Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Carlosguitar

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Carlosguitar

Final (29/1/3); Originally scheduled to end 21:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC). Nomination successful. --Deskana (talk) 23:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Carlosguitar (talk · contribs) - It is my pleasure to nominate User:Carlosguitar, a valued and trustworthy Wikipedian for consideration. User:Carlosguitar is Brazilian and is fluent in Portuguese. He has been a very good editor over a wide range of articles, including biographies, sports and activities (especially Parkour to which he has made excellent contributions), and Brazil, which with vigorous debate and close collaboration among varied strong viewpoints, User:Carlosguitar helped steer the article to achieve Good Article status. User:Carlosguitar also has extensive experience in administrative areas. He participates in XFD's (where I first met him) where he provides useful and civil comments. He is active in WP:AIV, WP:UAA, WP:CSD, and RC patrolling. He is a good and calm communicator with the various newbies, vandals, and other editors he comes across in RC patrol. He has demonstrated thorough knowledge and understanding of WP and the policies we trust admins to help out with. Simply put, I think he has earned the community's trust and will make a great admin. Carlossuarez46 21:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Carlosguitar 04:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia 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: I am a bit random, these are the areas that I can help:

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

A: Since December 2006, I have been working on Parkour by adding sources, expanding, clarifying. I am proud to say that this article meets GA criteria. Also, I stated 4 articles related to parkour: Lisses, Raymond Belle, Parkour in popular culture and Timeline of parkour. Others works was helping Brazil to meets GA criteria and my RC patrolling.

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: Yes, during the collaboration on Brazil article, there was a lot of disputes between editors, I was involved. My conflict was over the undue weight, WP:BIAS, and the reliability of sources. I just paused my discussion with editors, giving more time to understand our polices, since that is not a easy thing. WP:CCC and WP:DR are nice way to resolve disputes.

Question from User:Pedro

4. Hi Carlosguitar, and thank you for application. I note from your well laid out table above that you are looking to perform some administrator actions at C:CSD. My question is: You see a page tagged for speedy delete with {{db-bio}} the contents of which are;

Elba Maynard is a very well known author from Cleveland who has written and published several books on medical practice.

Assuming for the sake of argument that the only entries in the article history have been the original author and the editor who tagged it for Speedy which speedy deletion criteria would apply, and what would be your actions? Pedro :  Chat  07:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

A: Firstly, I will check if the author of article was warned, if not then I will place {{nn-warn}} on his/her talk page. If the article does not contain the ISBN of books or any other reference. I will try to find some sources to assert the notability and verifiability. Yet, failed to find any sources or reliable sources, the article will be speedy deleted under A7. And take to the WP:AFD.

A question from bainer (talk)

5. Under what circumstances should one ignore a rule?

A: I think, everyone IAR when start editing the Wikipedia. Who is the person that read our polices and guidelines before the first edit? Maybe 0.00001%? Also, I do not think that is a bad idea to speedy close and delete the hoax-like articles at WP:AFD with a high number of delete votes.

A question from Spevw

6. Your nominator and you have a similar name. How did you meet? Are you alternate accounts of the same person. If so, isn't this permitted? (Hint, yes it's permitted but you may comment). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spevw (talk • contribs) 22:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

A: I met him at WP:AFD. No, I am not a sock puppeteer of Carlos Suarez, just another user. You may take a look on legitimate uses of multiple accounts to know when an alternative account is valid, for example: using another account in a public computer to avoid losing your password to keyloggers.

Question from rspeer

7. You say you want to join the fiasco at WP:UAA, so good luck to you. Can you tell me how you define "blatant", when deciding whether a username should be instantly blocked? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:45, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

A: I cannot define, since blatant is subjective. But I think, there is a consensus to block usernames such as User:rsuhrhpwhf29rfifjyhy, User:NameOfYourCompany.com, User:_____is a motherfucker, User:Amyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, User:The history of the most longest username that escaped from the username policy, User:Cum on _____, User:Administrator of Wikipedia, etc...

Optional questions from Kim Bruning

8. What is the policy trifecta. Why did the author pick those policies? Do you agree with them?

A: Policy? Are you sure? :P

9. (Real world situation:) A while ago, en.wikipedia guidelines uniquely banned non-latin usernames. At the time, a metapedian (someone who is present on many many wikis and has admin or bureaucrat or steward on several) including being an admin on the Japanese wikipedia ... has a username that is a hiragana chracter... ie, definitely not latin. This user was blocked at the time, as per policy, and an outrage ensues across several wikis and mailing lists. What would you have done as an en.wikipedia admin, at that point in time?

A:

10. Do you promise to apply WP:WOTTA in future?

A: No, I try to avoid by doing: Oh my God! What the fuck? Barbeque!.

Optional question from User:Piotrus

11: Would you add yourself to Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall? Why, or why not? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] General comments

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

• Links for Carlosguitar: Carlosguitar (talk · contribs · deleted · count · logs · block log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · search an, ani, cn, an3)

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Carlosguitar before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Support

1. As nom! Carlossuarez46 04:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
2. Support Good stuff. T Rex | talk 05:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
3. Support Seems like a strong candidate, civil and patient. --TeaDrinker 06:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
4. Obviously - 'nuff said. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
5. Support No problems here. Would definitely make a good admin. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 13:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
6. Strong support per his answer to question 5. Admins who block new users indefinitely for vandalism often forget that these users have no idea about policy. I'm not going to rule out blocking but indef blocks should be reserved for severe offenses and users who have chronic block histories. --VoL†ro/\/Force 13:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
7. Support due to excellent quantity and quality of edits, use of edit summaries, great answers to questions, and work on AfD etc. Bearian 13:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
8. Support It's about time. east.718 at 16:05, 10/18/2007
9. Support. I second Voltron's comment - excellent answer for question 5. Good luck! -- _{Folic_Acid | talk}  17:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
10. Support Appears to have a good amount of experience and should be a good admin ;) Tiddly-Tom 18:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
11. I have seen this user around many times, and they will make a good administrator. Acalamari 18:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
12. Support, valid contributor with solid knowledge of the Wikipedia world. Regarding your answer to #5, let me note you can already speedy close and delete an hoax article with a presence of a high number of delete votes, per WP:SNOW. --Angelo 21:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
13. troppus (spell it backward) NHRHS2010 ^Talk 21:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
14. PxMa 22:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
15. Eu apoio Precisamos de mais administradores experientes e eficientes, e já agora que falem português. :-) Húsönd 00:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
16. Keine Ahnung was Husond da oben so sagt, aber wenn hier schon mal kein Englisch verwendet wird, dann kann ich ja genauso gut einfach mal auf Deutsch kommentieren, oder? Jedenfalls, guter Benutzer so weit ich sehe und ich vertraue ihm auf jeden Fall die Werkzeuge nicht absichtlich oder versehentlich falsch einzusetzen. Also, warum zum Teufel nicht? — Dorftrottel⁠ 07:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
17. Support - admins with other languages are always useful, and Carlos seems very sensible. Obrigado! (sorry, that's the only word of Portuguese I know that isn't rude). Neil ☎ 11:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
18. Support Editor shows quite a strong grasp of policy, although there may be holes. But, still warrants support. Phgao 11:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
19. Support an ambitious user. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 19:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
20. Support Looks good to me! Very impressive question answering. GlassCobra 20:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
21. Support - you appear to have a decent set of contribs there my friend. Your time has come! :-) Lradrama 16:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
22. Support track is okay with nearly 2000 mainspace edits.No concerns as per track.Pharaoh of the Wizards 17:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

    Is your support based on anything besides edit count? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

23.  Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 09:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
24. Support– It seems like this user would know how to handle conflicts on a case-by-case basis. User seems to have experience with WP:AIV, WP:AFD, and seems to be great in mainspace. Ksy92003(talk) 19:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
25. Support - I don't see the candidate abusing tools, edit history is good so I see no reason not to support.--Sandahl 01:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
26. Support Handled the conflicts at Brazil well. Epbr123 12:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
27. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 21:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
28. Support Looks good to me. Dureo 08:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
29. Support - I like what I see. Jauerback 19:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

1. According to his answer to Q6, he erroneously thinks there is a consensus to instantly block usernames such as "Amyyyyyyyyyyyyyy", and wants to start blocking at UAA. He could create another Ggggggggggggggg12 newbie-biting incident just by following his stated actions. I have to wonder if he's ever considered other ways to deal with minor problems that aren't blocking. I don't want someone with this mindset to become an admin. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

   Ok, after reading the talk page of username policy I see no consensus over it. I removed the "Amyyyyyyyyyyyyyy" as example, what do you think about other examples? Just a clarification, that is not a mindset, I just did not see the discussion. Carlosguitar 13:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

   The other examples you gave are usernames that should be blocked, yes. But UAA doesn't need more people to place blocks: the blocks happen quite fast enough as is. It needs admins who are willing to apply common sense and good faith, who can see the difference between "hate speech" and "too many y's" without a discussion needing to point it out. I appreciate the response, but I'm going to let my oppose stand. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 07:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutral

1. Neutral leaning to Nervous Support Your answer to my question concerns me actually. Yes, check the editor has been warned, fair enough. But there would be no way whatsoever that WP:CSD#A7 would apply. There are some serious assertions of notability. The first thing I'd have done would be to remove the speedy tag. Then go about finding some sources, and possibly end up at WP:AFD if they couldn't be found - but speedy? Nope. However the rest of your edits look good, although automated. AFD discussion seems spot on and the (fairly minimal) CSD tagging you have done seems fine. AIV reporting also seems okay. I'm just nervy you'd hit the delete button without need..... Pedro :  Chat  13:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

   True, I forgot that notability is not temporary and Google is not even the best way to know the notability. I'm sorry. Carlosguitar 13:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

2. One should ignore a rule anytime the rule is preventing Wikipedia from improving or is harming Wikipedia. This is very simple. That's the only issue so I won't oppose, but I can't support. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 18:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

   Neutral Abstain, leaning towards support. Like Wikidudeman, I'm slightly concerned that Carlos sees the role of an admin as more of a rule enforcer than a consensus enforcer. Also found this revert rather objectionable. Still, good-standing editor and seems fairly judicious overall. — xDanielx ^T/_C 06:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

   I tried, but this user just wanted to make some fun. Carlosguitar 09:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

   Interesting... I still wouldn't have deleted the !vote outright (can always comment with a bold note, maybe even strike the !vote for emphasis), but it seems somewhat more reasonable in light of the above. — xDanielx ^T/_C 22:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

3. Neutral leaning heavily towards support based on questions already answered. Excellent replies! :-D One more question to go (clarified the wording, the situation happened a long time ago and has since been resolved, of course. :-) ) --Kim Bruning 20:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.