubleheader". But there were tons of votes in mine, and it went to a crat chat, and it passed, so at least I win that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I swear, Floq, I'm gonna ban you from this talkpage if you keep talking about things that will or won't happen. /s P.S. Who's the only pitcher to throw three pickoffs in an inning? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)20:28, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Asking for a friend: how mad would you be if I were to saythey were to say "Congratulations on your RFA passing!" right now? --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
On that same token though, if you do receive 117 opposes (which I sincerely hope you do not), you must garner 351 supports or face the bureaucrats. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 01:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Contrary to common misconception, RfAs in the discretionary range don't need to go to a 'crat chat. They usually do, and I'm guessing this would, but it's not required. When I started editing, 'crat chats were by far the minority of discretionary-range closes. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)01:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Privacy policy
Hi Tamzin. One extra thought about the suppression and restoration of the question at RfA. "If I use my name, it's OK, if I use a pseudonym it's not" was a line I could enforce - and indeed referenced before making the suppression. Instead I will say that this is a level of nuance that I don't think fair to expect from OS in terms of enforcement - that is you reserve the right to have non-peseudonomous accounts be considered OUTING unless you also link to your real name with those accounts. It can be tricky enough for me to figure out if there has been disclosure onwiki such that something is not OUTING, and asking me to do that on other sites feels a step too much. Barkeep49 (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
re: "fair to expect from OS in terms of enforcement": This would be completely right if you were somehow criticized for guessing wrong. But I doubt anyone on the planet thinks you did anything wrong. No one expects you to research each person's off-wiki posting exhaustively before suppression. Tamzin's just given you further info, which led you to unsupress. Seems like the system worked perfectly. The only imperfection is the extra work caused, which is probably not going to happen very often. And, the main reason I'm sticking my nose in here: I hope you didn't misunderstand my comments in that thread as any kind of criticism of the suppression; it most definitely wasn't. If I was still an OS, I'd have suppressed it too, in the absence of Tamzin's request to the contrary. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I think this is an OS success story @Floq. An anonymous editor saw something that was OUTING, came onto IRC, requested help, an admin saw, revdelled it, asked for oversight, it was oversighted as a tool of first resort, it became clear the target was OK with the comment, and it was undone. I have truthfully spent more time on this userpage about this than in the suppressing and unsppressing - in fact the only reason the original suppression was close was I double checked Tamzin's privacy notice.My comment is about next time, when maybe Tamzin hasn't seen the edit between the time it was posted and the time it's suppressed and can't give informed retroactive consent. If Tamzin had said "I am OK answering this question" or "I am OK with this account being linked" as to why it should be restored, I wouldn't have said anything here. But the actual response to you was it satisfies my test of a site where I participate under my real name. To which I say "No, it fails the test that was setup" and adding nuance to make clear that it didn't fail the test feels like it would - and did based on the change below - make the ask complex. When an OS request comes in, I often feel some compunction to respond to it. Even if I would rather not pause my TV show, put down the book I'm reading, or stop what I was doing at work, I will generally try to make time for it because the things we oversight can cause real damage and real harm and the ask on my time, in 90%+ of circumstances, is small compared to the good I can do. Having an individualized workflow for what should be suppressed is one thing, having it take real detective work on my end is a different thing and not part of the bargain for me. If I wanted non-simple work that I was obligated to do, I'd have opened some ArbCom appeal I haven't weighed in on. And that's why I'm pushing back on adding nuance here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, thought I'd replied, but apparently there was an edit conflict with Floq and I mixed that up with the earlier edit conflict with Sdrqaz' deletion and closed out the tab. Sigh. Let's see if I can remember what I'd typed... @Barkeep49: You make very good points. I certainly don't want to make things any harder for the OS team. This is the first time my waiver of OUTING has come into play anywhere, and it clearly still has some kinks to work out. Does this address your concerns? Trying to burden-shift onto the !outer. (Wait how the Hell is that a redlink? Next you'll tell me fee shifting is... Oh gosh.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)00:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
In one sense it does address my concerns. In another sense, not really as I explain above to Floq. It feels like part of your concern is that someone could get in trouble with the OS'er in this circumstance. It never entered my mind to warn or sanction the editor who asked the question, so if that's your concern I wouldn't sweat it, and would go back to the original wording. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Signing comments on RfA pages
Hello Tamzin, I hope you're doing well during what I'm sure is an unsettling period of 7 days. As far as I know, it is clearer to sign answers to questions on RfA pages, as they are comments you wrote, in addition it clearly denotes the end of the comment, helpful for ones that span paragraphs. I noticed the first one was signed, but none of the others were signed. I first applied the unsigned template, as I do normally, but I looked for reference at the previous RfA, by Colin M, and saw those weren't signed either, so I reverted it.
The obvious solution to this problem is to ask you to sign them yourself. I didn't reach out to you about it initially because the last two times I have posted it here, you haven't taken too kindly to it. However, I hope my message here has a different tone, and it's more so my intention to get the confusion cleared up-- as I found the page by editing normally and think they would be better that way. So, would you be willing to sign them? Naleksuh (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Naleksuh: Traditionally RfA answers aren't signed. I've removed the one signature I'd included by accident.Your message confuses me: You seem to be aware that I don't want to interact with you, but seem to not get that that means the correct response is to leave me alone. Why you think that your own misunderstanding of RfA norms creates a good exception, I do not know. I do not think you mean me ill will. I think I'm in the minority in that regard, as a number of people have told me they're concerned about your behavior toward me. Certainly it's a bit harder to assume good faith when you choose to contact me at a time when you know I risk consequences at RfA if I do anything elsewhere on-wiki that could be taken as causing drama. But I will continue to AGF. I think that you have some uncanny knack to always land on the worst possible misinterpretations of subtext and tone, and that it makes you come off as malicious when you're not. So this time I will be very clear, for both our sakes: Please do not post on this talk page again, except for procedural notifications (e.g. if you RfD a redirect I created). Where possible, please leave me alone elsewhere on Wikipedia as well. If you would like to acknowledge this message, you can do so with the thank button (just the once). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)04:23, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Looks like you're on track to pass. In case I forget, just thought I'd wish you good luck! I look forward to coming across your signature in the future :) — Ixtal ⁂ (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
All's well that ends well. It was interesting to see how many times checkusers were used during this RfA – after all, SPI skills were the most important thing. Congratulations, Mathsci (talk) 15:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Resilient Barnstar
A barnstar seems performative, but a private email seems not brave enough, so I'll selfishly choose the former, and hope that it incrementally lifts your spirits as much as an email might. An honorable >70% "pass" is better than a silent 99% "pass". I can't find it now, in that increasingly unfollowable discussion, but somewhere you said this discussion is making you question whether you want to spend time in a community that turns a blind eye towards those who would erase you. Remember not to ignore the other +/- 250 people. Wishing you resilience for the next few days, and beyond. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
+1 Surveys since 2016 consistently find > 75% of Americans think polarisation is getting worse and it needs to be addressed, so can't blame the few who are opposing. Though it does seem quite a misreading of your track record. My reading is your radical transparency & decency on this issue is likely to have a net depolarisation and NPOV enhancing effect, which is much needed. 264 dwarves 40, or even if the oppose count grows to 90 before the end. That said, if it does get too stressful, we'd want you to do what seems best for you, of course. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ascendingrisingharmonising: Normally I'd say this is off-topic, but hey, anything to pass the time right now. I started learning Toki Pona for the same reason that Sonja Lang invented it: to simplify my thoughts. I was in a bad place, and doing a lot of therapy, and the therapy wasn't helping much. I started learning Toki Pona—just through reading pu—and found that that was helping a lot more! So I kept going. I would journal in Toki Pona at least once a day, and after a while I joined the largest Discord server for it, ma pona pi toki pona. (You can find a link if you Google it; now's a bad time for me to violate WP:SPAM.) There, I could talk in Toki Pona with others, by text and by voice, and I learned it a lot faster.As to how long it takes to learn... There's a fairly common misconception that you can become fluent in Toki Pona in a matter of days or weeks, and that just isn't true. What is true is that you can learn how to assemble a grammatically correct sentence quite quickly, meaning that you can write things for yourself that you'll understand later. What takes longer is learning to understand what others say, and learning to express your thoughts in a way that isn't just translating from your native language, but rather thinking in a pona manner. For instance, I recently saw a new speaker talk about drinking telo pi kili lili loje jelo, 'liquid of the red yellow circular fruit'. They were still learning to combine words, and it was good that they'd figured out the right words to fully express the concept "orange juice", but a friend corrected them: "You can just say telo, 'liquid'". Because Toki Pona is a language about simplifying things. That takes some getting used to. I still wouldn't call myself quite fluent. I can speak fairly fluently in conversation, but I haven't quite internalized the pona mentality 100%.Anyways, given that this is off-topic, if you have further questions about Toki Pona, feel free to reach out by email. Or I suppose it would be on-topic to discuss this on my Meta talkpage, since there's an active request for a Toki Pona Wikipedia and the language is already in use on Wikisource. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)18:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Tamzin, just hang in there, insofar as you mean well for the collaborative project and you truly want to serve, you would get the bit. Just hang in there it would all be over soon and you shall emerge successful. Celestina007 (talk) 21:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Casualdejekyll, I understand, I believe we have all failed RFA candidates, I mean the collaborative project as a whole, now, for a collaborative project which has the mantra of RFA isn’t a big deal it sure is looking like a big deal with the unnecessary pillorying of the candidate. The community complains that in the last 4 years the number of editors willing to serve has diminished exponentially. I think it was a sysop I regard, I think it was Ritchie333, who first admonished us long ago to stop deceiving ourselves and categorically stared that Adminship is Infact a big deal. In the end I trust Tamzin would emerge successful, insofar as they mean well for the community and truly want to serve which I believe they do. Tamzin is familiar with policy, they have a clue, they have a perfect temperament and most of all have demonstrated a need for the tools, these are the requirements & Tamzin checks all boxes. Celestina007 (talk) 22:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
My admin criteria is purposely much lower than many other editors' - and makes no explicit mention of edit count or any such statistics. I should probably save it on a userpage somewhere so I can refer it to other people more easily. casualdejekyll22:29, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I think the community also underestimates its ability to deal with rogue and problematic admins, Celestina007. I don't expect Tamzin will be one, and I'm glad they're on the way to passing, but if they are the community will be able to address anay problems that arise. I'm somewhat surprised that the opposing votes do not even mention Tamzin's high regard for transparency and disclosures -- all indicators of an editor who'd follow ADMINACCT. — Ixtal( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 23:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
It's worth noting our color matched before a commenter on the RfA pointed out the accessibility issue with it. I just figured that I'd solve it the same way you did casualdejekyll22:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
needed information
Dear admin, by mistake it got clicked [n.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Baidy540] . Now, should I file this again or the old one can be considered. RS6784 (talk) 23:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@RS6784: Don't worry, I'd already noticed the issue and fixed it for you. :) Your filing is now in the queue to be reviewed. In the future, yeah, it's the first box that shows up in "How to open an investigation:", not the second. The second is only for non-autoconfirmed users. (Also, I'm not an admin.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)23:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Hey, I hope you're doing okay. This may have been better as an email so no worries if you remove this. I agree with what I said in my oppose, but I support the great work you're doing here at Wikipedia, and I support Tamzin the person, so please don't get discouraged from continuing to do the good work you do improving the encyclopedia. When/if your RfA goes through, I hope to see you around and hope that we can all move forward without any hard feelings.Endwise (talk) 04:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm a supporter and I feel exactly the same way. The smiley just made my day. I gotta say: this is one of the more interesting RFAs to read. There is real clash of ideas and while it must be nerve-racking to be the candidate, I am grateful they stood for sysop and like my new friend Endwise, hope their wiki-career continues to inspire, regardless of the outcome. BusterD (talk) 19:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
At the time of writing this, Tamzin actually ended up winning the rfa. Congrats Tamzin! Even though I opposed, like this person said here, please don't be discouraged to edit Wikipedia. Keep doing good work in improving Wikipedia! Have a good day! Toad40 (talk) 13:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations!!!!
Congratulations on WP:300, with almost being the most supported RfA of all time. This is nothing to scoff at and is an incredible acomplishment. PerryPerryDTalk To Me05:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I'm so totally blaming Primefac for my mucking up the numbers. I don't know how to blame them for me getting it wrong the 2nd time, but I'm sure I can find a way Nosebagbear (talk) 00:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
The Best Drama Barnstar
The Best Drama Barnstar
The Best Drama Barnstar is awarded for having a bit part in one of the best dramas of the year. Thank you for your diligent work. -- zzuuzz(talk)21:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Y'know I said in advance people should say "break a leg" and not "good luck"... Maybe all this happened because some didn't listen.Curtsies and/or bows.-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)21:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Semi-related.. somebody needs to start reverting me if I add more to the already bloated RfA. I'm getting into the same territory Perry was. casualdejekyll00:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Get some sleep
A process not for the faint of heart. I'm stressed and I barely contributed. The way you handled the process makes me proud to have been a supporter. BusterD (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Add: Immediately after I sent this reply, my mother (who schlepped out here 9 hours from D.C. without a car, just to keep me company as things got intense), made the same suggestion. So congratulations, @BusterD, you're an honorary Jewish mother. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)03:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I'll give you a ring if I'm ever in town, we'll bake it together :) I have to agree with BusterD's initial comment, too. My browser history shows that I hit refresh on your RfA more often than I did my own, and that's really saying something. seriously, Tamzin, you did a fantastic job. In this weird Jewish quasi-family that's forming here (actually not the first time this has happened to me), I've never been prouder to call you my sibling. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 03:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Well, you've managed to succeed at something that a certain someone on Wikipediocracy rather hilariously failed at, which is make me cry. /pos Thank you, Claudia. <3 I hope you know I'll be first in line whenever RfA/theleekycauldron 2 rolls around. (I'd offer my nomination, but you'll probably have to wait another decade or two before I'm no longer the most controversial possible nominator... Probably better off going with Icewhiz and a GRP co-nom.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)04:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
well, you never know how low that bar goes... I could always nominate myself :) <3 wikipediocracy is totally a shitshow, but good god did I laugh out loud at parabola's rants. A+. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 08:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey, I self-nommed on Wikidata... 34-0. I had 2,013 edits and four months' tenure. Held the record for most successful RfA there for years, still I think 4th or so. Imagine if it worked that way here. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)08:34, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@Theleekycauldron - as I understand it the real value of nominators is in the advice and behind-the-scenes work they can offer rather than the endorsements they give. Sure, some people will vote along the lines of "I trust any nomination by X", and that is of course a benefit, but that might be 2 or 3 votes out of hundreds. What all this is getting at is - don't dismiss the idea of a self-nomination. I think we might do well to bring back them back as "something we do"... Apologies to Tamzin for using her talk page to blather on. firefly ( t · c ) 08:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@Firefly: Oh, I couldn't agree more; mother prune hamentashen up there was invaluable during my run. (seriously, can't thank BusterD enough.) I'd love it if self-noms became more normalized for others; I think they're not because while the particular nominator might not matter so much, people expect that any serious adminship candidate has been around long enough to build the connections to rustle up those nominators. But it'd be nice to not have that expectation :) Tamzin, I have to ask you if you purposefully ran at 2013 edits because that's the year you ran... if so, kudos, that's fantastic. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Late Happy 1st May!
And nominators might have it difficult to find editors to have not a phrase that can be opposed by lets say in some words we might not be able to repeat in a discussion. And least I wouldn't have been able to use such words as Hammersoft did. But for now that's allowed, we have a Sysop precedent.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 03:44, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
You are an incredible human being. You are an amazing editor and a beautiful part of this community. Your impact is most definitely felt and it is such a positive for this encyclopedia that I don't believe that could even be questioned. But more than that, the civil way you have conducted yourself through the difficult events of the last week and the lovely way you interact with those around you on a daily basis can only ever be matched. It saddens me that you were so affected by everything that you lost sleep, though I understand full well the intimidation you may have felt, or that you were stressed to a breaking point. But I am equally thrilled that you had those around you supporting you through the process. Regardless of the outcome I want you to know you are supported, as a fellow editor and human being. Keep shining your Light and singing your Song. I don't think there is a barnstar here for that but there is in my world and you've earned it. --ARoseWolf13:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar
For when there is no other barnstar for a situation.
PerryPerryD, not to hijack Tamzin's talk page but it looks like they redid that barnstar. It looks incredible. I'm all about some rainbow (lol). --ARoseWolf14:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Excellence
Congratulations again on WP:300, achieving the most !votes in an rfa since 2019, being the most supported rfa since 2019, and staying calm during all of this. Regardless of the result, Its clear that people appriciate you. so dont forget that. PerryPerryDTalk To Me13:56, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Grats from me too. But I think it was bigger than Perry thought. In my reading you have the most participants ever in an RFA, the most supports in an RFA, the most kbs of discussion, one of the few records you don't seem to have is most opposes.... ϢereSpielChequers20:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Also, kudos on your excellent demeanor throughout. That is, in great part, what convinced me to stay in the support column. Your temperament throughout, despite the stress and timbre of the conversation, is a good look. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Makin' sure it's not lost on others... I admire your sand (#3). You've been on my Awesome Editor list for a long time, and it looks likely that you will soon go on my Awesome Admin list as well. You probably already know this, that when we see dolphins, then we can be confident and assured that there are no sharks around. Just another reason to love those cute, big-brained swimmers!P.I. Ellsworth - ed.put'r there09:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Noticed your notice above and in case you haven't found it, there is a really good template called {{If mobile}} I've been using when I close move requests. The template I use, {{Requested move/end}}, does not appear in mobile view, and I use If mobile to let my closure appear for mobile users. You might find it useful at the top of this page and in other applications. P.I. Ellsworth - ed.put'r there10:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I have closed your RFA as successful, congratulations. If you ever have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me or any other administrator. Useight (talk) 13:37, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congrats - enjoy the scary new buttons everywhere. :) More seriously, you'll do brilliantly, I have every confidence. firefly ( t · c ) 13:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations, Tamzin! It's no cetacean, but I see above that you already have found one. Time for a new signature? ;) HouseBlastertalk13:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations on the result of your RfA, which looks like it was a pretty stressful one. It does look like you've achieved a record number of supports, though, which is a notable achievement. These things were a lot less stress in my day - but back then, Trump was only a clown on the TV. Anyway, I think you need a porpoise for your new abilities. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Hearty congratulations, Tamzin. You finally did it. I was really worried with your RFA seeing all the oppose votes. Enjoy your adminship. Regards, ItcouldbepossibleTalk14:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations. Going through chats is never fun, I know from personal experience. May your tenure as an admin be free of angst and drama. Although, if you crave that, you could consider RfB eventually . -- Avi (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Avi that's just pure evil and you know it [FBDB]. Besides, anyone with any chance of passing an RfB did their RfA like fifteen gazillion years ago, anyway. hot take: instead of the current system bureaucrats should instead be a committee like ARBCOM but separate, and they should return to being a "normal" admin after their term is over casualdejekyll15:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations, Tamzin. And sorry our exchange came back from the dead to make it such an absurdly close thing. I'm sure you'll do a great job. – Joe (talk) 15:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
It’s a shame that it took all that to get to this point, but this is the right outcome. Congratulations, Tamzin! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 15:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Crikey, I thought I'd seen baptismsbyfire, but this was something else altogether. Still, you have the mop now - may you use it wisely. I was impressed with your communication throughout the RfA, which in this case made a serious difference. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
To say "congratulations" feels wrong — well done for passing, but that RfA has so little to congratulate. I'm so, so sorry we the community are in this state. — TNT (talk • she/her) 16:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations, I think that the socks won’t congratulate you though, so I will on their behalf, otherwise, you might get fed up of them. But in all seriousness, you have a couple of achievements, the 1050th admin, the most voted RfA and probably the most controversial RfA for a while. Zippybonzo | talk17:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
For your courage and bravery in mounted RfA combat, I award you this unusually powerful 16X SUPER STAR WOMBO COMBO MOP. May it serve you well in the timeless quest to rid the Wiki of scum and villainy! CaptainEekEdits Ho Cap'n!⚓18:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations on breaking two records within your RfA! You faced the bureaucrats gracefully. May you use the mop wisely and in a record-breaking manner! — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — 18:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations! Sorry that the community has once again proven that they do not want new admins. Most of it is nothing to do with you. You made the mistake of needing the tools at a time when RfA has almost successfully killed off all candidates. You are an excellent editor, don't take the discussion at RfA too seriously, thanks for persevering when other candidates in similar positions have chosen to withdraw, and good luck as an admin! — Bilorv (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations! I am late to the party but I wanted to wish you all the best for the future. I also "believe strongly in telling the truth", and I have nothing but respect and admiration for how you stayed honest under intense scrutiny. That reassures me that you will have a principled approach to adminship and that you will do more than just fine. Good luck! — The Most ComfortableChair07:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Congratulations, Tamzin! I felt guilty for not speaking up at the RfA in support of you, but I knew you would make it anyway. Your tenacity at SPI convinced me long before that you were going places around here. - Hunan201p (talk) 12:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
I know I said this over on the Discord, but just wanted to reiterate it here: massive congratulations on passing the RfA. I wasn't around at the time, but you would have had my full support - I wasn't aware you'd received the highest amount of support !votes ever, crikey - what an achievement! I also highly admire how you answered all the questions put to you with civility and decorum. You'll be a great admin for sure; I have full confidence in that. Patient Zerotalk04:55, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Look Tamzin
Tamzin You do know you owe me a pack of fine Marlboro cigarettes for being the first to congratulate you on your successful RFA in advance right? Celestina007 (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
CONGRATULATIONS!!
You didn't just win–You set records
As others have pointed out above, yours was the most voted RfA. And now the real work begins. Atsme💬📧17:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Well that was fucking weird
Me on day 8 (of 9) of 7. Not quite the tan Paine Ellsworth was hoping for, I think.
I have been writing out some significantly longer thoughts as the RfA progressed, and will post them once I've cleared my head a bit more and thoroughly read every oppose. Briefly, though:
I want to thank my supporters for the most-supported RfA in English Wikipedia history, the 11th time ever outside of ArbCom elections that 300+ EnWikipedians have gotten together and agreed on something. I am so immensely grateful for the time and emotional energy you all put into supporting me.
I take this outcome as, at once, a vindication that expressing the opinion I expressed is not incompatible with adminship, and, per 28bytes, a rejection of any suggestion that such an opinion should ever become policy—not that I've ever suggested it should.
Y'all better prepare yourselves for a whole bunch of... me being a pretty fucking boring admin. I am entirely happy to go back to doing what I had been doing for 11 months before this RfA: Not expressing divisive political opinions on-wiki. For those of you with a love for drama, here are some divisive non-political opinions to argue about:
I'm a cat lover as well, but they're not pets, they're essentially broody, alcoholic roommates. They wander around, sometimes they decide they need to get right in your face to tell you how much they love you... man... and then you do the wrong thing and they fly off the handle. They also leave piles of puke around. Reminds me of my living in my first apartment.
Also, isn't the whole IPA thing done yet? When can we go back to real beers without needlessly excessive hopping. I'd rather drink a nice stout or porter. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
That you left RC Cola out of the equation tells me you're woefully inexperienced with flyover country. The beachy smile and the tattoo tell me we made the right choice. I'm so tickled we have you on the team. Now go forth and block someone. Plenty of work to do. Get the sand out of your keyboard and get to work. BusterD (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Tamzin. you would totally be justified to kick these two off your talk page after such foul language, BusterD excluded. Ritchie is a known problem, though. You didn't get the asparagus did you? (inside joke) --ARoseWolf20:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Can't get Moxie in Chicagoland (that I can find). I couldn't find it in NYC, but could at a little market in Putnam County. A long way to drive for something that's not even in a glass bottle anymore. BusterD (talk) 20:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
You just don't want it hard enough. I had some pals from England over to my neck of the woods for my wedding, and they were very impressed with Moxie. They said it was the first soda they had that didn't just taste like sugar. They expressed mild disappointment that there's no way to get it in the land of Queens and Kelpies. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Just my luck right now... Wanted to do one easy admin thing. AIV? One case there is complicated. U1/G7? Involved w/r/t the only entry. G6? Empty. G5? Only tagging there was out of order. That last one at least gave me occasion to use {{admin note}}, so, that's something. And of course I've pressed the "edit source" button on Main Page, stared at that for a long moment, and then freaked out and closed the tab.I've never had Moxie. Been at one restaurant in Salem, Massachusetts, that served it, but they also served egg creams, and I don't think I've ever in my life said no to an egg cream. Still, in terms of "soda that d[oes]n't just taste like sugar", I can't imagine it could surpass a nice authentic craft root beer. I root-beer-evangelized TheresNoTime a bit when she was here. Just, none of that Barq's stuff. Ewww.Okay, actually off to my head-clearing. Not all fun and dolphins. Gotta go pick up my new glasses from the shop. Pink frames! To finally match my signature. :D-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)21:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
the fact that you don't like barq's is undoubtedly the opinion I take the most issue with. Although I'm a hardcore Dr Pepper stan myself, complete with the (correct) omission of the fullstop. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 22:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
@BusterD:Now go forth and block someone.Done. A sock of a[n already-blocked] supporter, no less. Hopefully off to a better start than my infamously bad first block on Wikidata (a completely unneeded 10-minute block of d:User:Dexbot... Which has since gone on to delete redirects to my userpage twice. Coincidence, I ask‽). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)22:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I got you beat. I actually had to immediately unblock my first block because I had incorrectly read edit summary times between warning and blocking. I felt like such a noob (with sixteen years of service). BusterD (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I'd say that seems like wikialwyering, but you can block me now, so nevermind. Looks like the only record I was able to hold on to is most opposes in a successful RFA. By the skin of my teeth. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the club of those who survived a harrowing RfA! You'll emerge stronger than if you had unanimous approval but it's not a club that many editors want to join, no, membership is thrust upon you. You might be surprised if you looked back through past RfAs over the years at how close the votes were for some admins who are now respected and appreciated. My only advice to you is
a) never be afraid of asking for a second opinion from an admin who works in the area you have wandered into...unless it's a vandal running amok, it's better to not act too quickly and come to the right solution,
b) remember the kernel of the Opposes, the questions some folks had about your ability to be a good administrator but forget who said what. Occasionally, when I've gone back to my RfA and saw editors and admins who had no confidence in me and I've been surprised because they are people with whom I now have a good working relationship. I'm sure some of the words stung but it's best to move forward and be focused on learning how to use the tools. Let your future work show how some misgivings were exaggerated.
I thought that Scott Pilgrim vs. the World was very good overall. Also congratulations and best of luck. GABgab03:07, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your patience, Tamzin. You conducted yourself with aplomb through a stressful process, and I look forward to you continuing to be a net positive in our community. Happy editing! bibliomaniac1503:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
I mean, yes, obviously, dogs are better pets. And I am clearly far too cool to have a clue about the three pop-culture judgements. But... the pepsi error - no, this was concealed information by a rouge admin. We've Been Tricked, We've Been Backstabbed and We've Been Quite Possibly, BamboozledNosebagbear (talk) 08:26, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
I just want to know if you like tea. I can't remember the last time I had a coke or pepsi product. --ARoseWolf12:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Hey. I know I'm a bit late, but I just wanted to say, congrats. I've seen you a lot around the wiki, and certainly would have voted for you if I could. Have a great day. :) 98.179.127.59 (talk) 18:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Belated congrats from me as well. Your talk page is much more entertaining than that RfA was! Have enjoyed reading your various sub-pages as well. The project - and the community - are the better for your presence. Funcrunch (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't usually think highly of people's pet RfA questions, but after seeing Drinking orange juice right after brushing your teeth is fine, I think I'll have to do the same. I feel like that's the sort of utterly disqualifying opinion people should know up front. Congrats on making it through with a sense of humor intact. :) — Rhododendritestalk \\ 00:53, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Floquenbeam: Ha, you did this like a second before I was going to. Funny enough, this isn't even fucking up with admin tools. It's a mistake I could have made in the past as a pagemover, and managed to avoid last time I moved my userpage... I knew there was another box I needed to uncheck. (Cleaning this up, OTOH, is an admin-needed task, so way to go, denying me that. :P ) But yes, thank you to you and leeky for pointing this out. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)23:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Even though you may still be mad at me (feel free to remove), I just wanted to congratulate you on receiving the mop even though I couldn't make up my mind. If I could, I would go back to support. I am sure you will do a great job as an administrator as you showed no signs of poor judgment in the last 10 months anywhere. You did not deserve any of the abuse you received from the more vicious opposers. Again, congratulations. Scorpions13256 (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
@Scorpions13256: I'm not mad at you, and have never been mad at you. Thank you for this. A word on indecision, though: My whole point in all this has been that it's important to really believe in what you believe in. Sometimes that means settling on a position that you wish you didn't have to settle on—like giving a deeply unpopular answer to a question because you believe strongly in that answer and believe strongly in telling the truth. Or like staying on one side, be that support or oppose, even if doing so hurts. I hope that makes sense, and hope it isn't an unwelcome thought. Either way, I hope you know I appreciate your work here, and again, I haven't been mad at you at any point throughout this. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)05:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
I know I'm a bit late but congrats on becoming an admin. While I Did change my vote from full support to neutral leaning support, I felt that as long as you didn't let your political stance influence your decisions that you would make a great admin, and you probably will do exactly that. So again congrats. Hey, now that you're an admin you don't need someone else to block the socks you find and you can do the blocking yourself And now I can bother you whenever I need someone to take a look at an SPI for me.[Joke] ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654518:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Tamzin, I have revision deleted that threat. Congratulations! You conducted yourself very well under pressure. I am sure that you will be a very good administrator. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Oh, that person again. All really one-note. I guess I should at least be grateful they got my pronouns right. Thanks for reverting. I'll go have a chat with T&S. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)00:28, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
The rant by that troll was really bizarre, and your block is 100% correct. I think that goes without saying. Anyway, despite my opposition for a very narrow reason, I would like to put that behind us and have a cooperative relationship going forward. I hope that you feel the same way. Cullen328 (talk) 01:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Yep. When they accuse you of being exactly the opposite in real life of who you really are, you are definitely doing right. --Deepfriedokra(talk)01:47, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Absolutely. I've been in a similar situation: I narrowly opposed theleekycauldron's RfA and then reached out to them. They have been incredibly kind to me, and indeed have become someone I'd consider a good friend. I hope to follow the example they've set, with you and anyone else. You're one of the admins I most respect, and I look forward to working alongside you. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)03:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
I really admire the lack of editing you've done on the page of your father - I apologize if I speak of him in a way I have no right to. I have considered creating a page for my father, but I'm the only one who really knows him, of course leading to WP:OR, WP:COI, and WP:N difficulties. Reminds me of all the people on WP:WWA. Lucksash (talk) 03:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Why no animated gifs?
Congratulations on adminship, little user. (Bishzilla was once an admin.) But why no animated gifs? Bishzilla has access to some very fine animated gifs such as this and this, for posting on pages of favoured little users. [Pointedly:] Usually evoke pleasure and admiration. bishzillaROARR!!pocket11:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC).
I don't know this user's exact reason, but generally people who ask for non-autoplay media are doing so because some types of media can trigger photosensitivity or sensory issues (i.e. migraines, seizures, overstimulation, etc.); even if, say, a particular gif or autoplayed media isn't a problem for a particular person, if it autoplays they don't get a choice in the matter. People tend to ask that non-autoplay media not be posted either because they personally experience these things or want to make things less of a mine field for people who do. - Purplewowies (talk) 16:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
O towering ex-admin: It's a mix of what Purple said and my frustration with MW's lack of a way to pause gifs. If I'm spacing out while staring at a screen, and there's an autoplaying gif on it, I'll get sucked in like a moth to a flame. Not a medical thing per se, although I'm sure it's related to my neurodivergence more generally, same reason I don't do great in loud rooms. (Hmm, I wonder if there's enough RS for an article on high-fidelity earplugs that wouldn't just be an ad. Super-cool stuff.)Elsewhere on the 'pedia, just gotta deal with it, but I like my usertalk to be a calming space for me any anyone else who reacts negatively to autoplaying media, whether that's the subset of such media that can cause super-scary consequences, or the broader issue of them just being unpleasant.I do like your 'zilla gifs, though. :D-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)21:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
[Pleased, Bishzilla towers some more, her head reaching right into the clouds and dispersing them with her radioactive breath.] Excuse is acceptable, O little new admin. Welcome relax occasionally in calming space of Bishzilla's pocket! bishzillaROARR!!pocket21:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC).
I have another reason. Some devices run super-slow with normal images, if they are large enough. Nevermind animations! Even with a teensy-tiny GIF, I suffer 2 frames-per-second. ); And with enough, how the fuck am I going to read the rest of a page!? My device crashes if only 3 medium-large ones are shown. I've only tested those though. Not the small ones. -- L10nM4st3r(talk)15:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Coffee?
The Admin-Coffee
Hi, congratulations for becoming an admin; I know how important it becomes for some people to have admin like tools on any wiki, as I happen to be an eliminator at a different wiki. Coffee has got different variants, and I plan to launch a new one. It is called, "The Admin-Coffee", and you are gifted with this. Looking forward working with you on anti-spam... Love! ─ The Aafī(talk)17:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
@TheAafi: Thank you for this. :) I believe I toasted to your Noon Chai offer with some sickeningly sweet "chai" from Dunkin'. I'll toast to your coffee with some more pleasantly over-sweet mango Pepsi (which I only recently even learned is a thing). I look forward to working with you as well. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)21:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
RfA debrief and acknowledgments
Hello, friends. I intentionally didn't say much in the immediate aftermath of my RfA because I wanted a bit of time to clear my head (and quietly reacquaint myself with the tools in the meantime). I've had a lot to think about, and a lot to say, and I've written it down at User:Tamzin/340/112/16: An RfA debrief.
The most exciting thing about publishing this is that I can stop thinking about this RfA and continue full steam ahead deleting (and keeping) redirects, blocking (and not blocking) suspected sockpuppets, and generally using my expanded toolset to make the community better.
For those who do have any lingering questions or concerns about anything that came up at the RfA, do please feel free to reach out, on this talkpage or by email.
A bit belatedly, I would like to thank:
My mother, for schlepping 16 hours to come keep me company as things got bad
My father (Z''L), for teaching me to stand up for what I believe in
My found family—BiomatrixBackup and her fiancée, who is too cool for Wikipedia—for letting me vent for hours
Drmies and BDD, for being the two best nominators a !gal could ask for
TheresNoTime, for pushing me to run, and so many other things
Firefly, my would-be flightmate if not for some slowness on my part, a faithful ally before, during, and after this RfA
Tavix, Ritchie333, Trialpears, RoySmith, Vanamonde93, and one admin I spoke to only by email, for nomination offers I was forced to decline due only to a surplus of options. Maybe next time, y'all! (Joke. Please no.)
MastCell, also for getting it, and for in doing so giving me the only good laugh I had all week
Every oppose and neutral that gave me constructive material to work with. There were many, and I will keep them in mind.
The entire English Wikipedia bureaucrat team, for their careful reading of consensus. At first I was grumpy when it went to a 'crat chat, but now I can say that 9 bureaucrats agreed that there was consensus. How many admins can say that?
In particular, Primefac, for consistently making sense of the chaos during the RfA
Every editor who makes this encyclopedia great
And of course, the cetaceans who swim in the waters off Cape May
Glad to hear that you took a little time to process everything. The comment related to your political status (or something) made me feel that if you could show that you won't let politics influence your decisions then you would be a good admin. Also glad to see that you've found the cetaceans you've needed [Humor]. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654517:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
~TNT (talk) 19:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Fixed. Thanks! -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 08:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Cabayi (talk) 13:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
. -- Avi (talk) 14:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
_of_7.jpg)
Ritchie is a known problem, though. You didn't get the asparagus did you? (inside joke) --ARoseWolf 20:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Done. A sock of a[n already-blocked] supporter, no less. Hopefully off to a better start than my infamously bad first block on Wikidata (a completely unneeded 10-minute block of d:User:Dexbot... Which has since gone on to delete redirects to my userpage twice. Coincidence, I ask‽). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 22:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
