Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AdamSmithee (talk | contribs) at 07:43, 13 July 2006 (→[]: support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Arthur Rubin

Discuss here (20/0/1) Ending 01:52, 2006-07-20 (UTC)

Arthur Rubin (talk · contribs) has been here for 11 months (sans 3 days). Arthur is a (notable) mathematician, he is a friendly and thoughtful person, and I believe he can be fully trusted to use the extra tools for the good of the project. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept the nomination. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Support

1. Proud to be the first to support. Shanes 01:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
2. Support. All around good user.Voice-of-All 02:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
3. Fully Support Amazing credentials and brief overview of the user's edits leads me to believe that this user will in no way abuse the tools hoopydink 02:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
4. Support Naconkantari 02:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
5. Suppport, as nominator. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
6. Support Very knowledgeable person and appears to be level-headed. Would make a great admin. --Chris S. 02:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
7. Support I think Hoopydink said it best. Viridae 02:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
8. Support. I agree with Viridae's agreement with Hoopydink. Agent 86 03:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
9. Support. It's good to have the extra tools- especially for those committed to building an encyclopedia.--Kungfu Adam 03:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
10. Brand new mop - 13 dollars. Camouflage-colored flamethrower - 650 dollars. Erdős number of 1 - priceless. For everything else, there's Support - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
11. Support —Quarl 2006-07-13 04:11Z
12. Orane (talk • cont.) 04:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
13. Support This Fire Burns Always 04:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
14. Strong Support - need more mathematicians and scientists here. Blnguyen | rant-line 05:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
15. Awesome! Strong Support --Jondel 05:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
16. Merovingian (T, C, @) 05:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
17. Support. DarthVader 06:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
18. Support per Oleg Alexandrov and CrazyRussian. Eluchil404 06:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
19. Support. Arthur's committed to building a good encyclopaedia and won't abuse the extra tools. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 06:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
20. Support. RandyWang (/_rants) 06:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
21. Support. Baseball,Baby! 07:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
22. Support - nice work :-) AdamSmithee 07:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

1. Neutral I agree Mr. Rubin certainly is knowledgeable and responsible, there's no doubt. I'm just not sure he needs nor actually really wants the tools? Answers show apathy (for want of better word) and reverting does not require sysop rights. May change this as nom progresses however - Glen 03:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

   Did you read the bit about closing XfDs and page moves?Blnguyen | rant-line 05:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

2. Neutral, leaning on Support. Reversion does not require the tools, unless you want rollback.--Tdxiang 07:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

   He did say that he would close debates. Anyway, if he is only going to use the tools sparingly, at least he is being honest.Blnguyen | rant-line 07:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• See Arthur Rubin's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.

All edits.Voice-of-All 02:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

--Viewing contribution data for user Arthur Rubin (over the 2693 edit(s) shown on this page)--  (FAQ)
Time range: 301 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 13, Jul, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 22hr (UTC) -- 15, August, 2005
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 97.65% Minor edits: 98.29%
Average edits per day: 20.12 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last (over the 2693 edit(s) shown on this page)--  (FAQ)
Time range: 301 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 13, Jul, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 22hr (UTC) -- 15, August, 2005
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 97.65% Minor edits: 98.29%
Average edits per day: 20.12 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 257 edits) : Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 100%
Analysis of edits (out of all 2693 edits shown of this page):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/rewrites/sourcing): 0.11% (3)
Significant article edits (small content/info/reference additions): 3.12% (84)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 12.14% (327)
Minor article edits marked as minor: 46.41%
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 941 | Average edits per page: 2.86 | Edits on top: 4.05%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 48.53% (1307 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 16.67% (449 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 14.18% (382 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 18.79% (506 edit(s))
Edits by Misplaced Pages namespace:
Article: 27% (727) | Article talk: 18.79% (506)
User: 3.86% (104) | User talk: 8.84% (238)
Misplaced Pages: 36.65% (987) | Misplaced Pages talk: 4.64% (125)
Image: 0% (0)
Template: 0.07% (2)
Category: 0.11% (3)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.04% (1)

• Arthur Rubin's edit count using Interiot's tool

Username Arthur Rubin
Total edits 2693
Distinct pages edited 941
Average edits/page 2.862
First edit 22:35, 15 August 2005
(main) 727
Talk 506
User 101
User talk 238
Template 2
Category 3
Category talk 1
Misplaced Pages 990
Misplaced Pages talk 125

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: I'd probably work on closing some of the backlog of WP:RM and WP:XfD. I've contributed to opening enough of them . I've been watching a couple of "semi-vandals", and I'd probably use rollback on those of their edits which are really of no value, rather than merely being misguided. I'd also use rollback rather than my manual attempts at rollback on clear vandalism. Otherwise, no real change, and I wouldn't be planning to look for opportunities to cause trouble use the admin tools.

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

A: I don't have any articles I'm particularly pleased with (yet). Back on November 7, 2005, I sorted all the elements of Category:Integers into the correct sort order (I think), moving about 10% of them.

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: ... Seriously, I've had edit conflicts with User:RJII over Coercive monopoly and User:CarlHewitt over a number of his personal concepts (mostly in regard mathematics and logic). (Hmmm. Neither of them has been editing lately. Coincidence?). Also, currently, User:Jose and Ricardo aka User:Joseandricardo about a number of strange redirects, disambiguations, and copies of parts of other articles; User:Friedenr on Extreme physical information and variants; and apparently the vast majority of Admins about userboxes. I haven't really been tempted to counter-vandalise pages in response to the (remember, WP:NPA and WP:AGF) questionable edits I've run across, and I've only requested (on WP:AN/I) a block once. I did request a block on WP:AN/3RR once, but it was found inappropriate, and I can live that. I do admit I've twice massively trimmed an article because I couldn't see any way the rest of it was in keeping with WP:NPOV and/or WP:OR, which some people would consider vandalism. I don't think I'd block for anything not obvious without consulting WP:AN/I.

Optional question from Alphachimp

1. In your answer to question 1, you mentioned that "I'd probably use rollback on those of their edits which are really of no value, rather than merely being misguided." What makes an edit have no value (remember WP:AGF)? What is a semi-vandal? Alphachimp 02:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)