Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:43, 4 August 2019

Chetsford

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (39/0/0); Scheduled to end 13:24, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination

Chetsford (talk · contribs) – It is my pleasure to present Chetsford to the community for consideration as an administrator. Chetsford is an all round user: his content contributions are second to none, with three featured articles, nine good articles, and 97 DYKs.

Beyond his impressive audited content, Chet also helps the project through his work in NPP and AfC. These areas are under appreciated and take a lot of work and patience dealing with predominately new users, many of whom are unhappy with Misplaced Pages processes. In any situation where Chet has encountered them or another disgruntled user, I think you'll find he has responded calmly and collectedly in a way that we would expect administrators to behave.

All-in-all, I think Chetsford would be an ideal administrator because he has the temperament we need with an unwavering commitment to improving content for our readers. I hope you will join me in supporting his RfA. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Co-nomination

I second what Tony writes about Chetsford. While he is an outstanding content contributor (with multiple, impressive FAs, GAs and DYKs), he has also in my opinion turned out to be a most mature and stable editor over time. Probably his content focus was exemplified by his getting the autoreviewer bit just above 3 months after he started editing. The 227 articles he has created in his tenure here provide him ample breadth of experience in understanding our key guidelines and policies and also in understanding the nuances of team work, communication and conflict resolution. At the same time, his admin focus can be estimated by the actual work he continues doing in maintaining the website. Apart from what Tony writes above, in Chetsford's close to 25,000 edits till date, he has also involved rigorously in areas like AfD and CSD – his AfD match percentage (even though this is just a number) stands above 90%, not considering the no consensus closures, and he has an as impressive CSD log. I would probably look forward to his increasing involvement in admining in these areas too. I close my nomination by bringing out an example of the maturity that Chetsford has regularly displayed. In an AfD last year, where the discussion was about an article he had created, Chetsford's most balanced analysis stood more for the betterment of the quality of this project than in holding on to something he "owned". In that AfD, one of the statements he said was: "I made this early in my WP career and, had I the benefit of experience, I might have invested my energy elsewhere rather than in an article on an unindexed journal. If the decision comes down to delete, I won't be really torn up." That, my friends, is as committed as I could probably (never) get. I hope you support this excellent candidate's request for adminship, as Tony and I excitedly do. Warmly, Lourdes 08:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you for the nomination. I accept. (Also, as a customary disclosure, I have not edited for pay.) Chetsford (talk) 19:52, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

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. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: Back in January Martin inquired of my interest in adminship. At the time I declined as I didn't have any compelling reason to be an admin. Since then, however, I have started to regularly observe a persistent backlog in two areas which I would like to help remedy, as well as a third area in which — while not necessarily backlogged — I think I could provide assistance.

• The first area is in RfC closures. Since I'm not very involved in contentious content areas, I try to regularly contribute to RfC closures as a non-admin and have, thus far, not had much in the way of complaints. However, an increasing number of RfC closures make specific requests for closure by an admin only. These sometimes languish in an unclosed state and I feel I could help in resolving these "admin only" closures in the same way I do for non-admin RfC closures.
• The second area is in Requests for Page Protection. We have a lot of great admins patrolling this area but it doesn't ever seem to be enough. This may be due to the fact that the encyclopedia is expanding faster than it's intaking new editors. While I believe page protection should be applied only in the most serious situations, I regularly see fairly straightforward requests for pending changes or semi-protection in response to persistent BLP vandalism from burner accounts that linger for 12 or 13 hours. This creates extra work for vandal fighters.
  
• Finally, I'm fairly active at AfC. During the course of new article reviewing it's not uncommon for editors to come across pages that require speedy deletion. In some cases, like G6 CSDs involving the deletion of an existing redirect to allow movement of a draft into the same space, it can be derailing for reviewers to have to wait too long for their request to be processed. Having an extra set of hands to help manage these would be helpful, I think.

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

A: Most of what I do in terms of content contribution is in the development of new articles, versus editing existing articles. Two articles I created from scratch with which I'm particularly happy are Herman Vandenburg Ames and Helicopter 66. Working on Ames, who was an important asterisk in the life of Ezra Pound, was very enjoyable. While he was clearly notable, some of the details of his life had been lost to the sands of time so it involved a bit of detective work and a trip to the special collections room at the Van Pelt-Dietrich Library to obtain an out-of-print book. Since I don't live in Pennsylvania I had to wait until I happened to be in the area for unrelated reasons which meant it took some extra time to build this article up to FA status, but also made the pay-off especially satisfying. I also think United States Zouave Cadets, which was an all-time DYK page view leader, turned out well. It's made it to A-class but still has a bit of work before I'll be ready to submit it to FAC.

I also enjoy creating short articles on topics that contribute to forgotten or neglected moments of pre-WP history, as our content on contemporary history often seems weighted to 2000 and later. These are sometimes on topics which will probably never be expansive enough to get to FA or GA. For instance, HPA-23, an almost forgotten episode from the early days of the AIDS epidemic. I also think I've done an okay job on short biographies of people notable for niche or highly specific achievements, such as Sara Sheffield and John Hirasaki.

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 try to help as much as possible reviewing drafts at AfC so am regularly accused of incompetence by editors whose drafts I've declined. However, having once been a new editor myself I can understand, and try to empathize with, their frustration. It can be confusing for a new editor who tries to model a draft article off an existing, poorly sourced article in mainspace, only to have their draft rejected. Simply telling this person WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is rarely something they find satisfying. To the greatest extent possible I try to exhibit patience and, if all else fails, point them to other resources they could access such as WP:TEAHOUSE, or advise that they can simply resubmit for a second opinion from a different editor. Even though these recommendations are rarely actioned, I think it's important they understand that their participation at WP is not subject to the personal idiosyncrasies and whims of a single editor.

Aside from the discontent of new editors whose articles I have declined at AfC, I have had two minor conflicts with editors regarding AfD nominations I made with which they disagreed. In both cases I found that remaining WP:CIVIL helped to avoid escalating the situation inasmuch as possible.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

Additional question from PCN02WPS

4. Have you ever dealt with a problem on Misplaced Pages in a way that you now regret? If so, how would you now resolve the problem differently?

A: In general, WP has not been a highly stressful activity for me and I've not encountered many situations I'd characterize as problems. However, I'd note an occasion about a year ago when an editor disagreed with several AfDs I'd made on closely related topics and felt that I was targeting articles on specific subject-matter. While that was not the case, I can appreciate that it might have appeared that way to him/her given the close proximity of several of the AfDs in question. Text kills much of the nuance in interpersonal communication and perception is as important as intent in our interactions with others. I've tried to keep that lesson in mind since. Chetsford (talk) 15:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Additional question from LessHeard vanU

5. From a perusal of your major edited articles, I hope you concur that you are an US centric contributor. How do you think you will be able to help in matters relating to non US issues (are you familiar with some of the political/cultural backgrounds to some subjects)? ps. RfA is not comfortable, but then neither is adminship sometimes - if you are able to withstand this, then you were correct in accepting the nomination.

A: I would agree my contributions tend to edge towards topics related to the U.S., however, I also have created or significantly developed a number of non-U.S. articles such as the FA-classed Emanuel Moravec and GA-classed Government Army (Bohemia and Moravia), as well as a number of recent articles on non-American diplomats such as Peruvian ambassador to China Harold Forsyth, and articles like the Gajda Affair, German People's Radio, etc. In all these cases I have been open to feedback from those with perspectives that might offer a different worldview than my own. One of the great things about Misplaced Pages is that it is able to corral editors from diverse backgrounds. This is an asset for editors and one I try never to under appreciate. Chetsford (talk) 15:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Additional question from Foxnpichu

6. You are fairly new to Misplaced Pages, having only edited for 2 years (as far as I can tell, I may have made a mistake). Would you say you have gained a reasonable amount of experience in a couple of years?

A: That's a good question and you're correct (two years and three months, to be precise). I do believe I've gained reasonable experience in that time, however, I don't anticipate there will ever come a point when I'll have learned everything there is to know about WP. More specific to the subject of RfA, I don’t anticipate entering with 100-percent competence in the use of the tools on day one. Due to that, I would always self-regulate my activity to those areas in which I was comfortable and competent. In other areas I would either defer to more experienced admins or seek counsel from them first. Chetsford (talk) 15:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Additional question from Reyk

7. What is the most important policy on Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: Thanks for the question. WP:CIVIL and WP:NPOV are both important policies. However, WP:V is what differences Misplaced Pages from many similar projects out there, active and inactive, that have attempted to ape it. Chetsford (talk) 16:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Additional question from RadioKAOS

8. How is it considered a net positive to the encyclopedia when editors specialize in a particular content or project area and their editing activity suggests that they have no clue or could care less about the encyclopedia as a whole?

A:

Discussion

• Requests for adminship/Chetsford

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

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

Support

1. Per my nomination. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:25, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
2. Per co-nom. Lourdes 13:36, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
3. Support I've known about Chetsford for ages. Strong candidate, extremly industrious and well worth admission to the corps. scope_creep 14:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
4. An editor I have come across numerous times. Every encounter has been positive. My experience of them echoes the comments by the nominators. Seeing them standing is enough to renew my faith in Misplaced Pages. A wholehearted Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
5. Well rounded editor who will be an asset to the community as a sysop. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
6. Support - This user seems to have the judgment, integrity, and commitment needed to be a good admin. I've only a passing familiarity with his or her work but what I have seen has been uniformly of average to superior quality. Michepman (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
7. Support - Yes, yes, yes to another helping hand at RfPP. You’ve also written some great articles.—NØ 14:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
8. Support - Seems like a great addition Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski 15:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
9. Support good answer to Q4, learns and improves from past experiences. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
10. Yes, I am impressed with their content contributions in particular, but also their work closing RFCs and a desire to close more as an admin. I’ve closed my share too and am all too familiar with this admin only desire for a closer, so happy to give my support to one willing to work on this backlog with demonstrated level headed experience doing so. Good luck. Steven Crossin 16:12, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
11. Support From my perspective, would be a good addition to the admin group. I support individuals who are careful about their interactions with others and are willing to thoughtfully take a close look at their own behavior. Glennfcowan (talk) 16:26, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
12. Support. per nomination statements. I surprisingly haven't seen this editor before at AFC and will double check their record their to make sure the support is well-founded, but I have no reason to believe it will be anything less than great. Cheers! –MJL ‐Talk‐ 16:36, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
13. Support no reason to think this user would abuse the tools --rogerd (talk) 16:59, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
14. Support - Satisfied with the answer to my question. Thank you for your response, and I wish you luck. Foxnpichu (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
15. Chetsford will be an excellent addition to our admin corps. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 17:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
16. Support per nominators, plus sensible answer to Q6. I have no concerns about the perceived focus on US topics mentioned in Q5 - a particular interest in one subject area will do no harm to our coverage in other areas. We may need more admins with an interest in non-US topics, but there's no cap to the number of editors we promote, there's no point in barring people with an interest in US topics. (Plus, if Chetsford is writing FAs on non-US topics, it's a bit of a non-issue anyway...) GirthSummit _(blether) 17:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
17. Support per nom and own research. Easily trustable with the tools. Ritchie333 18:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
18. Support - admirably meets all the requirements for being an all round admin. Two years with this kind of engagement, especially to NPP, is more than enough to gain the required experience. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
19. Support per nomination, net positive! SEMMENDINGER (talk) 18:48, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
20. Support per my criteria, a valued content creator. GregJackP Boomer! 19:10, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
21. Support Jianhui67 19:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
22. Support. No concerns whatsoever. I'm confident he will make a fine admin. -- œ 19:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
23. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 20:12, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
24. I was impressed by the candidate's nomination of Dream Pod 9 for AfD and, to get a bad non-admin close overturned, at deletion review. Obviously has the intelligence and judgement to perform administrative functions. On the negative side, the first sentence of Government_Army_(Bohemia_and_Moravia)#Operations starts with "Prior to...". "Before..." is simpler and should be preferred. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
25. Support - I think you are ready. CLCStudent (talk) 20:50, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
26. Support, no concerns. bd2412 T 20:50, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
27. Support, no concerns; have shown the skill to use the tools, and the temperment to apply them properly. Britishfinance (talk) 21:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
28. Support with no qualms, and a good couple of uses for the toolset. J947 21:29, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
29. Support very prolific. (Also on a tangent, approved my first ever article via the AfC process). – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:52, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
30. Support - Talk page archives are filled with evidence of patience and courtesy. I did see a few more RfC concerns than Q1 led me to expect, but on the whole Chetsford looks to be a strong addition to the admin corps. MarginalCost (talk) 22:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
31. Support - Chetsford, you weren't on my radar, but for one of the only times in memory, your answers to the above-posed questions were so ideal as to be enough despite that. Thank you for your work on the project! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:25, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
32. Support. Will be a good addition to our admin team.--Darwinek (talk) 22:48, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
33. Support ~SS49~ {talk} 22:50, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
34. Support Looks good! -- ferret (talk) 23:13, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
35. Support Again, no use wasting bytes, so per everyone above. Squeeps10 23:17, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
36. Support Well-rounded, trustworthy editor who will help in needed areas, with lots of content creation to boot. Will benefit the project with the tools. Spencer 23:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
37. Support - trustworthy editor. PhilKnight (talk) 23:31, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
38. Support - no concerns and doubt they'll break anything. --TheSandDoctor 23:34, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
39. Support - I am new to Misplaced Pages, but I've read about user groups (such as admin) and requests for adminship for a long time. With 25K+ edits and other qualifications, he is fit for admin. Decisive Domination 23:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

General comments