Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:38, 17 April 2012

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Whisperback}} on my talk. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Whisperback}} on your talk. Please click here to leave me a new message.

ARCHIVES - Archive 2006-1010 - Archive 2011 - Archive 2012

BEFORE YOU POST - Discussions about the content of articles belong on the talk page for that article. This includes discussions about text, images, tags, or other physical things on the page. This way everyone can participate. If you like, you can post a note here pointing me to it. If you want to discuss general policy, ask for help on a page you haven't seen me on, or other topics that aren't related to the actual article, post it here. I archive frequently, check there if a discussion has "disappeared". Thanks -Dennis

Contemplating RfA - Requesting feedback

I'm contemplating an WP:RfA and requesting feedback from any registered editor who cares to give an opinion. In short, I've been here over 5 years, took a wikibreak a few years back (burned out a bit) and came back. I've got over 17k edits, never been blocked, and have learned a great deal by contributing at Misplaced Pages that has helped in my real life. I've worked in admin areas to get my feet wet and noticed a seeming shortage of admins available for vandalism and such. I've never been the greatest author, but I did start High Rock Lake, Bob Timberlake (artist), Lexington Barbecue Festival and Pigs in the City (and others), which are all regional to my new home in NC. I've uploaded a lot of original photography, (and have much more still to upload) which is likely one of my better contributions. Like anyone, I make mistakes but quick to admit them. What I'm hoping for in this discussion is for some folks to look back a little at my history, offer guidance and an honest opinion (even if brutal) if you think this would be in the best interest of myself and Misplaced Pages. If I do go to RfA, I will notify every registered editor in good standing who participates here, although there is no obligation to participate. I will be asking specific editors to come here, but any editor who happens upon this is welcome to chime in. If you are willing to nom (some have already expressed an interest) please indicate. In the interest of disclosure, I've talked to another admins about his previously , which is still in my archives. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 16:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Areas I would be interested in working at - CSD, ANI, vandalism, eventually page protection and copyright issues (a year down the line). Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 18:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I saw your notice of this thread on another editor's user talk, which happened to be on my watchlist. You've made a few posts on admin boards which appeared very sensible to me, and they suggested to me you might have good judgment. On that basis I'd encourage you to explore a bid more seriously. I think it would be correct for you to expand a bit on the very short resume of your work you've included above. Also what admin work you would do. Include any controversies or disputes you've been in. Your comments above seem to be hyper-aware of the risk of canvassing, and that's a good thing. If you've done anything special since November 2011 to overcome the objections mentioned in the thread you cite above, you could mention what you've done differently since then. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I archive talk, log my CSDs and PRODs, slow down and research better before entering AFD/CSD, and have generally tried to research more before I offer an opinion. Nothing radical, just being more thoughtful before I act. I have gotten more involved with ANI, learning to help others and settle disputes peacefully. In a nutshell, I've tried to be more objective in what I do. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 18:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Since few weeks, I have been stalking watching your edits since you and James had a small fight with each other. And, you are certainly a good editor. You will do great as an admin according to me. I m really surprised that why haven't you gone for RfA yet. Yasht101 17:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I don't remember James and I having a fight. I can't think of a time I've even disagreed with him. If we did disagree, it had to have been minor as I don't even remember what you are referring to. I respect his judgement enough to usually defer to it if we were on the different sides of an issue. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 18:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Am I the "James" referred to? If so, Dennis, I think there have been one or two occasions when I disagreed with you, but I don't remember having a "fight" over any of them. Or maybe it wasn't me. There is an editor whose username is just "James", but he has made only 54 edits, not one of which has been on a page you have ever edited, so I don't think it's him. Anyway, whether I am the person referred to or not, here are a few of my thoughts. I think you would make a very good administrator, and I am delighted that you are considering an AfD. I have seen examples of your work quite a number of times, and my impression is that you are reliable, level-headed, and constructive. You frequently consult others, rather than jumping in unilaterally, which is a good thing. You are patient and civil to other editors, even when you clearly don't like what they are doing. I have not always agreed with everything you have done, but that is no reason for opposing you: any two people will disagree sometimes. You have extensive experience of several admin-related areas of work. Your content creation is a fairly small part of your work, and some people see that as a reason for opposing at RfA, but you have created more articles than many admins (for example, nearly three times as many as I have) so that should not be a problem. I have also looked at a sample of your articles, and they all looked good to me, and they were all genuine articles, not just stubs, so I really don't think there is likely to be any problem there. You have written on another page "The harshness there is one of the reasons I've avoided RfA", and it is, unfortunately, true that RfA can be an unpleasant experience, and the amount of unreasonable aggressive attacking of candidates has for some reason been steadily increasing over time. I found RfA very stressful, even though I had a three figure number of supports and a single figure number of opposes, so what it is like for good faith RfA candidates who get a lot of aggressive opposition I hate to think. However, as far as I know you have not made any serious enemies or got into heavy controversy, so the risk of having a rough time is probably not all that great. In fact, after checking through a sample of your edits, I can find only two things that might give me pause. Firstly, I managed to find one occasion when you made a report at AIV which was edit warring, and arguably disruptive, but not, as far as I could see, done in bad faith. If one such incident is the worst you have done then it may not be a big deal: we all make mistakes sometimes, but I suggest reading WP:Vandalism carefully. Secondly, I see here that you seem to be unclear of correct administraive procedure concerning animal sacrifice. I really do have serious doubts about anyone so grossly ignorant of administrative ritual running for RfA . JamesBWatson (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Yeah, I'll chime in with JBW, whose desysopping for lack of article creation is in the mail, BTW. James, you are clearly the good cop. Drmies (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I created WP:BLUDGEON back in 2008, and I've seen others use it. That should count as the equivalent of what, 100 new articles? ;) Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 20:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I'd never seen that, but now that I have I will use it. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Not to totally butt in, but I've seen you around the admin noticeboards recently and you seem to have a good head on your shoulders. I say go for it! (I would even nominate you if you wanted a completely unbiased opinion.) Keilana| 21:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I've had a brief look through your edit history, it's pretty good. Mature attitude, article creation, high edit count with low proportion of automated edits, clean block log, good use of edit summaries... I can't see any valid reason to not support you. I would, however, opt into the monthly edit count breakdowns as per Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

•  Done Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 22:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Also note, I used to use the name User:Pharmboy, had it changed here via proper channels, but some edits still show that old name. I disclose this on my user page, but wanted to add here to prevent confusion. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 22:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I've seen you around at ANI and you certainly have a cool head, but I do worry over potential disruption to your RfA since you were sort of involved in that MMA nonsense of a meatpuppet farm. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 11:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• I've never actually edited any of the MMA articles (not interested in MMA, never seen an event) and my involvement was to try to help bring some order to the process after multiple AFDs made it clear that a merge was in order. I would like to think my actions there helped calm things down, and a look at the talk pages of Talk:2012 in UFC events and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts/MMA notability would show I stayed out of most of the actual !voting on names, etc., and instead tried to help others understand the policy reasons for the change. One example would be helping User:Glock17gen4. (User:Elen of the Roads was involved in that as well). Now, most of the participants who originally opposed are on board with the changes (or banned for sockpuppeting). I had nom'ed one of the articles at AFD, which ended in merge to an undetermined article, and I made a conscience decision to stay involved (but not too involved) to help two other editors User:TreyGeek and User:Mtking start an omnibus article to merge the content into, simply supporting their efforts. There were times I disagreed with them as well, such as using AFD to force a merge, and I said as much. I also reverted myself once to keep from being dragged into an edit war and causing more problems. I would like to think my participation there was beneficial to the process, as someone who focused on the guideline side of the issue rather than the content. It would require a lot of deep reading to get the full picture, but anyone that cares to, I would welcome their input as to my handling of the issue. This was the first time I chose to intentionally put myself in the line of fire to help calm down an extremely heated dispute, so surely I made mistakes, but nothing I would be ashamed of. At the time I decided to get involved, the I had already thought about adminship, and figured that this would be a good test of my mettle and would serve a higher purpose. If I wasn't willing to help out and couldn't keep a cool head in what really was an explosive situation, then I shouldn't consider seeking admin. In the end, it was an ugly affair that needed some objective eyes on it, and fortunately a few others got involved just enough to help out by also being calm voices of reason, including User:Anna Frodesiak and User:DGG. Would I do some things differently now? Of course. I learned a lot during that process, it was my first time to participate in such an extreme dispute resolution but I don't regret my efforts. And sincerely, thanks for bringing that up, as I'm sure you are correct that some will bring up that issue in an RfA. All I can hope is that anyone who wants to judge me on my actions will first take the time to research it fully. (added later) And let me be clear, I have NO intention of getting involved in heated debates regularly. It is too taxing. But all admins should be expected to do ugly work every now and then. I've probably done more of this in the last few months that I would in a year, solely to make sure that I am up to the task. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 12:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the response. I think you've misunderstood me somewhat; anyone who opposes you based on your brilliant handling of that issue will be silly, or, more to my original point, a sock of one of those previously involved at the MMA mess. There have been cases in the past where disgruntled users have created socks or invited meatpuppets to ruin an RfA, and my only concern is that it may happen to you. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 12:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for the compliment on my handling of the affair. I'm not as worried about socks/meat at an RfA as I would be in AFD or ANI, simply because I think there is a more serious approach to the process and they have a history of looking at the merits rather than the vote count. If a dozen socks show up to !vote, there really isn't anything I can do except hope they realize who is and isn't a sock. RfA isn't a good place for a candidate to have to constantly defend himself, so I would have to depend on others familiar with my efforts here to do that for me. That is one reason I started this talk where socks aren't as likely to participate, to see if the 'real' editors here would support my candidacy enough to actually speak out. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 12:49, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• In short, do it. I have seen, (for search of a better word), lesser editors pass RfA in the past. MrLittleIrish 13:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

• Your attitude is rock solid, and you're a good communicator. I would support. Basalisk ⁄_berate 13:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
• Hmm. A pre-RfA. Looks like wikipedia is going the way of New York kindergarteners! Based on what I'm reading above, you seem like an erudite and reasonable person. Just go for it! --regentspark (comment) 14:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
• Support Bmusician 15:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
• Solid but not showy, moderate and civil: looks like sound admin material to me. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Biotechnology in Maryland

FYI, JoelWhy's edits are up for Biotechnology in Maryland. I made some changes, too. Please consider re-reading new version and weighing in before tomorrow's close date if possible. Thanks for all your help in teaching a relative "newbie" the ropes. Ferddog (talk) 22:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC) (I was Mdbizauthor, name change)

• Excellent work! I've stuck my Delete, added a Keep, and asked the closing admin to consider the diffs between the nom and the current article. I would imagine it would be kept. If not, you could go to WP:DRV and I would be happy to participate. It is a completely different article now. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 23:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Wonderful - thanks, Dennis. Really appreciate all your help on this. On a side note, I think you would make an excellent admin - your patience, open-mindedness and willingness to help others make you a great candidate. If there's anything I can do to help just let me know. Ferddog (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)