Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Anárion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This discussion existed before the RfA page was restructured with subpages. I am simply copying the contents from the history of the main page [1] since I find this discussion to be particularly interesting and worthwhile of easy access. Gadykozma 15:18, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) (modified: Anárion 09:30, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC))

[edit] Anárion (9/6/4) Ends 07:59, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've been actively editing using this account since april 2004, and have over 1500 non-minor edits as of this date. I feel sysop rights could be helpful for helping on patrol pages like Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion, Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, and similar pages. My main interest is in fiction and fictional topics, although I do edit "real topics" when I feel I have something to say. Sysop rights will also occasionally help in merging multiple stubby articles into broader articles. I must point out that currently I am involved in a debate on Acronym with User:Nohat, but I feel that the article's talk page is evidence enough that I am doing my best to work towards a concensus there.

Support

1. —No-One Jones 08:17, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   172 08:29, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC) (At the time of my support vote, I was confusing this user with another user.172 15:27, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC))

2. — Jor (Talk) 15:29, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
3. -- orthogonal 17:52, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
4. Oppose until I see enough evidence that Anárion is not a sockpuppet of Jor. --Lst27 20:45, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)I move my vote to support.
5. Jwrosenzweig 19:05, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC) Er....I like Anarion, and would normally have supported, but Jor's vote is odd, considering it's his first edit in a long while (and that Jor's user page seems to imply he's editing under a different name now). I always liked Jor in the contexts we interacted, so this isn't me bashing either Jor or Anarion. I just have to think about this for a while. I've seen enough sockpuppet weird stuff around here that I trust my own judgment to a good extent -- this just doesn't have the feel of that sort of thing. I trust Anarion, and believe that adminship is well deserved. Jwrosenzweig 13:50, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
6. Neutral > Support. Even if he is a sockpuppet, he hasn't been disruptive. Sockpuppets may be "uncool", but Anarion hasn't acted Jorish. --MerovingianTalk 05:05, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)
7. Vote moved from neutral to support. Andre 16:53, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
8. Support. He's been nice, helpful and contributing, in the couple topics and discussions I've happened to meet him. Aris Katsaris 22:23, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
9. ugen64 19:18, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I'm not convinced. It doesn't help that Jor votes here suddenly, although he hasn't edited articles since April (when his RfA failed, and at the very same time Anárion started editing - Jor's last article edit (apart from three isolated ones in May) took place on April 23, two hours before Anárion's first-ever edit - coincidence?). Also, Jor's user page makes it clear that he is still editing under another name - if that other name isn't Anárion, maybe Jor could tell us what it is. This again is, given the lack of de-sysopping procedures, too much of a risk. It is also interesting that Anárion made about half his edits in the last week only, and they're almost all de-facto minor edits, though not always marked as such. As to Jor, he clearly holds Nazi-sympathetic views like this expressed on Talk:Erika Steinbach: "A peace treaty was made impossible because Poland's allies immediately declared war on Nazi Germany, and it is rather pointless to speculate what might have been had England not taken the invasion of Poland as an excuse to declare war on their economic rival." Gzornenplatz 15:34, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

   I put a note on his talk page shortly after reading your question. If IPs will help convince you, I'll post logged-out here, if Jor will do the same you could compare our IPs. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 15:38, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   So although he practically hasn't edited for months, he sees your message within hours. Amazing. Gzornenplatz 16:21, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

   Anárion logged out 193.67.113.66 15:40, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   That would prove nothing; IPs are a dime a dozen. I recommend you not bother further with this accusation. It is largely irrelevant anyway whether you are someone's sockpuppet if your contributions speak for themselves, and spilling (virtual) ink on this issue will just cause it to haunt you further. The fact that Jor's adminship failed is not a mark against him, either; many good users don't get consensus for adminship for a while. VV 15:44, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

2. 172 Jor connection has me concerned 15:27, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
3. Agree with 172. Ambi 07:47, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
4. Rmhermen 16:08, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)
5. I've been asked to review the technical evidence regarding any connection between Jor and Anárion. Although their most recently used IP addresses don't match, their interests appear to be very similar. I think I'd prefer to step on the side of caution. -- Tim Starling 11:07, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
6. I think this is like an "inverse court" where you are guilty until proved otherwise. Since the evidence above definitely brings doubt, I also oppose. Anarion, please don't take it personally. I am not saying you are a Neo-Nazi. I am just saying that this is one of the possible explanations of the facts above, and until this is ruled out without doubt, I oppose giving you administrator priviledges. If you are interested in the good of Wikipedia, you should agree that caution should be first, even if that principle hurts you personally. Gadykozma 23:14, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
   • Gadykozma writes "until this is ruled out without doubt, I oppose giving you administrator priviledges [sic]." Well, then, how is Anarion to rule this out "without doubt"? -- orthogonal 23:17, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
   • This is rather frustrating. The only "doubt" here seems to be that User:Wik (who I remind everyone was banned for excessive vandalism and edit warring) made a claim that I am Jor's sockpuppet, and apparently therefore people are now judging not me for my contributions, but for their feelings over another user, Jor (who had a nearly succesful RFA [2] in April). Tim Starling has done the search I asked for, and found no evidence that I am anyone's sockpuppet other than that my watchlist is similar to Jor's: I explained below why (I mass-imported List of Middle-earth articles into it, easily over 500 articles). How am I to prove I am myself then? [[User:Anárion|Ана́рыён]] 11:09, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
     • Jor's "nearly successful" RfA was 18-14. With 14 oppose votes, he would have needed 56 supports. Also the question of whether Jor is Anárion does not depend on Wik's claim at all but on the facts stated above which you have not satisfactorily explained, e.g. Jor has supposedly introduced you to Wikipedia, but he stopped editing the moment you started - and although he hasn't edited in months, he immediately reacted when you posted him a message here, and conveniently voted for you, etc. By the way, it's also curious that your application says: "I've been actively editing using this account since april 2004." Using this account? Did you use another account before then? You know, between that and the message that was on Jor's page (before he modified it just now), it all seems as if your plan was (if I hadn't brought the Jor matter up before) to get the safety of adminship and then openly say that you were Jor before and ask for the accounts to be united. Gzornenplatz 17:11, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
       • Well, I have been actively using this account since april 2004. I have not edited much before that, and have been editing logged in ever since. Jor's "immediate reaction" took several hours, and came from a different I.P. as Tim Starling pointed out. Also note that I was editing before and after Jor replied: If I were a "sockpuppet" of Jor, wouldn't he have replied either sooner, and from the same I.P.? I know your counter-argument for that, you'll say "proxy". I guess I cannot convince you or anyone else that I am who I say I am, as long as you want to find "suspicious" data you will no doubt find it. I don't know why Jor stopped editing, I haven't asked him. But given what I see here I have a pretty good idea that his user page is an accurate description. It pains me to see that because of one user's accusation I am being called a sockpuppet and by implication a neonazi, while I am doing my best to prove I am indeed a unique user and not just somebody's sockpuppet, who wishes to be judged by his own contributions, and not by what people think of another user they believe may have changed his writing style, I.P., username, password. I know my interests coincide for a large part with Jor's. My first edits here were Lord of the Rings-related articles, and I still have a great number of them on my watchlist. But if that is a criterion, there are many other users you should be suspecting of being a sockpuppet: I am willing to bet that (for example) Ausir, Aranel, Aris Katsaris (to name but three) also have a great number of Middle-earth articles on their watchlist. I am willing to cooperate with any admin to clear my name of Wik and Gzornenplatz' accusations of being a sockpuppet and a neonazi, but I have to given the chance. [[User:Anárion| (Anárion)]] 19:46, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
         • IPs say nothing; you don't even need proxies, you may just use different dialup ISPs. And I don't think you changed your writing style much at all. Indeed I found more curious similarities: both Anárion's user page and previous versions of Jor's user page use mdashes in the same way. Both Jor and Anárion have used the term "copy-edit" (hyphenated, which is unusual) in edit summaries (e.g. Jor: [3], [4], Anárion: [5], [6]). I checked the three examples you gave (Ausir, Aranel, Aris Katsaris) for comparison, and none of them has ever used "copy-edit" in an edit summary, nor do they use mdashes on their user pages. Coincidence? Gzornenplatz 20:38, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
           • Yes, coincidence. As your other "evidence". The only real evidence pointed out so far by Tim Starling was a blow against your theory. By the way, the verb is copy-edit: Talk:Editor, and a Google site-search on Wikipedia for "copy-edit" reveals more appearances of the hyphenated term on the Wikipedia, so if that is your best evidence, it is rather weak. Your attitude of "guilty until proven innocent" is rather discomforting to say the least, and I sincerely hope that you never have to decide on someone's guilt in real life. [[User:Anárion| (Anárion)]] 22:08, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
             • It's not weak at all. That there are other appearances on Wikipedia goes without saying. Of course you're not the only one ever to use that spelling. However, it is demonstrably very rare. I looked through the last 5000 edits on Recent Changes, and there were 14 instances of "copyedit" - in one word - used in edit summaries, but none at all hyphenated. So it's curious that you two would both hyphenate it. The same goes for the mdashes. And the combination is pretty damning. How many users can you find who have used "copy-edit" in edit summaries and mdashes on their user pages? Gzornenplatz 22:43, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
         • By the way, I never claimed Ausir, Aranel, or Aris Katsaris had a similar writing style, but that they likely also have a watchlist which overlaps for a great part with both Jor's and mine. 22:16, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
           • I didn't say you claimed it. I just used those names as some random control group. Gzornenplatz 22:43, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

I honestly don't have any idea how you could prove yourself innocent. Believe me, if I would have had an idea, I would have brought it up, I have nothing personal against you. But the weird coincidances noted above remain. Just consider yourself unlucky, that's all there is to it.

BTW: it was mentioned above that this is not a simple majority vote. Where are the precise rules recorded? Not in the top of the article where they should be, that's for sure. Gadykozma 15:05, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

1. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 16:25, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

   Merovingian (moved to support)

2. I too like Anarion, but this Jor business is sort-of dubious. Neutral for now. blankfaze | (беседа!) 21:10, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
3. Dubiousity. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 02:48, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
4. Cannot see any real positive community involvement; cannot really see any community involvement at all, actually. Agree with Fennec on dubiosity note. -- Grunt   ҈  03:09, 2004 Sep 12 (UTC)

Comments

• It seems to have been alleged that Anárion was formerly User:Jor (who was involved in German-nationalist POV-pushing and had a failed request for adminship in April). Is that correct? Gzornenplatz 10:28, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

  I know Jor outside the Wikipedia, and was introduced to it by him, but am not the same user. I'll let him answer the nazi accusation himself. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 10:38, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • The only time I remember seeing this accusation was from Wik, not the most credible source. But Wik might have gotten it from elsewhere. VV 15:33, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • It is credible enough seeing that Anárion started at the time Jor left, and that they both edit the same Tolkienish fantasy stuff (except that Jor in addition made those German-nationalist edits). It is not a far-out speculation that Jor, after seeing he could not get adminship with his history, started under a new identity, carefully avoiding making nationalist edits until getting adminship, which he is now trying again. And if he's made admin, and suddenly starts again with the POV edits, there will be no way to get him de-adminned. (And by the way VV, the main problem with Wik was his edit warring, wasn't it? You seem to have taken that up from him pretty well.) Gzornenplatz 16:21, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)
      • Wow, for a second it looked like you might make it an entire paragraph without sniping at me, but my conceptions are back to normal. No, Wik had other problems, not least exemplified by the "hate list" I linked to. VV 16:28, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
        • A hate list that he later removed when I asked him to.Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 08:24, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
          • Well, many asked him to remove it, I don't know who was key. But the fact is he made it in the first place, and it was hardly an isolated instance of personal attacks. VV 01:15, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
            • Actually not very many people did ask him to remove it.IIRC most people just edit warred with him by constantly removing it. I think only myself and Danny asked him to remove it.But the point I'm trying to make is that the "Key" person was Wik. He removed the list himself. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 21:04, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  I was NOT involved in German-nationalist POV-pushing: I was involved (against my will) in banned user:Gdansk's Stalinist propaganda pushing, and banneduser:Wik's edit wars (the troll hates me, and blindly reverted all my edits). To answer your question: I am not his socksuppet nor he mine. — Jor (Talk) 15:29, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Would Jor or Anárion have anything against a sock-puppet search performed by one of the developers? You both seem eager to clear yourself from the suspicions. — David Remahl 03:42, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  While of course I would oppose it on principle ("assume guilt"?), if "the community" feels the need, I do not object to it. However, I do edit from multiple locations (home and work at the least, occasionally other locations), so there will be multiple IP addresses listed. And I do not doubt our watchlists overlap for a large part: I have included nearly all articles from List of Middle-earth articles to my list. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 09:48, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC) Revised, see below.

  Since Gzornenplatz is accusing me of being a "sockpuppet" of User:Jor, and is at the same time accusing Jor of being a neonazi, he is by implication calling me a neonazi. I do not appreciate being labelled such by Gzornenplatz or anyone else. Gzornenplatz' belief I am a "sockpuppet" also seems to be the sole reason for opposing this candidacy, so a search which can clear me of this insane accusation would only be in my benefit. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 07:41, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Could you please not use an image as your signature? There are good reasons for not doing so. Markalexander100 07:49, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  Sure. [[User:Anárion|АПА́ДІОП]] 07:59, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Much better, thanks. ;) Markalexander100 08:03, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• The charge is that Jor pushed (disturbing) POV and that Anárion may be Jor. But Anárion has so far as I know from the above discussion, not pushed POV; even if Anárion is also Jor, the indication would be that Anárion has learned not to push POV and hasn't since April. That would seem to argue that Anárion at least shows the restraint we would find a good quality in all sysops, and would be an argument for support.

• The only issue then is if Anárion and Jor are the same person, in which case Jor's vote in support of Anárion would be ballot-box stuffing -- which I think alone would disqualify a nominee. Since Tim starling finds no evidence that both users use the same IP, I think we must discount this possibility unless further evidence of sockpuppetry is offered.-- orthogonal 11:25, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)