Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:07, 21 December 2024

Areaseven

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (0/5/2); Scheduled to end 16:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Monitors:

Nomination

Areaseven (talk · contribs) – I am pleased to see Areaseven's contributions to the fields of anime, films, music, and racing. This user is diligent at revising pages, reverting edits, checking facts, and citing sources. He is in the counter-vandalism unit and participates in WikiProject Anime and manga, WikiProject Film, WikiProject Automobiles, WikiProject Metal, and WikiProject NASCAR. I believe this user would excel at determining what pages should be protected, what pages should be deleted, and whether certain bad actors (such as vandals and sockpuppets) need to be blocked promptly or if they will be allowed time to reform. With that, and especially your interest and knowledge of anime in mind, I would like to nominate this user for administratorship. Z. Patterson (talk) 23:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?

A: I've been an active editor since 2006, and aside from creating new articles and improving existing ones with proper references, I have been actively countering vandalism by random IP users or persistent sockpuppets.

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

A: I have helped expanded articles of several J-pop artists such as Pink Lady, Chisato Moritaka, Yōko Oginome, Miho Nakayama, Mari Hamada, and Princess Princess by adding discography articles.

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: There are times when other users either post bare references or use incorrect date formats, and I often remind them of their errors.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions are disallowed, but you are allowed to ask follow-up questions related to previous questions.

Optional question from Significa liberdade

4. Given that you've been around since 2006, what lead to your decision to RFA at this time?

A:

Optional question from TheAstorPastor

1. Considering your presence since 2006, you've participated in only 10 AfDs, with no involvement since 2019. Is there a particular reason for this?

A:.

Discussion

• Links for Areaseven: Areaseven (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Areaseven can be found here.

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Numerated (#) "votes" in the "Support", "Oppose", and "Neutral" sections may only be placed by editors with an extended confirmed account. All other comments are welcome in the "general comments" section.

Support

Oppose

1. Oppose. One of the main traits necessary for adminship is an understanding of community norms. This RfA breaks several of them, by having a non-admin nominator, no acceptance from the candidate with standard disclosures, and very short answers to the standard questions that make it difficult for me to get a sense of the candidate (e.g. for Q3, there are no diffs to examples). I do not mind intentional norm-breaking, but it needs to be done with purpose and a recognition of what the norms are being broken. I see no indications of that here, which makes me uncomfortable supporting. Sdkb  17:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   Just to chip in though, is there a policy against non-admins nominate a user for adminship? I don’t think if I’ve read it somewhere. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 17:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   No, although the nom being an admin is a de facto expectation. charlotte 17:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   No, there isn't (and independently from other concerns, that baloney should be stopped right here). I am not an admin and have ten successful RFA noms, with no fails. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   Although it's certainly not required that the nominator be an admin, strong nominations come from experienced users (Misplaced Pages:Advice for RfA candidates#User nominations). There's also a difference between being nominated by an experienced non-admin and being nominated by an editor with fewer than 2,000 edits. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   I agree with that wording; just want to be be sure other logic doesn't take hold at RFA :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

2. Neutral: At this point, I'm not ready to state that I'm opposed to this nomination, but I echo Sdkb's concerns. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC) In addition to echoing Sdkb's concerns, I'm raising a few statistical concerns, as well. Looking at xTools, 71.9% of Areaseven's edits do not have edit summaries, which is especially concerning if they're working with vandalism. Further, they've only participated in 10 AfDs with a 71.4% match rate; they also haven't participated in AfD in five years (). I'm not sure if they keep a CSD log, but that would be helpful to see, given that they're potentially interested in deleting pages. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   Adding to my concerns: Not only is the nominating editor not an admin, they have fewer than 2,000 edits. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

3. Oppose Disagree that a non-admin nominator is per se against community norms. However I agree that this particular nomination is, pace, not a good example. And since we are here to evaluate the candidate, I generally think we shouldn't hold their noinator against them (noting, for example, that there are some admins whose nominations I would oppose those grounds if I could; but I don't because it would (rightly) be shot down. Thus, the same must apply here). However, as Sdkb suggests, the candidate's answers to the questions—questions deliberately designed to allow candidates to set out their stall/blow their own trumpets for the only time in 168 hours—are not encouraging. And there's no indication of where they intend to work, except a hand wave towards fighting vandalism. With only 10 AfDs participated in, no RfPPs for over two years, and only 20 AIV reports this year it's actually impossible to identify an area where the tool kit would measurably assist. And finally, when the answer to "what conflicts have you been in in?" is "I point out people's errors for them", that copper-fastens it for me; that's far more likely to increase conflict than lessen it. --SerialNumber54129 17:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Oppose Sorry, but per Sdkb and Significa liberdade. It's also difficult to believe a nominator who has been absence for 9 years and only returned to active editing in the last month has a firm grip of community expectations for admins. -- ferret (talk) 17:53, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Oppose: The candidate did not state their need for the tool, vandalism is something that every editor encounters everyday and can be easily reverted. What is the need for the tool? What do you need the tool for? Also, their AfD track record is not impressive IMO and I wouldn’t trust someone who doesn’t understand the notability guidelines to be able to delete articles. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 17:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I was tempted to say "screw it" and support, but the answers to questions do not give me faith or say an area where they will work. charlotte 17:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
2. I can't support this, but I want to make it clear to the candidate that the total they're likely to receive here doesn't mean that the community doesn't value their work. If they want to be an admin, they could likely reach out to some current admins willing to nominate others, get some advice , and come back here in a few months. The current nomination is unlikely to win people over, for rrasons others have explained, but I don't want them to see this as a crushing rejection of their editing work. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:58, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

   +1 Sdkb  18:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

General comments