Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:04, 14 June 2007

CharlotteWebb

Voice your opinion (11/2/0); Scheduled to end 19:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

CharlotteWebb (talk · contribs) - My fellow Wikipedians, I give you, CharlotteWebb, as a candidate for administratorship.

Since May 29th, 2006, CharlotteWebb has been continually improving the encyclopedia with her great work. In that time, she has amassed about 13,000 edits, and of those 13,000; she has over 8,500 to the Mainspace; over 1,300 to Project-space, with activity at AIV, AN, AN/I, and other RfA's; nearly 900 to the Category and Template spaces; and over 80 to Images. However, it should be noted that CharlotteWebb's edits are high in quality as well as quantity, as she helps reference articles and make sure they are up to the standards. When it comes to communicating, she is very honest and direct, but at the same time, CharlotteWebb is very civil, and she is also a very calm user, not one to get upset easily or anything like that. I personally think she will make an excellent administrator, hence my nomination for her. Acalamari 17:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Alright, let's do this thing. — CharlotteWebb 18:52, 14 June 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 questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: In addition to continuing to do what I have been doing, closing AFDs, CFDs, and RFDs here and there, as well as transferring free images (of credible origin) to the Wikimedia Commons, I would like to take an active role in deleting copyright infringements, protecting heavily vandalized pages, unprotecting pages which have been protected for too long, making edits to protected templates as needed, and blocking persistent and/or blatant vandals. I would also like to help maintain deletion review, which (more than any other wiki-process) I feel could benefit from a greater level of diversity.

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

A: I do not consider myself a great or prolific writer, though I do try. I'd say the article to which I have made the most significant contribution is that of the great Jewish-American Chief Justice Jay Rabinowitz of the Alaska Supreme Court (no longer a stub ). I have created countless disambiguation pages such as , but I have not bothered to maintain a complete list. Recently I got hooked watching NBA games this season and have developed a strange fascination with basketball, creating articles like , , and maybe others I've forgotten. I've also written a few a few album and film stubs here and there , and helped keep current event articles current, such as .

However... my proudest contributions to Misplaced Pages have been the photography I have been able to locate and upload to the Wikimedia Commons to help illustrate articles. A small selection of articles containing my uploads: . While not my own (I'm not photographer) they have all been free to anyone to use under Creative Commons licenses, and have in many cases replaced previously standing "fair use" images, which by their nature should probably not have been uploaded in the first place .

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: Mmmm, conflicts. Well I do remember my slightly perturbed response to one user about his poor taste rhetoric/humor in an unfunny AFD nomination about an executed convict , though he later apologized (to me for some reason). There was also a short little edit war on Dave Grohl where a user continued to put his "fair use" image back in the infobox even after I'd found a free replacement because he felt that the photo I uploaded was a "piece of garbage" . In the end this was peacefully resolved when he himself found another free photo that he was happy with. I also had grievances with HagermanBot from time to time , and I also found myself in the middle of a WP:LAME edit war on Misplaced Pages:Be bold . I have explained my reasoning both on the talk page and the mailing list. I think I've remained pretty calm through all of these issues, though not to the point where I would let anything unacceptable pass without comment.

4. (self-question actually) Do you have any comment on "the Phaedriel thing"?

I first became aware of the situation when I got this message from Phaedriel on my talk page. I had previously been participating in a mailing list thread where User:SPUI raised concerns about "fair use" of song lyrics for wiki-fun purposes. Specifically he was referring to a parody of Hotel California which can be found on meta . I replied to SPUI's comment on May 4 saying that I had seen a similar Misplaced Pages-related parody of a classic rock song here, which I thought would also be of concern to SPUI due to his interest in roads and the way the song parody even mentions him by name. On May 8 I got the happy day message from Phaedriel and I honestly did not know what to think about it. So I looked more closely and saw that it too was part of a series of song lyrics and poetry, much of which is still protected by copyright, so I assumed that an implicit "fair use" claim was being made, and I posted a link to it in my second reply to the mailing list thread on May 9, because I felt it was a relevant example for the ongoing discussion.

The complete mailing list thread can be found at the following links (chronological order): . Only two of the postings are by me. One linking to the song parody by User:Rschen7754, the other linking to Phaedriel's collection.

I had no ulterior motive for doing posting these messages. I did not harass anyone or express any desire to have anybody blocked or anybody's userspace pages deleted, nor was I uncivil in handling this matter. I was just asking a couple of simple questions regarding examples very similar to the one originally given by SPUI. I have explained this to several people who led me to believe they were satisfied with my response, however I still do not see how or why this got blown so far out of proportion. — CharlotteWebb 19:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

5 (Optional Question) Do you believe vandalism fighting is more important, or page creation? RuneWiki 20:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Well either activity would be pointless without the other, unless nobody ever vandalized anything. If everybody kept to their own articles the project would be unmaintainable, because nobody is active 24 hours a day, and some people are not even active more than a few times a month, so their articles would turn to crap due to lack of attention, unless everybody was an constructive good faith user (which is too much to ask for). On the other hand if everybody began to only patrol existing articles for vandalism, there would be no growth within the project, or even within articles. If we protect the articles extended periods of time, we will also shut out users who are trying to improve them, and very little progress can be made at all. So it's a delicate balance, and I've always tried to do a little bit of both. If I can't think of anything to write at the moment, I might try instead to keep the vandals from wrecking your articles, even if I know very little about the topics. Then when I'm busy writing articles or doing something in real life, somebody else will always be keeping an eye on the pages I've created or taken an interest in editing. It's really a supply and demand relationship between the two pastimes. — CharlotteWebb 20:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

General comments

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

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

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

Discussion

• Comment Reagrding the opposes below. A fair while back I initiated this thread about User:Zoe (who has now regretfully left the project), who I felt was brusk to the point of incivilty in her dealings with me. The result of the discussion was pretty much overwhelming support for her, and In retrospect rightly so. At the time it was commented that she was considered "forceful" but that didn't stop her being an incredibly well respected and accomplished admin. I look back on raising the complaint with slightly red cheeks now, and my attitude has changed (or I've beome thicker skinned!). Although WP:CIVIL is vital, we shouldn't assume that shortness and brevity are the same as incivility. This is only a comment, and as I say slightly embarasing for me, but it does show that the community has accepted, indeed embraced, a brusque admin before now, and therefore I felt it right to mention it here; in light of the comments in oppose from editors I respect deeply. Pedro |  Chat  20:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Beat the Nom Support Charlotte knows what's she doing. She understands an admins tasks, and has a need for the tools. Therefore, I say give them to her. BH (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 19:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
2. Second beat the nom Support Very well balanced contributions and I've seen here before around and I'm surprised she's at RfA... You know the cliche. Evilclown93_(talk) 19:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
3. Strong support as the nominator and my reasoning. For once, I am not late to support a candidate I've nominated. :) Acalamari 19:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
4. Support per nom and answers. I entirely trust the candidate's judgement. Peacent 19:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
5. Support Previous observation has left a positive impression. Remember, we're choosing sysops, not RFA voters.--Chaser - T 19:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
6. Support Demonstrates that tools will be used well - the diffs provided by User:Ryan Postlethwaite aren't all that convincing to me - saying oppose without much of an explanation might not be the most constructive, but I wouldn't call it uncivil, either. PGWG 19:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
7. Support. Maybe she comes across a little gruff in a few RfA's but I'm not sure I'd classify it as incivility. User has good contributions and seems to have a good understanding of policy. I can offer my support. Arkyan • 20:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
8. Support The incivility concerns are too small to particularly bother me - should be a great, active admin. GDonato (talk) 20:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
9. Good-faith user, has the experience. Not perfect, but then again no one is. The opposes are completely unconvincing (and in the case of The Sunshine Man, just vindictive), and I sometimes forget that not everyone reads the mailing list, as well. Not a bad user. This business of Phaedriel etc was blown sky-high out of proportion. She gave me a good going-over at my RfA, with reasoned argument instead of YOUREADELETIONISTBASTARD. That was impressive, and certainly not incivil. Moreschi 20:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Not only do I not think she is incivil, or even brusque, but in all honesty, on some RfAs, what is there to say other than "No. Just, no."? Comments of this type should not be taken as evidence of incivility, or even of sharpness. Moreschi 20:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well Said, give yourself a pat on the back. That's two Tommy Points BH (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 21:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

10. support per nom and Moreschi. JoshuaZ 20:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
11. Support Posting a too brief or overzealous oppose, in the middle of a sea of opposes, is hardly gross incivility. I respect both editors posting oppose votes, but am going to support. User seems quite experienced and good faith, if not a bit brusque/overzealous. I doubt that user will be a problem admin or abuse the admin tools. —Gaff 21:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose - sorry Acalamari, but CharlotteWebb isn't polite and friendly. Users that make incivil comments in others RfA's such as this and this shouldn't be admins. Also, when you have to run to the WikiEN-l mailing list instead of approaching Phaedriel about her Wikipedian of the day, I sense an admin that would go behind others back. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Ryan; your two RfA diffs were in March, a full three months ago. I doubt she'll do things like that if she became an admin. Evilclown93_(talk) 19:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Civilities important to wikipedia, she'd had enough experience then to know what she was doing. Secondally, the Phaedriel thing was little over a month ago. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Could you please point out which part of the cited RfA comments is uncivil? Thanks Peacent 19:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Maybe it's the fact that she said "Absolutely not" and "Oppose" with no reason. Maybe. I, myself am not too sure either. Evilclown93_(talk) 19:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Exactly what Evilclown says, at the top of each RfA it clearly states "Please keep criticism constructive and polite," how are comments such as "absolutely not" constructive and polite? Quite simply, they're not. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   I just think it's a too small reason to oppose, about a few bad comments in RfA's 3 months ago. But, I'll probably leave it at that. Evilclown93_(talk) 19:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Well with all due respect, this is my comment, and I personally don't think it is, that's not all the incivil RfA comments, I just haven't got time to go fishing for the rest of them at the minute. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   (outdent for sanity purposes) Ryan, I respect your opinion very much. I hope you haven't taken me badly. Cheers! Evilclown93_(talk) 19:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

2. Oppose(edit conflict) Sorry but I completely agree with Ryan, Charlotte although a good editor is not friendly not polite, comments like this seem to show that you expect large amounts of experience for RfA candidates, many users have passed RfA with slighlty over or less than that amount of experience, for example Sr13, Majorly (under previous username). The Sunshine Man 19:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   I don't see a comment on that diff. regarding incivility. Miranda 19:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   So you're arguing that because she sets high standards of experience for other users when it comes to becoming an admin, she shouldn't be one. Shouldn't an admin be someone who respects the position enough to set high standards? BH (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 19:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Sunshine Man; I'm concerned by your diff; CharloteWebb was opposing one of your RfA's (as Tellyaddict). Wouldn't that make you much more critical of here? Evilclown93_(talk) 20:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Sunshine Man, opposing because she opposed your RfA (under a different name) falls under what I would consider conflict of interest. You should have disclosed that it was RfA when you voted. BH (T|C) (Go Red Sox!) 20:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Yes it may affect me commenting but I've seen here on other RfA's being uncivil, however Miranda I didn't mention the user had been uncivil. The Sunshine Man 20:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   Your RfA is the only one you are explicity commenting on. That is why it's a COI. You don't like here high standrads in RfA's (you were involved directly) and now you are opposing her explicity for that aforementioned reason. --Evilclown93_(talk) 20:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

3. Oppose What Ryan and the guy above me said. RuneWiki 21:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

   That is not, categorically not, what she did. She left a neutral comment on the mailing list, citing this as a potential problem. So, she forgot that not everyone reads the mailing list. Minor slip-up. Not a big deal. This is getting farcical. Moreschi 21:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh thats what happened. My bad. I still don't get it........... But ok! Neutral