Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:03, 13 August 2006

Pmanderson

Voice your opinion! (28/9/1) Ending 00:00, 2006-08-19 (UTC)

Pmanderson (talk · contribs) – I mask my signature with Septentrionalis; this started as a misunderstanding, and since then I've usually had too many edits to change. I notice that Requested moves and the X for discussion pages are often backlogged; I'm willing to help out. I have had adminship suggested to me by a user now on Wikibreak, so this is not entirely a self-nom. Septentrionalis 00:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

If you'd be interested, I'll nominate you. I like your work, especially on Phaistos Disc. Cheers! --Scaife Don't forget Hanlon's Razor 03:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept my nomination Septentrionalis 00:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Misplaced Pages backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: Primarily helping to close whatever's backlogged, although I do check my watchlist for vandalism, and will deal with persistent vandals as AIV would.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A:

• This edit to Joseph Conrad, which immediately settled the controversy then at Talk:Joseph Conrad#Racism: neither silence about Achebe's criticism of Conrad, nor a long paragraph, but a couple sentences.
• Resolving banausos from one of User:WHEELER's rants, which was on the verge of deletion, to a generally accepted article by adding context, while saving his language.
• Cleaning up this version of Feynman diagram#Mathematical details into substantially the present text of Feynman graph.
• Creating WP:JOU, to help everybody discuss the same set of Jimbo's views.
• Being thanked for work on American Civil War#Abolition.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: Yes; I was involved in a disagreement at Democratic peace theory, before I knew the dispute resolution tools, and frustration drove me to be sometimes less than civil. I did two things;

• I learned dispute resolution to the extent of requesting arbitration,
• I walked away from the article (except for occasionally cheering on those editors who are now attempting to clean it up), and I will go back after a while and see what they've made of it.

I have since interacted with some users who are now banned, and some who have engaged in personal attacks. I have, when necessary, used the dispute resolution methods, and I will do so again. I hope any stress has not been visible on Misplaced Pages. Septentrionalis 00:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Last 5000 edits.Voice-of-All 05:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Viewing contribution data for user Pmanderson (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ)
Time range: 126 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 5hr (UTC) -- 12, Aug, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 20hr (UTC) -- 7, April, 2006
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 36.98% Minor edits: 66.67%
Average edits per day: 47.03 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 390 edits): Major article edits: 86.31% Minor article edits: 74.07%
Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown on this page and last 0 image uploads):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.1% (5)
Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 1.42% (71)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 24.14% (1207)
Unique image uploads (non-deleted/reverts/updates): 0 (checks last 5000)
Superficial article edits marked as minor: 13.82%
Special edit type statistics:
All edits to deletion pages: 8.12% (406 edit(s))
Marked XfD/DRV votes: 0.14% (7 edit(s))
Article deletion tagging: 0.12% (6 edit(s))
Page (un)protections: 0% (0 edit(s))
Page moves: 3.54% (177 edit(s)) (94 moves(s))
Page redirections: 0.7% (35 edit(s))
User talk warnings: 0.2% (10 edit(s))
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 1646 | Average edits per page: 3.04 | Edits on top: 8.6%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 24.66% (1233 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 4.06% (203 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 7.3% (365 edit(s))
Unmarked edits with no summary: 60.34% (3017 edit(s))
Edits by Misplaced Pages namespace:
Article: 37.78% (1889) | Article talk: 32.18% (1609)
User: 0.82% (41) | User talk: 7% (350)
Misplaced Pages: 13.8% (690) | Misplaced Pages talk: 6.6% (330)
Image: 0% (0)
Template: 0.86% (43)
Category: 0.4% (20)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.56% (28)

• See Pmanderson's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
• Edit count:

Username Pmanderson
Total edits 15074
Distinct pages edited 3959
Average edits/page 3.808
First edit 20:02, May 1, 2004
(main) 6457
Talk 4506
User 317
User talk 1060
MediaWiki talk 1
Template 98
Template talk 64
Category 82
Category talk 27
Misplaced Pages 1803
Misplaced Pages talk 659

Support

1. Extremely strong support, way past my standards. Just one condition though, please check the "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Your edit summary usage is just a bit low. —Mets501 (talk) 00:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Support per above. Michael 00:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Support but please use edit summaries more. I always check a candidate's first edit, yours was a single word that greatly improved the paragraph. Also cogent to judging a candidate is the edits of which you are most proud, yours say a lot for your values of preserving usable contributions, while stabilising the text... sometimes hard to do both. Pedant 01:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   Darn, my first edit was to the sandbox. DarthVader 01:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

4. Support. DarthVader 01:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Support - my experience with this editor has always been good, and no evidence they'll abuse the tools. Thanks/wangi 01:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Strong Support - Has the makings of a good admin. I can clearly see that my support is in good hands. Best of luck! --Nishkid64 01:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Support - I have always had good experiences with this editor, his contributions are very positive, and I'm sure he'd use the tools responsibly. TheronJ 01:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Strong Support I like the honesty in Q3 and his learning from the experience to hone his dispute resolution skills. These skills will serve him well as a potential administrator, as an administrator must be extremely level-headed and often very patient. The numbers speak for themselves of course, but his answers are what make me confident in his abilities and happy that Misplaced Pages could have what I think will be a great new administrator. hoopydink 02:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Support. Long overdue. Put edit summaries more often though. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
10. Support. Misplaced Pages will be a slightly better place with this ascertively NPOV editor as an admin. Themindset 03:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
11. Support. While I don't like some of the edits brought up by Ultramarine are (I have no problems with others like the last one), it is quite a while ago. On the positive side is much good work. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 03:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
12. Support, good, experienced, dedicated editor should make a good admin abakharev 04:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
13. Support No major concerns here. --Siva1979 04:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
14. Support - seems like a good user that is unlikely to abuse the tools. Kalani 05:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
15. Support. Agree with the above. And doing backlogging work would be well appreciated. I even have a script that alerts you to all backlogs when you view RC/watchlist pages.Voice-of-All 05:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
16. Support per Hoopydink, TheMindset, and the ever-sensible VofA, and consistent with my RfA criteria. Joe 05:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
17. "Insanely Great" Support per above. RandyWang (/_{fix me up}) 06:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
18. Support - I know Pmanderson as a user who has great merits in upholding academic standards and NPOV on controversial issues, and I trust him to deal responsibly with the admin tools. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
19. 15,000 edit count support Computerjoe's talk 08:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
20. Total support don't always agree with the guy, but i trust him to make a wonderful admin. --heah 09:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
21. Support Per all. --Kbdank71 11:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
22. Merovingian - Talk 11:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
23. Support I have no problems with supporting this user. Thε Halo 11:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
24. Support. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 13:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
25. Support. Good work! :) NCurse _work 16:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
26. Support. Proficient Wikipedian who has demonstrated policy knowledge and other strong qualities from the start. --Gray Porpoise 20:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
27. Support Dolive21 20:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
28. Support Fredrik Johansson 20:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. Does not play well with others. Several personal attacks: "It would be uncivil to speculate whether he is a liar or a lunatic." "Mr. West appears to have had a life other than Misplaced Pages for the last two weeks; Ultramarine does not have this excuse."

   Note that his statement above is misleading. The Arbitration Committee has found that he has participated in "sterile revert warring" and he may be banned for up to a week if repeating this on the Democratic peace theory article and another article. I find it troublesome that he does not disclose this.

   I also question his repeated attempts to exclude well-sourced advantages of democracy and related research. See for example this, where he deletes every sourced advantage of liberal democracy while keeping many claimed unsourced disadvantages. Or this, where he completely deletes the painstakingly made table regarding world-wide democracy from Freedom House, now in Freedom in the World 2006.. Or this, which seems to be deliberately misleading complaints of copyright infringement in order to remove pro-democracy arguments. Or this, where he even argues that Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages-CD/Download should not have any article about democracy.Ultramarine 03:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   Comment: Almost all those examples are over 8 months old, and have been explained. And the last example he is simply giving an honest opinion, hardly something for which one should be censured. Themindset 03:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   Several are from June this year. Extremely few Misplaced Pages editors have been found guilty by the Arbitration Committee and he is one of them. Today, he chooses to not disclose this, instead misleadingly stating "I walked away from the article". Is this an editor that should be trusted to be an administrator?

   It is also dubious that he has walked away since he has continued to edit the article and talk page extensively until two weeks ago and as he states above he intends to return when he gets the administrative powers.Ultramarine 04:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   Some editing tactics: edit warring in order to insert tags stating factual errors but refusing to give any examples or explanations, citing books bur refusing to give page numbers so that the claims can checked (the Arbitration Commitee noted that this is not allowed in the above case), stating that problems with article might be found if reading long lists of books and articles and demanding that someone else should read and check them, and bad faith attempts to delete articles (See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/R. J. Rummel and the comments.) I seriously doubt that a person retorting to this in order insert his original reserch will be a good administrator.Ultramarine 04:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

2. STRONG OPPOSE. I have serious complaints about Pmanderson that are recent--all summer 2006 )the most recent was Aug 11 2006). He has seriously interfered with Alexander Hamilton repeatedly attacking and reverting edits, primarily to ridicule Hamilton's anti-slavery position. It seems ideological more than anything. He has not been concilatory but aggressively hostile in insisting on his own positions. He has removed quotations from leading scholars, for example, because he decided based on his original research those scholars were wrong. I strongly oppose giving him Wiki authority. Rjensen 04:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   This is Pmanderson's only edit to Alexander Hamilton today; I don't see how it could be a problem. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 04:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   But he has done lots of edits on the page in the last couple of months. --Salix alba (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   I can second this; I've seen Pmanderson having some massive ownership problems with articles, and he usually "wins" simply by out-lasting and out-wikilawyering the other guy. Misplaced Pages thrives on consensus-seeking, not "It's my way or the highway". I'm afraid of what might happen with him in his disputes if we gave him the tools to protect pages and block people :-O Cyde Weys 22:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

3. Oppose Per all above --Masssiveego 09:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

   Opppose per Masssiveego (just kidding :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

4. Oppose as per violations of WP:NPA. People who lose their temper are not qualified for adminship. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 18:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Oppose per Ultramarine.  Grue  18:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Seriously strong oppose - I've had run-ins over the course of several months with this user and it's never been pleasant. I was originally involved with him as a mediator in which he really wasn't helping. Then he went on to become a userbox wikilawyer, making all sorts of inane statements. And then most recently he was doing the same thing except with cross-namespace redirects, making more extreme statements like how getting rid of cross-namespace redirects means we'd have to get rid of all redirects. He even tried to dismiss me as trying to impose another uniformity on Misplaced Pages. Gahhh. All I've ever seen from him is poorly-reasoned hyperbole and personal attacks of a passive aggressive behavior, coupled with the hypocrisy of calling out other people for incivility. --Cyde Weys 22:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Oppose userbox wikilawyering, too addicted to rules and process --Doc 22:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Oppose per above concerns. Doesn't seem like the user is familiar with WP:IAR, or point two and three of WP:TRI for that matter, which are in my opinion the most important things of understanding for an administrator. Cowman109 22:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Oppose per above.Voice-of-All 23:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
10. Oppose mainly due to negative impressions of this editor formed while Arbitrating the extensive and irritating dispute he had with Ultramarine over the "criticisms of communism" article. While not a terrible editor per se, I would not trust this individual with the mop. Kelly Martin (talk) 00:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral for now. If it was not for the on going spat with Ultramarine over Deomcratic Peace Theory it would be a clear support. Some of Pmanderson actions there have not been the most constructive, but it is a controversal subject and many other editors have crossed swords with Ultra as well. It raises concerers about how Pmanderson will be able to work with the more challenging editors and sutuations, which is really what the task of an admin seems to be. So I have a couple of questions:

What is the most difficult situation you have manged to sucessfully resolve, and how?

How would you seperate your personal beliefs from your administrative duties. How could we be reassured that you would play by the book?

How would you approach persistant POV pushers and or awkward users such as User:David Cruise, and User:JanWMerks?

Why do you needs these tools?

--Salix alba (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)