Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Martinultima: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:40, 29 April 2007 editKelly Martin (talk | contribs)17,726 edits →Discussion: oppose← Previous edit Latest revision as of 08:00, 28 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(17 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #fff5f5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ] that '''did not succeed'''. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>]

===]=== ===]===
'''''' ''''''
'''(3/11/3); Scheduled to end 01:32, ] ] (UTC)''' '''(2/18/3); Ended 03:45, ] ] (UTC)'''


{{User|Martinultima}} - I've been with Misplaced Pages for several years now (I think since sometime late in 2004 or early 2005). I've created several articles, from ] to ]. I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now but I do occasionally make minor edits, particularly to try and reverse vandalism, and I also have experience as a MediaWiki admin for my own site. I'm mostly running so I can better revert vandalism, and maybe handle other small projects here and there... <span style="font-family: 'Gill Sans MT', inherit; font-size: 1.1em;">] ''']''' <small><nowiki>]</code> - ] - ] - <nowiki>]</nowiki></small></span> 01:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC) {{User|Martinultima}} - I've been with Misplaced Pages for several years now (I think since sometime late in 2004 or early 2005). I've created several articles, from ] to ]. I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now but I do occasionally make minor edits, particularly to try and reverse vandalism, and I also have experience as a MediaWiki admin for my own site. I'm mostly running so I can better revert vandalism, and maybe handle other small projects here and there... <span style="font-family: 'Gill Sans MT', inherit; font-size: 1.1em;">] ''']''' <small><nowiki>]</code> - ] - ] - <nowiki>]</nowiki></small></span> 01:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 7: Line 10:
:''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:'' Hmm, not going to argue :-) :''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:'' Hmm, not going to argue :-)


<font style="color: #c00000;">I'm withdrawing my request.</font> I can understand those of you who agree we need more active admins, but honestly, if your sole reason for being against is something as silly as a signature, quite honestly I don't ''want'' to be in the same user community as you. (And they wonder ''why'' free projects like Linux or Misplaced Pages never catch on?)
<!--The candidate may make an optional statement here-->

Thank you for your time and consideration, and bye-bye. ], ''without'' the fucking image sig! 19:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and incidentally, my bad, it was ] that I created &ndash; I created that one a while back (at the time there wasn't a DistroWatch article anywhere), they'd since moved it and done a redirect. ], ''without'' the fucking image sig! 19:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


====Questions for the candidate==== ====Questions for the candidate====
Line 20: Line 27:
::'''A:''' Yeah, I'll admit. I've had ''issues''. Mostly over stupid stuff I'd done without thinking, on impulse, that sort of thing. I've gotten better since I stopped being quite as obsessive a contributor ;-) ::'''A:''' Yeah, I'll admit. I've had ''issues''. Mostly over stupid stuff I'd done without thinking, on impulse, that sort of thing. I've gotten better since I stopped being quite as obsessive a contributor ;-)


:'''4.''' Question from '''<font color="#5B92E5" face="georgia">]</font>''': What does ] mean to you? And, in which cases will you use ]? :'''4.''' Question from ''']''': What does ] mean to you? And, in which cases will you use ]?


:'''5.''' Question from '''<font color="#5B92E5" face="georgia">]</font>''': What ] have you been involved with? :'''5.''' Question from ''']''': What ] have you been involved with?


:'''6.''' "Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced ... Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked" (from ]). How rigorously would you enforce this?--]<sup>g</sup> 02:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC) :'''6.''' "Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced ... Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked" (from ]). How rigorously would you enforce this?--]<sup>g</sup> 02:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 46: Line 53:


'''Support''' '''Support'''
#'''Support''' Based on how long you've been here, I think otherwise. 2004 or 2005 is plenty of experiance to me.--] '''''' 03:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Support''' I'm not asking myself if you need the tools, only if I think you will abuse them. I don't think you will, so here's a support. ] 11:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Support''' I'm not asking myself if you need the tools, only if I think you will abuse them. I don't think you will, so here's a support. ] 11:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Moral Support''' - I think you're a good editor, but sadly your RfA is unlikely to pass this time round, as you jumped in too early. I suggest you withdraw, wait 6 months and chalk up 2500-3000 edits, then I'll nominate you myself. You could also consider applying for ], or an ]. <font face="Verdana">]] <small><sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup></small></font> 11:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Moral Support''' - I think you're a good editor, but sadly your RfA is unlikely to pass this time round, as you jumped in too early. I suggest you withdraw, wait 6 months and chalk up 2500-3000 edits, then I'll nominate you myself. You could also consider applying for ], or an ]. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">]] <small>]</small></span> 11:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


'''Oppose''' '''Oppose'''
#'''Oppose'''. You need to have more experience editing articles, interacting with other users, and in project areas. Most candidates for adminship have several thousand edits. While sheer numbers aren't important, experience is, and so is enough article editing and interaction to give a sense of who you are as an editor and what kind of admin you'd make. Come back after a few months of regular editing. Best, --] 01:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Oppose'''. You need to have more experience editing articles, interacting with other users, and in project areas. Most candidates for adminship have several thousand edits. While sheer numbers aren't important, experience is, and so is enough article editing and interaction to give a sense of who you are as an editor and what kind of admin you'd make. Come back after a few months of regular editing. Best, --] 01:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#Image in signature. ] 02:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #Image in signature. ] 02:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#Have to oppose due to your signature. --]<small><sup>]• ]</sup></small> 02:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #Have to oppose due to your signature. --]<small><sup>]• ]</sup></small> 02:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' of the articles you mention in your answer to Q2, ] if the only one you've edited in the last six months (you edited that in the beginning of February) and you have never edited ]. ] is very clear that "Images of any kind shall not be used in signatures.". You have fewer than 500 edits in total and have only made three edits in the last two months (apart from two to this RfA). Your answer to Q1 is poor, especially as the Undo feature gives you almost the same abilities as the Admin's revert tool. Your talk page shows you don't have a good understanding of image uploading policy, and this from the header on that page is really unacceptable: "If I decide to give myself a barnstar or two here and there, I think I deserve the right to do so... and make a few exaggerated claims along the way." Altogether this adds up to an obvious oppose, sorry. ] 02:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Oppose''' of the articles you mention in your answer to Q2, ] if the only one you've edited in the last six months (you edited that in the beginning of February) and you have never edited ]. ] is very clear that "Images of any kind shall not be used in signatures.". You have fewer than 500 edits in total and have only made three edits in the last two months (apart from two to this RfA). Your answer to Q1 is poor, especially as the Undo feature gives you almost the same abilities as the Admin's revert tool. Your talk page shows you don't have a good understanding of image uploading policy, and this from the header on that page is really unacceptable: "If I decide to give myself a barnstar or two here and there, I think I deserve the right to do so... and make a few exaggerated claims along the way." Altogether this adds up to an obvious oppose, sorry. ] 02:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 61: Line 67:
#'''Oppose''' I'm not happy with the level of commitment to the project nor the answers to the questions. No real justification as to why the user needs admin access. User is able to contribute significantly to fighting vandalism without this. Edit summary usage for major edits is too low also. It might be wise to withdraw this RfA. ] 10:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Oppose''' I'm not happy with the level of commitment to the project nor the answers to the questions. No real justification as to why the user needs admin access. User is able to contribute significantly to fighting vandalism without this. Edit summary usage for major edits is too low also. It might be wise to withdraw this RfA. ] 10:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' I don't feel that this person needs the sysop tools right now. ''']''' '''(]'''|''']''') <sup>''']'''</sup> 11:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Oppose''' I don't feel that this person needs the sysop tools right now. ''']''' '''(]'''|''']''') <sup>''']'''</sup> 11:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' usually I don't consider edit counts that much in RFA, but 500 edits are just ''too'' few for an admin candidate over two or three years. The image in the signature indicates a lack of familiarity with the policies. Additionally, your answers do not convince me of your need for the tools. —] <sup>]</sup> 11:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Oppose''' usually I don't consider edit counts that much in RFA, but 500 edits are just ''too'' few for an admin candidate over two or three years. The image in the signature indicates a lack of familiarity with the policies. Additionally, your answers do not convince me of your need for the tools. —] <sup>]</sup> 11:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#I cannot in good conscience support a candidate whose user page says "As of February 2007, I’m no longer regularly contributing to Misplaced Pages". ] (]) 14:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #I cannot in good conscience support a candidate whose user page says "As of February 2007, I’m no longer regularly contributing to Misplaced Pages". ] (]) 14:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''', sorry but 400 odd edits in two and a half years shows distinct inactivity and per your answer to question 1 - there are many easy ways to revert edits made by vandals, say ] for example, I don't think you have a need for the tools. ] 16:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''': Plenty of time here but a lack of edits. While the inactivity is a problem I also am not quite sure why you would need the tools. Especially since you are "not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now". Also your edit summary usage is quite low for major edits and suffering a little in minor edits. <font style="arial: ridge 2px #FF0000;">'''&nbsp;]&nbsp;'''</font><sup><small>]</sup></u></small> | <sub>]</sub> 18:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' You need more editing experience before I support. ] ] 18:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''', not enough recent edits. And get that stinking picture out of your signature. --''']''' <small>(])</small> 19:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' I can't support the picture and more edits are needed. ] 19:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''STRONG Oppose''', per ]. Violating ] is worthy of a strong oppose in my opinion. ]] 19:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)



'''Neutral''' '''Neutral'''
#'''Neutral''' Due to Question 3 and pending answers to my questions. '''<font color="#5B92E5" face="georgia">]</font>''' 01:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Neutral''' Due to Question 3 and pending answers to my questions. ''']''' 01:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Neutral''' - as per "I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now ". We need very active admins because we already have a bunch of people who became Admins and then just Disappeared..Sorry..--<span style="color:blue;font-weight:bold;font-size:medium;font-family: Monotype Corsiva;">]</span> 02:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Neutral''' - as per "I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now ". We need very active admins because we already have a bunch of people who became Admins and then just Disappeared..Sorry..--<span style="color:blue;font-weight:bold;font-size:medium;font-family: Monotype Corsiva;">]</span> 02:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#'''Neutral''' There's no reason you can't revert vandalism without sysop access (especially if you use Twinkle or Vandalproof, but I do it "by hand"). Other than that, you haven't provided a satisfactory reason for needing the tools. ] 03:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #'''Neutral''' There's no reason you can't revert vandalism without sysop access (especially if you use Twinkle or Vandalproof, but I do it "by hand"). Other than that, you haven't provided a satisfactory reason for needing the tools. ] 03:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Line 72: Line 85:
#:I did not know that a canadate had to state why he/she wanted the tools on an RfA.--] '''''' 03:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #:I did not know that a canadate had to state why he/she wanted the tools on an RfA.--] '''''' 03:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
#:I'll ask the canadate.--] '''''' 03:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC) #:I'll ask the canadate.--] '''''' 03:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
:''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either ] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>

Latest revision as of 08:00, 28 March 2022

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Martinultima

Voice your opinion (2/18/3); Ended 03:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Martinultima (talk · contribs) - I've been with Misplaced Pages for several years now (I think since sometime late in 2004 or early 2005). I've created several articles, from little known children's authors to well-known computer applications. I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now but I do occasionally make minor edits, particularly to try and reverse vandalism, and I also have experience as a MediaWiki admin for my own site. I'm mostly running so I can better revert vandalism, and maybe handle other small projects here and there... Martin Ultima 01:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Hmm, not going to argue :-)

I'm withdrawing my request. I can understand those of you who agree we need more active admins, but honestly, if your sole reason for being against is something as silly as a signature, quite honestly I don't want to be in the same user community as you. (And they wonder why free projects like Linux or Misplaced Pages never catch on?)

Thank you for your time and consideration, and bye-bye. Martin Ultima, without the fucking image sig! 19:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and incidentally, my bad, it was DistroWatch.com that I created – I created that one a while back (at the time there wasn't a DistroWatch article anywhere), they'd since moved it and done a redirect. Martin Ultima, without the fucking image sig! 19:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work, if any, do you intend to take part in?
A: Mostly I'm hoping to deal with vandalism - I usually attempt to manually edit things back if they've been vandalized, but reverting's considerably easier and more effective. Plus I can help with other small tasks here and there.
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: I think QEMU, DistroWatch, shutdown, Story Time, and the Vivian Vande Velde articles are the ones I'm most proud of, as well as a few edits to the Artemis Fowl articles. They're somewhat rough, but some of them (QEMU especially!) I think were pretty important articles which no one else had yet created.
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: Yeah, I'll admit. I've had issues. Mostly over stupid stuff I'd done without thinking, on impulse, that sort of thing. I've gotten better since I stopped being quite as obsessive a contributor ;-)
4. Question from Real96: What does WP:IAR mean to you? And, in which cases will you use WP:IAR?
5. Question from Real96: What Wikiprojects have you been involved with?
6. "Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced ... Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked" (from WP:BLP). How rigorously would you enforce this?--Doc 02:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Optional Questions from U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk · contribs)

7. After reverting vandalism, how are you going to warn the users who vandalize. And, would you watch the WP:AIV for reported vandals when your are an administrator?--U.S.A. cubed 03:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Optional Question from Nick

8.You are requesting the community grant you extra tools - primarily the ability to block users, the ability to delete material and the ability to protect or unprotect pages. Could you provide some examples of when you found it frustrating or inconvenient not having these tools and how you would have used them ?

General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Martinultima before commenting.

Discussion

Support

  1. Support I'm not asking myself if you need the tools, only if I think you will abuse them. I don't think you will, so here's a support. Frise 11:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Moral Support - I think you're a good editor, but sadly your RfA is unlikely to pass this time round, as you jumped in too early. I suggest you withdraw, wait 6 months and chalk up 2500-3000 edits, then I'll nominate you myself. You could also consider applying for admin coaching, or an editor review. Walton 11:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. You need to have more experience editing articles, interacting with other users, and in project areas. Most candidates for adminship have several thousand edits. While sheer numbers aren't important, experience is, and so is enough article editing and interaction to give a sense of who you are as an editor and what kind of admin you'd make. Come back after a few months of regular editing. Best, --Shirahadasha 01:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Image in signature. Naconkantari 02:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. Have to oppose due to your signature. --Kzrulzuall 02:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oppose of the articles you mention in your answer to Q2, QEMU if the only one you've edited in the last six months (you edited that in the beginning of February) and you have never edited DistroWatch. WP:SIG is very clear that "Images of any kind shall not be used in signatures.". You have fewer than 500 edits in total and have only made three edits in the last two months (apart from two to this RfA). Your answer to Q1 is poor, especially as the Undo feature gives you almost the same abilities as the Admin's revert tool. Your talk page shows you don't have a good understanding of image uploading policy, and this from the header on that page is really unacceptable: "If I decide to give myself a barnstar or two here and there, I think I deserve the right to do so... and make a few exaggerated claims along the way." Altogether this adds up to an obvious oppose, sorry. Gwernol 02:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Just not active enough to be given tools. I agree the user has longevity at Misplaced Pages, but that doesn't necessarily mean a good, all-around editor. Jmlk17 05:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Fewer than 500 total edits - roughly 100 of which have been to the candidate's own userpage. Also, oppose per Gwernol. --Tim4christ17  06:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose No need for sysop tools. Jehochman (/contrib) 06:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  8. Oppose. Gwernol has written everything I was planning to write. Also, I do not trust Martinultima with the tools due to the comments on his talk page. ···日本穣 08:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  9. Oppose I'm not happy with the level of commitment to the project nor the answers to the questions. No real justification as to why the user needs admin access. User is able to contribute significantly to fighting vandalism without this. Edit summary usage for major edits is too low also. It might be wise to withdraw this RfA. Adambro 10:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  10. Oppose I don't feel that this person needs the sysop tools right now. Sr13 (T|C) 11:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  11. Oppose usually I don't consider edit counts that much in RFA, but 500 edits are just too few for an admin candidate over two or three years. The image in the signature indicates a lack of familiarity with the policies. Additionally, your answers do not convince me of your need for the tools. —Anas 11:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  12. I cannot in good conscience support a candidate whose user page says "As of February 2007, I’m no longer regularly contributing to Misplaced Pages". Kelly Martin (talk) 14:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  13. Oppose, sorry but 400 odd edits in two and a half years shows distinct inactivity and per your answer to question 1 - there are many easy ways to revert edits made by vandals, say Vandalproof for example, I don't think you have a need for the tools. The Rambling Man 16:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  14. Oppose: Plenty of time here but a lack of edits. While the inactivity is a problem I also am not quite sure why you would need the tools. Especially since you are "not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now". Also your edit summary usage is quite low for major edits and suffering a little in minor edits.  Orfen  | Contribs 18:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  15. Oppose You need more editing experience before I support. Captain panda 18:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  16. Oppose, not enough recent edits. And get that stinking picture out of your signature. --Phoenix (talk) 19:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  17. Oppose I can't support the picture and more edits are needed. Gutworth 19:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  18. STRONG Oppose, per Gwernol. Violating WP:SIG is worthy of a strong oppose in my opinion. Funpika 19:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


Neutral

  1. Neutral Due to Question 3 and pending answers to my questions. Real96 01:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Neutral - as per "I'm not quite as active on Misplaced Pages now ". We need very active admins because we already have a bunch of people who became Admins and then just Disappeared..Sorry..--Cometstyles 02:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. Neutral There's no reason you can't revert vandalism without sysop access (especially if you use Twinkle or Vandalproof, but I do it "by hand"). Other than that, you haven't provided a satisfactory reason for needing the tools. YechielMan 03:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
    That's true, but the canadate would need to be an administrator to block reported vandals at WP:AIV.--U.S.A. cubed 03:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
    The question is why does the candidate want the tools; he hasn't suggested that he wants to do that. Gwernol 03:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
    I did not know that a canadate had to state why he/she wanted the tools on an RfA.--U.S.A. cubed 03:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
    I'll ask the canadate.--U.S.A. cubed 03:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
The above adminship 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.
Category:
Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Martinultima: Difference between revisions Add topic