User talk:Elonka/RfA ponderings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Electrawn's Questions

Elonka, I would support/nominate you for admin in a heartbeat without question. That said, these are some critical questions for you to ponder. Electrawn 08:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

  • You are a long time, high level executive at Simutronics. Please explain your past edits to Simutronics, Gemstone IV, Dragon Realms and other related pages. As an admin, if someone were to place criticism in those articles, how would you react?
All of my past edits to articles about my company or company's products were done while mindful of WP:AUTO and WP:V. As for any new criticism that might be added after I had admin access, it would depend on the type of criticism. If the information that was added was properly sourced per WP:V, and also relatively neutral and notable, in line with WP:NPOV, there probably wouldn't be any need for any kind of reaction. However, if criticism was added which was unfounded or without reliable sources, then any editor who sees it (including me) should remove it immediately. As for my adminship, if approved, I do not anticipate my behavior in such a case being any different than it already has been as a normal editor. -Elonka 02:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • As a source for cryptography and a game developer, you have become a notable person for inclusion in wikipedia at Elonka Dunin. What are your thoughts on auto-biographical edits? As an admin, how would you react to critical edits to Elonka Dunin?
I am in full agreement with WP:AUTO, that it is very difficult to write about oneself in a completely neutral manner, and that it is far better for a third party to write an article about someone. Also, while reviewing other new articles on Wikipedia, I have seen the damage (and sometimes outright silliness) that results when company PR departments or music promoters seek to create "articles" that are nothing but thinly-veiled advertisements (and sometimes not so thinly-veiled) which are completely inappropriate for Wikipedia. However, just because many people cause problems with autobiographical edits, I do not think that there should be a total ban on them, because I have also seen many positive benefits of encouraging notable individuals to take an active interest in their Wikipedia bios. They can review them for accuracy, donate photos, suggest references, and do many other things which ultimately result in stronger articles, as long as it is done with care and oversight.
In terms of critical edits to the Elonka Dunin article, I do not anticipate that I would handle things any differently as an admin, than I already have as a normal editor. In other words, anything I did would be done while being mindful of WP:V, WP:AUTO and WP:BLP. If any admin action was required, I would seek outside assistance rather than handling things myself. --Elonka 02:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • As an admin, notable wikipedians become inadvertant meta:metapedians. In this role, how do you see yourself supporting wikipedia (internally and externally) in the future?
I find that I get the most enjoyment from my time on Wikipedia, with a mix of article creation and behind-the-scenes activities. For example, I have devoted many many hours to Category:Category needed, and reviewing Special:Uncategorizedpages. If I am approved as an admin, I think it's natural to assume that the mix/ratio would skew a bit more towards administrative duties, but I plan to continue with article creation and editing as well. I have a sizable backlog of articles that I still want to write. In terms of offline activities, I have a regular speaking schedule about games and cryptography at various events around the country, and I am already starting to include talks about Wikipedia within that schedule. As an admin, I imagine that that would increase somewhat as well. --Elonka 02:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


Good Luck.

Interesting questions, thanks! --Elonka 02:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)