Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Frank (talk | contribs) at 00:08, 26 June 2008 (→Oppose: signing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Frank

Voice your opinion (talk page) (1/2/1); Scheduled to end 22:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Frank (talk · contribs) - I offer myself to the community for evaluation for adminship. I've reached no milestone recently in terms of quantity of edits or time, my birthday was months ago, and the moon is not full. In short, now is as good a time as any. My time on Misplaced Pages has been stimulating and rewarding, and I would like the opportunity to be of more help to the project with additional tools. I'm constantly impressed with the breadth and depth of the contributors - named and anonymous - to this project, and I like to think that I've been a valuable part of that and have more to offer. I've never been blocked, I've never been involved in any wikidrama, and I don't have any latent frustration or hostility built up, either on- or off-wiki. I have opinions on most of the topics that come up in RfAs (and elsewhere) and I usually express them; I will continue to do so whether the community sees fit to grant the mop or not. I've participated in anti-vandalism, disambiguation, general editing and cleanup, RfA, CSD nominations, and AfD. There are certainly places I haven't hung around, but I've found the places that suit me so far, and I don't feel the need to try to be all things in one package.

I look forward to the evaluation and comments of the community. Thanks in advance for your constructive comments - regardless of which category they are in.  Frank  |  talk  22:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

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: Mainly by continuing what I have been doing with vandal-fighting, working at AIV as needed, and on recent changes patrol. Having the extra tools will, of course, enable me to deal with some stuff immediately rather than reporting. But, more to the point, the mop would enable me to help with backlog. I am not as interested in being able to "do it myself NOW" as I am in being able to help.

I am a strong believer in consensus, and I've really been surprised that people don't express anti-vandalism procedures in those terms (at least not that I've seen). Here's what I mean: let's choose the middle-schooler who's bored in class and wants to talk about his buddy named Nick or Chris by telling us how cool or not cool he is right here on Misplaced Pages. Obviously a revert and warning are in order. But digging through other contributions from the same user often leads to more mischief. It's quite possible to follow a single vandal for 10 minutes, warn them 4 times, and then block them. However, I think that isn't really consensus-based - even if it gets the job done. I would rather see three or four different editors warn a user and then have another one do the blocking, because that validates the opinions of each of the editors involved, rather than presenting the appearance of stalking. (I suspect this will bring questions like "is there ever a reason for an immediate block?" to which of course, I answer "definitely yes" and I've seen such behavior. It usually involves profanity, usually is repeatedly copy/pasted to create or replace a page with a large continuous phrase, and it's usually directed at a person. Those are not the majority of vandalism cases I see, however.) Back to my scenario: blocking a user at an earlier stage may be more effective in the short term, because the vandalism stops sooner. On the other hand, I think it has the potential to be viewed in the same way the not-to-be-used cooldown block would be viewed, and actually serve to inflame the vandal. Simplified: if somebody tells you you're being rude, you might well ignore it because you disagree, but if four different people tell you in a relatively short time, I think there's more likelihood that you'll pay attention. That's consensus, and it may be slower, but I think it's more effective in many cases.

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

A: I'd love to be able to point to a featured article, a DYK, or something I created, but I'm not yet in that league, and may never be, which is OK with me. I have created a few articles, and while I am satisfied with the work I put into them, the fact is they are not especially important articles and they've not generated additional interest, so I would say I prefer to contribute to content that people actually read. With that in mind, I guess I have to say I was pleased when Myron Cope was rated a good article, especially since it was just in the normal course of editing. I think I've done some good work on David Paterson, New Orleans, and William F. Buckley, all of which you'll see on my list of top edits, so there's nothing illuminating in this part of the answer. Shedd Aquarium interested me and I think I contributed greatly to that one, and learned a few editing tricks (such as use of the {{convert}} template). Here's a diff from right before I saw it to its current version (not all intervening edits are mine). The article isn't "done" - what article is? - but I think it's much improved.

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 have no interest in conflict of any kind - editing or otherwise. I am the parent of four teenagers, so I know a little about drama and conflict, and all I can say is, it takes two to tango, and I don't like being one of the two. Being "right" isn't always good enough; the point is to make sure the encyclopedia avoids disruption and challenges to its legitimacy. Therefore, I don't aim to be "right" but rather to do what's best to keep things moving along. To be specific about my own conflict experience, nothing stands out in my mind as noteworthy; certainly I've had a couple of revert situations here and there, such as with Frank Lorenzo, but nothing that approaches 3RR and nothing I've lost a moment's sleep over. (It may be that some eagle-eyed editor comes up with a diff I'll have to answer for; I'm totally OK with that and I'll respond accordingly. I don't claim to be perfect - but I'm not going to get bent out of shape over some edits, and I don't want to cause others to feel my behavior has caused them stress either.)

Additional comment/clarification - I've seen the attacks - some very personal - that administrators get when they delete pages or block users, and that doesn't qualify as stress to me. As I said, I have four teenagers. When a decision is made - especially by community consensus - it's made.

Additional questions from Bigvinu:

1. How do you plan to intervene within an edit conflict or even worse a war when you don't have any experience of ever being caught in an edit conflcit?

2. You say you'd like to "continue doing" what you're doing. So, how will being an Admin result a change?

3. And Finally, Do you have experience in AfDs?

General comments

• See Frank's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Frank: Frank (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/Frank before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support I can't say i have reviewed all of your edits but 3700 is plenty for an admin and having reviewed a dozen of your AFD contributions I'd say that the ones I looked at were all on the button. Your opinion was in all bar one case on the winning side - both delete and keep. Lots of early votes too so no worries about following the herd. My only concern is that even the most routine action can lead to strife and angst and your answersd suggest a conflict aversion on your part. Just remember if you get the tools that no means no unless you can see you screwed up. But having 4 teenagers (you have my sympathy} you probably already know that. Spartaz 23:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC) Struck per clarification - except for the sympathy for having 4 teenagers - you still have that. Spartaz 23:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Looks fine; I had four months under my belt when I was sysopped and the worst thing I did was delete the Main Page... ;-) Maxim_(talk) 23:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
3. Support Seems fine, I trust him. Good AIV work, no serious screw-ups in sight... also, if I remember correctly, I've had nothing but positive interactions with Frank. He's a good guy.--Koji†Dude 23:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. I don't think that you have enough experience for the job. Sorry. --Kaaveh (talk) 23:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Oppose Cumulus Clouds (talk) 23:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
3. Oppose Only four months of consistent contributions, not enough for me to support. RMHED (talk) 23:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose - Sorry – 2-1/2 months experience – less than 3,000 edits – and three what was your previous USER: Name? I noticed on your talk page a reference as shown here and wonder why it is not mentioned in this Rfa? Thanks. ShoesssS 23:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

   Given then this was a rename so all the contribs have moved as well as the redirect remaining at the old name, I kind of feel the question about the rename might be a bit of a red herring. Spartaz 23:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

   Comment - Truthfully, it was not meant that way. When I express an opinion on a candidate, I personally look at their discussion page to get a feel of how they interact with other editors. As this is probably the most important aspect of any candidate, in my opinion, for an administrator position. In the past, I have seen editors change user names for a multitude of reasons. Most for very good – legitimate reasons and some for not. In that I am not an administrator, and do not have access to all the information available, I posed question as part of my opinion, rather than a statement. Thank you for answering the question. Concerning my opinion, it still stands, concerning time and experience. ShoesssS 23:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

5. Oppose — I view self-noms as prima facie evidence of power hunger. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 23:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

   • Note - Kurt always does this - no need to jump on him - he is entitled to his opinion - even if many people disagree with him. Spartaz 23:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

6. Oppose Frank, I generally like your approach, and if you'll allow me to cut a few corners here (by not reading your contribs in-depth) and be a good sport about it, I'd request that you come back to RfA in about two months. I get a sense that what's going on here is generally considered "not enough" according to current RfA standards and practices...no serious editing until sometime in February or March, not much going on on your talk page, nothing big and shiny to point to. (Do you archive your talk page? It's helpful, especially in an RfA.) Still, I get the sense that you're learning fast and that you would be very useful as an admin. Does anyone think that at the rate Frank is going, 2 months would be "too soon"? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 23:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

   Thanks for the reminder; I just started archiving my talk page and I have edited it to reflect that. Only one archive page so far, but you're welcome to poke around. I would respectfully suggest that Misplaced Pages is about articles, not editor talk pages...there's plenty in my edit history to look through.  Frank  |  talk  00:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral Would like to support but I find the short span of consistent contributions troubling. Also not sure how much the editor knows about the role of an admin. I'll wait for more Q/A. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Neutral It looks like you have a good and extensive contribution list, but if you've never been in an edit conflict, how will you be able to intervene as an admin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigvinu (talk • contribs) 23:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)