Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:39, 16 July 2008

Gwynand

Voice your opinion (talk page) (17/1/1); Scheduled to end 18:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Gwynand (talk · contribs) - When I first came across Gwynand a few months back, I was so thoroughly impressed with his logic-based approach to Misplaced Pages, that I offered to nominate him for adminship. He had 850 edits at the time. Since that time, I've only been more and more impressed by his "gradual" approach to editing. He is extremely careful in what he posts on-wiki. He is extraordinarily communicative, well-reasoned, always thinking and asking before acting. He approaches every situation with a cool and level demeanor, and an open mind. In short, Gwynand is an ideal administrator, and has been one for a long time. He merely needs the extra buttons to go along with the title. You've likely seen him frequent my talkpage to get advice or to use me as a "sounding board"; his edit count there is abnormally high in that regard, as evidence that he is a collaborator looking to learn how this place works "on the job". He is a frequenter of ANI and AN, RFA and elsewhere. Based on the soundness and fairness of his posts, several other editors often assumed that he was already an admin (and has been offered nominations numerous times only to turn it down to gain more experience). I firmly believe Gwynand would have set a precedent and passed an RFA with 850 edits, they were that solid, but he is wiser than I and turned me down. He has only improved since then, and I am privileged to have the chance to nominate him. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that this user will be one of our best administrators for Misplaced Pages, and for the long term. Keeper ǀ 76 18:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: Primarily, I plan to make a natural transition to adminship if I am granted the tools. Meaning, I’m not going to immediately go anywhere new and start using them, but rather use them where I feel comfortable and confident that such actions are clear and will help the community. The obvious benefits of this are the ability to protect pages when such action is necessary, and also just generally assisting other editors who might have an issue where administrative action is required. If I need to block, I will, but considering how I usually work here on Misplaced Pages, it will come after a good amount of discussion with others and making sure it is what’s best all around. I plan to ask first, block later. I won’t be over at AIV or WP:UAA anytime soon, but will slowly gravitate there as I become more comfortable taking administrative actions in those areas.

I feel quite comfortable specifically at AFD (as opposed to XfDs in general), it is something I peruse quite often and weigh in on occasion. I believe I am able and willing to read deeply into tougher discussions to determine consensus. Furthermore, I’ll always be willing and open to discuss my view of the consensus and never plan to assume I must’ve been right, but rather explain my thoughts/decisions whenever questioned.

Finally, I think the ability to respond with admin actions to issues at AN and ANI will be of use to me and the community. There have been issues in the past where these things would’ve helped me help others: The ability to view deleted contribs, the ability to protect a page amidst an edit war, the ability to block a problematic editor who is making a clear problem which requires preventative action. The fact is, I plan and assume to continue to participate at both these noticeboards in mostly the same capacity I did without the tools: to try to be neutral and helpful whenever possible, trying to solve problems through discussion. If I occasionally need to use the tools when needed to help out, I will, but use of such tools I plan to be secondary to discussion.

2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: Since this area seems usually reserved for discussion of mainspace contribs, I’ll stick mostly there, although I’m probably generally most proud of dealing with dispute resolution at places like WP:ANI and helping solve issues at WT:RFA.

I think I’ve been quite helpful at American Idol Season 7 and some of its derivatives, like David Archuleta and Jason Castro. Articles such as these require intense scrutiny of sources added to ensure there is no incorrect “interpretations” going on, also for BLP issues. There is such a wealth of info on the internet regarding such new and high traffic topics that community discussion and heavy review of what is being added to the articles is necessary, I believe I have helped in both these areas.

Somehow I got caught up over at 1995 Japanese Grand Prix, a current GA (hopefully soon to be FA), where I believe I best helped out improving style and readability to readers of Misplaced Pages. Although many edited before me to help build that article up, I believe my edits both to the article itself and the talk helped deal with small but important issues that were keeping the article from be considered really great, eventually featured. I was generally pleased with the civil and solid collaborations there between editors to do what we could to improve the article.

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: I’m not sure how people here rate different levels of conflict, so I’ll try not to quantify it in that way. I had a disagreement at David Archuleta over a minor issue in the lead, but at the same time felt it was somewhat of a BLP issue and needed to be addressed. I sought out neutral third party commentary on the issue, where soon after the problem was resolved. I can say that I never take conflicts personally (or haven’t yet to date) and would like to say that I enjoy attempting to solve the problem itself and not beat any one editor into the ground for the sake of winning. I am often involved in conflicts because of my participation on the noticeboards, but it is as an uninvolved third party who is simply trying to help resolve an issue. If I become an admin, I realize that it might be more likely to be on one side of a dispute. If I do find myself in those situations, I intend to be thoughtful and make the reasoning behind any of my actions totally transparent to anyone who asks. Most importantly, If I’m proven to be wrong, or if there is consensus against any actions I took, I plan to be the first to overturn them, and always be conscious of not causing any disruption myself.

Optional question from xenocidic

4. As an administrator, you will most likely have to deal with some fairly troublesome users. You'll come across some extremely vulgar language and often come under attack for your actions. And you will sometimes be tasked with considering unblock requests from the users you block. Please review the very NSFW scenario outlined at User:Xenocidic/RFAQ and describe how you would respond.

A: Something I’ve always considered about blocks, is that the concept of WP:OWN should be applied to such actions. In the scenario you’ve provided, I see an editor that has continued vandalizing despite multiple warnings and consequently the hypothetical Gwynand-admin decides to block him. Looks like a sound choice. The vandal then makes a somewhat silly comment in response to the block, but quickly reverts. Finally, just a few minutes later, he makes a reasonable and civil request to become unblocked. In this magnified scenario I am discussing, I am unconvinced with the unblock request. While the minor “attack” he just made on me didn’t bother me, I should be considerate of future attacks he might make on others just a few minutes later if he is unblocked. So Gwynand’s first act as admin? Default to another admin/admins, letting them know that I question such immediate reform from someone who had been vandalizing and making attacks, although I would be comfortable with a quick second chance if another admin felt the request was OK. Just because I blocked, doesn’t mean I OWN the decision on an unblock. The block wasn’t made for personal reasons and considering the questionable nature of the unblock request, a few admins taking a look at it would provide the best outcome.

Optional questions from User:Filll

5. What should be done to encourage calmer environments around RfAs and similar polls? For example, would you support the Peaceful Polling Pledge?

A.

6. Answer two of the exercises at the AGF Challenge 2 and post the answers here or a link to your answers.

A.

Optional question from Keepscases

7. Are you offended that gender-specific pronouns have been used in this RfA?

A:

General comments

• See Gwynand's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Gwynand: Gwynand (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

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

Discussion

Support

1. Support - Incredibly clueful editor, one whose work I've looked at for a while and been solidly impressed at. No hesitation in supporting. Gazimoff _Read 18:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
2. Support. Of course. Amazing patience, impeccable policy knowledge, is incredibly more suited to being an admin than I am, and you folks voted me in. Definitely time to show our trust. Tan ǀ 39 18:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
3. Support. Synergy 18:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
4. Support An intelligent, reasonable editor who I expect will do the right thing. (three ecs? gee!) Tombomp (talk/contribs) 18:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
5. Support - I was waiting for this. Strong and solid. Wisdom89 _{(T / )} 18:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
6. Strong Support - (after four edits conflicts!) I have only known this user for a couple of months, but he has helped me a lot on Misplaced Pages, giving me good advise, and helping me work on article stuff. I am confident Gwynand will not abuse the tools, so this is a strong support from me. =) D.M.N. (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
7. Support. This is one of the few RfAs I've had watchlisted, and was happy to see if finally accepted. Gwynand has a strong understanding of policy and an even-handed temperament that is required to be an admin. He is a solid editor, and I have no doubts he'll make a great admin. Good luck! - auburnpilot talk 18:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
8. Support. No red flags, seems to have a clear plan for activities with the tools.--Finalnight (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
9. Strongest possible support. At around 600 edits, this user came across the same way as an administrator - a calm, civil, yet straight to the point and concise at the same time. This was at 600 edits. You just know a user is going to do great things if they come across this way that early. Now, after (even) more maturing time, he has once again exceeded all expectations and done the most amazing feat in the space of time between then and now - got better. I am honoured to support this candidate. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
10. Support good user. —αἰτίας •discussion• 19:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
11. Strong support — I was ready to support before the answer to my question, but then he knocked it out of the park. –xeno (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
12. Support From what I've seen, this is a solid candidate. SHEFFIELDSTEEL 19:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
13. Support Gwynand would be a great admin. He's calm, civil, insightful, respectful, and all those other great qualities you look for in a sysop. His participation in AN/I is impressive. His contributions to AfD are meaningful, and I have a firm belief he'll be a wonderful interpretor and closer of debates. Vickser (talk) 19:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
14. Support - Insert not an administrator quip here. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 19:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
15. Support, every time I have seen this user's signature tacked somewhere, it's surely a sign of clueful behavior. Shereth 19:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
16. Support — CycloneNimrod 19:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
17. Support - Gwynand (talk · contribs) is a good, collaborative editor. His article space edits are matched by a proportionate amount of discussion on the article's talk page, and the significant number of user talk-space edits is indicative of further collaboration. However, this is not all: this user's contributions in the Misplaced Pages namespace, particularly in some admin-related areas, are prolific. The overall edit count may seem low for a user who has been editing since January 2007, but looking at the contributions themselves beyond the raw count, this seems to be because the edits are lengthy, well thought through, and make good reference to policy. This editor is acting like an administrator in the way that he interacts with users, offering advice, and providing guidance. I therefore see ample evidence of sufficient experience in policy areas, positive interactions with other users, and consequently no reason that Gwynand should not be given the tools. In summary: large net benefit. Fritzpoll (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I am hard pressed to find any substantial article contributions; lack of interest in content writing is a bad sign. The more troubling thing I found was that Gwynand does not seem to be interested in editing, but rather the trappings of editing, mainly in socializing and commenting on the inequities of others on friends' talkpages. Indeed, user talk edits account for a vast majority of the candidate's contributions. Examining this lack of interest in articles and excessive commenting on others together with Q1 ("I think the ability to respond with admin actions to issues at AN and ANI will be of use to me and the community"), I am left with the impression that this is just another candidate who is attracted by the notion of telling others what to do, "running" the site and chatting away. This is a dangerous game and has a negative impact on Misplaced Pages, which is an encyclopedia first rather than a place to mingle and banter about the drama of the day. east.718 at 19:07, July 16, 2008

Weak oppose per Naerii's neutral vote. You seem good at AfD, i've seen you there before; however, I really do see being a kind natured, slow-to-anger person as a big factor in my vote. The thread that Naerii posted worries me in that sense. Good luck, i'm sure this will pass anyway since you have a lot of support behind your belt, a lot of people like you. Oh you know what, I just read your reply to Naerii. To be honest, that sounds like a sincere regret. I'll indent my vote and support. — CycloneNimrod 19:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I feel a bit weird doing this, as a few months ago I actively encouraged you to run. So I'm sorry that I can't support, but - lately I've noticed various comments from you towards other people, especially in the area of rfa, that I think can be rude and/or condescending and/or bitey. For example a few days ago I saw this thread, which IMO comes across as pretty condescending and pretty harsh, when there is no need to be. I also find myself agreeing with some of east's comments above - it's pretty astonishing that you have the same amount of edits to user talk as you do to the mainspace. I'm not going to oppose as you do make interesting, helpful comments. I just don't really feel like you're ready or have a particularly good feel of what (I think) an admin is meant to be. Naerii 19:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

   I'm also concerned that you're going to get a pile-on of support due to your levels of activity in and around RfA that does not actually reflect the quality of your contributions. The fact that there are people up there supporting you who are well known for finding any little trivial thing to oppose for is, I think, evidence of this, as any other user coming here with this ratio of user talk to mainspace edits would be shot down in a hurry. Naerii 19:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

   My interactions with BigVinu could have been better, and I honestly was upset with myself for making improper assumptions. Later when I commented on his RfA, I saw his edit count, and realized all along that I had mistaken him for another long-time editor. The nature of comments were based on that mistake, and in hindsight I wasn't particularly helpful there.

   I have the same concerns about supports and just hope that everyone is actually looking at me as an editor. Thanks Naerii. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs

   Thanks for clarifying, I guess we all make mistakes :) That was just something that really stuck in my mind at the time, especially as it seemed a little out of character. I am going to remain in this section for the time being, however - I hope you understand. Naerii 19:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)