| Revision as of 12:55, 2 June 2008 editKaranacs (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users27,644 edits →Oppose: remove premature opposition; note left on user's talk page with explanation← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:19, 2 June 2008 edit undoKaranacs (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users27,644 edits →Karanacs: first draft; will probably changeNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| :''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:'' | :''Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:'' | ||
| I accept, thank you. ] (]) 13:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
| <!--The candidate may make an optional statement here--> | <!--The candidate may make an optional statement here--> | ||
| I've never actively aspired to be an administrator; my edits have been in places where I tried to be useful. I've nominated articles for speedy deletion, placed prod tags, or nominated for AfD when I ran across articles that I thought were problematic. I warn vandals who I've seen do naughty things to the pages I watch, and when they've vandalised after their final warning I have reported a few to AIV (probably about a dozen in the year-and-a-half I've been actively editing). | |||
| ====Questions for the candidate==== | ====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: | 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? | :'''1.''' What admin work do you intend to take part in? | ||
| ::'''A:''' I am primarily a content editor, and that will probably not change. However, when I need a break from research or FAC-stress I often look for little tasks to do (assessing for wiki projects, recent changes patrolling, category cleanup etc). Having administrator tools would allow me to expand the pool of potential tasks. I could see myself closing prods, and possibly monitoring AIV, although I would want to watch how other administrators handle the vandals listed there before I would actually take action. I do watch a number of vandal-attracting articles, and once I'm comfortable that I understand how other admins deal with them it would be nice to be able to skip the step of reporting to AIV. | |||
| ::'''A:''' | |||
| :'''2.''' What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why? | :'''2.''' What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why? | ||
| ::'''A:''' I am most proud of my contribution to bringing the article ]. ] had noticed that I've brought several Texas-related articles to FAC and asked me to help get this article to featured article status in time to be on the main page for April Fool's Day. Although I got the credit for the FA promotion, the final product was the result of the collaboration of at least a dozen people: image copyright specialists, copy editors, MOS experts, researchers, peer-reviewers, picture-takers, etc. We brought the article from little more than a stub to FA in two weeks. It was a great experience to work with so many respected editors to build a quality article in such a short time, and I learned a lot from them. | |||
| ::'''A:''' | |||
| :'''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? | :'''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 a frequent ] reviewer; by definition that means I'm often embroiled in wiki-stress. I believe that many (but not all) conflicts occur because of an ignorance of or misinterpretation of WP policy, WP processes, or article-specific facts. Generally the best way to diffuse these is to explain why I am advocating a certain position, with brief summaries of and links to all the appropriate WP-space documentation. By giving the other person a glimpse into my thought process and an invitation to frame their argument in the same way, we can calmly debate the way the policies apply and skip the drama. Overall, I'm not a huge fan of drama. Getting angry on-wiki doesn't do much other than make other people angry or make them stop listening, so why bother? | |||
| ::'''A:''' | |||
| ====General comments==== | ====General comments==== | ||
| Line 40: | Line 41: | ||
| =====Oppose===== | =====Oppose===== | ||
| # | # | ||
| =====Neutral===== | =====Neutral===== | ||
Revision as of 13:19, 2 June 2008
Karanacs
Voice your opinion (talk page) (0/0/0); Scheduled to end 20:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Karanacs (talk · contribs) - I know RFA nominations from me are rare as hen's teeth, and the only editor I have nominated was shot down in a fairly spectacular fireball — but that said, I'd still like to nominate Karanacs for your consideration. I freely admit to not having heard of her until a month ago, when I was asking round looking for new admin material and her name was suggested to me. Having spent a fair while looking over her history, I'm honoured to be the one to suggest her for the mop, as well as surprised she hasn't been put forward before.
All the "doesn't need the tools" opposers may as well get their opposes in now, as she certainly doesn't fit the "traditional" admin candidate pattern. Hardly any discussions at AfD; no posts to AIV; never been a regular hanger-outer at WT:RFA, ANI or any of the other places wannabes are expected to hang out. To me, that's a positive, not a negative; she's an editor who realises that without content, Misplaced Pages is just Facebook for ugly people, and works steadily and unobtrusively to keep our content the best on the net. (But she's not exclusively a denizen of the mainspace; she has over 4000 non-mainspace edits, spread across all kinds of nooks and corners.)
She is, in my opinion, someone who may not need the tools, but would find them more useful than most, and has more than adequately demonstrated her trustworthiness. Her deleted contributions show a consistent well-judged use of CSD and PROD. She has maintained a steady flow of quality mainspace contributions for well over a year (including some mammoth articles on the history & institutions of Texas), and has a superlative record at pulling almost-there articles through the GA/FA hoops. Her talk/user talk edits show a consistent pattern of being able to collaborate, discuss and improve without once (that I can find) getting stroppy or arrogant, or even getting into an argument (aside from this storm in a teacup, in which I can't find her putting a word out of place). The ability to view deleted articles would be invaluable to a user like this who spends so much time putting individual stub-petals together to make article-flowers; the ability to block would be useful to anyone working on the vandalism-magnet US history articles in which she works (as I know to my cost, since Davy Crockett somehow found its way onto my watchlist), and I'd trust her entirely to use the delete button appropriately. More to the point, while she might not plan to do a lot of admin-drudgery, we have here a demonstrably committed and trustworthy editor who's willing to help where she can, and I think whatever help someone as good as this wants to give should be welcomed with open arms. — iridescent 20:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept, thank you. Karanacs (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC) I've never actively aspired to be an administrator; my edits have been in places where I tried to be useful. I've nominated articles for speedy deletion, placed prod tags, or nominated for AfD when I ran across articles that I thought were problematic. I warn vandals who I've seen do naughty things to the pages I watch, and when they've vandalised after their final warning I have reported a few to AIV (probably about a dozen in the year-and-a-half I've been actively editing).
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: I am primarily a content editor, and that will probably not change. However, when I need a break from research or FAC-stress I often look for little tasks to do (assessing for wiki projects, recent changes patrolling, category cleanup etc). Having administrator tools would allow me to expand the pool of potential tasks. I could see myself closing prods, and possibly monitoring AIV, although I would want to watch how other administrators handle the vandals listed there before I would actually take action. I do watch a number of vandal-attracting articles, and once I'm comfortable that I understand how other admins deal with them it would be nice to be able to skip the step of reporting to AIV.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
- A: I am most proud of my contribution to bringing the article Ima Hogg. User:SandyGeorgia had noticed that I've brought several Texas-related articles to FAC and asked me to help get this article to featured article status in time to be on the main page for April Fool's Day. Although I got the credit for the FA promotion, the final product was the result of the collaboration of at least a dozen people: image copyright specialists, copy editors, MOS experts, researchers, peer-reviewers, picture-takers, etc. We brought the article from little more than a stub to FA in two weeks. It was a great experience to work with so many respected editors to build a quality article in such a short time, and I learned a lot from them.
- 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 a frequent FAC reviewer; by definition that means I'm often embroiled in wiki-stress. I believe that many (but not all) conflicts occur because of an ignorance of or misinterpretation of WP policy, WP processes, or article-specific facts. Generally the best way to diffuse these is to explain why I am advocating a certain position, with brief summaries of and links to all the appropriate WP-space documentation. By giving the other person a glimpse into my thought process and an invitation to frame their argument in the same way, we can calmly debate the way the policies apply and skip the drama. Overall, I'm not a huge fan of drama. Getting angry on-wiki doesn't do much other than make other people angry or make them stop listening, so why bother?
General comments
- Links for Karanacs: Karanacs (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/Karanacs before commenting.