Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MBisanz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

[edit] MBisanz

Final (58/0/2); Closed as successful by WjBscribe at 03:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

MBisanz (talk · contribs) - I am honored to nominate Mbisanz for adminship. I have been his admin coach and he has diligently worked to learn various aspects of being an admin. He has worked at WP:AN, WP:ANI, WP:AN3, WP:SSP, WP:COIN. He does excellent work on wiki, analyzes situations well and will make a fine admin. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Co-nomination by Keilana - I have worked briefly with MBisanz as an admin coach, and I have been extremely impressed by his conduct and skills throughout the time I've known him. He has responded to admin-related queries on my talk page—without my asking—in an exemplary manner, giving attention to detail and showing the utmost kindness, as in protection here. He has an excellent knowledge of policy, and offers well-thought out opinions at the various admin noticeboards, including excellent, informed reports to WP:AN3, WP:AIV, WP:SSP, and WP:RFCU. He is very observant of COI, even writing out any possible conflicts of interest he may have (here). MBisanz also participates regularly at several village pumps, has worked in dispute resolution, comments on the BLP and copyright noticeboards, and comments often on things up for deletion, always maintaining a collegial attitude and civil air. I think that his work in these areas would be made much easier with the addition of the admin tools, and humbly ask the community if they trust him to have access to the block, protect, delete, and other admin tools. Keilana|Parlez ici 03:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept. MBisanz talk 03:27, 9 February 2008 (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: There are a couple of areas I've identified that I'd like to take part in:
First, I think there is a backlog at WP:AFD that I could assist with in closing articles per community consensus.
Second, I'm a grad student and keep odd hours. I've seen situations where a user need the immediate intervention of an admin, such as BLP, Legal threats, SPAM. Having an extra set of eyes around at 3AM EST I think would be a good thing to maintain WP:CSD and protect pages undergoing edit wars, pending community discussion.
Third, some of our noticeboards seem to be underused and/or under-monitored (COI/N & UPH/HD for example). Rather than wait for a user to get tired of inaction at these boards and drag it over to ANI, I'd try and make myself available to either comment, or more seriously, delete blatantly inappropriate content (more applicable of COIN than UPH/HD).


2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Well my best contributions would be over at Special:Longpages and CAT:DFUI where I try and keep articles and images as user-friendly/compliant as possible. No one wants to read 20 pages of thick content or deal with a 300Kb page loading when alphabetical subpages would work better. And of course, Wikipedia must be compliant with copyright laws, so I've probably fixed ~1,200 images that in some manner were non-compliant with WP:NFC.
As far as new content creation, I've written some short articles, improve others through wikifying, etc. I have 1 DYK so far and hope to work on more. I feel I'm better at content manipulation (arrangement, splitting, re-writing) than I am at creation, so I tend to focus in that area.
Also, I've authored a couple of proposals, the most noteworthy of which to be approved was a change to Wikipedia:Upload (with User:Remember the dot's help) that encourages users to better comply with our copyright policies. Also, I re-designed the top nav-bar used on admin pages to reduce AN/ANI traffic hopefully.


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: Sure, almost everytime I try to save a major noticeboard page me and MediaWiki have it out :) Seriously though, I don't think I've been involved in anything that would be a significant conflict (at least nothing that caused me stress or lack of sleep). Have I and other editors disagreed over material?; yes, have we stopped respecting each other or seeking dialogue?; no. In particular, at Talk:Mitt Romney I brokered a compromise that required me to accept others views as well as improving the page. Another example was at Neopup PAW-20 which involved numerous content and potential COI issues, but was resolved with few, if any, bad feelings. I am a member of WP:MEDCAB and have a couple of cases under my belt, so I think I can handle everyday wiki-admin-conflict.


Optional question from Malleus Fatuarum

4. - If selected, would you add yourself to the Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall? If not, then why not, and if you would, then what would your criteria be?
A: Yes, I would add myself. My criteria are at User:MBisanz/Recall. I wish there was some standard expedited procedure for Recall. But there is not. However, as I believe that I should be accountable to the community, and that in the event I lost the faith of a number of editors through improper admin action, the sooner I be held accountable, the better it is for the community, I am providing this process. MBisanz talk 04:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] General comments

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

[edit] Discussion

  • To respond to Dlohcierekim and help clarify, if I'm correct, Teplice nad Bečvou is the town article your referring to. This is the version I put in for CSD [1] on Jan 31. It appeared to be an article on a spa, which to me, meant a resort. I really couldn't see anything that indicated it was anything else and therefore put it in as a non-notable company (maybe advert or prod would've been better, hindsight). Cantagalo Station is another place CSD I did, which in the form of [2] which seemed like an advertisement for the area around the station (more-so with deleted picture). Looking over my record, Brittany Dempsey I CSD' and then I removed the tag when I realized it was part of a project to add all people in that topic. Flint Dille was someone who even with 1 interview, which wasn't there in the version [3] I CSD'd, is probably not-notable (but it'd be an AfD since its contested and has the fan-site interview). [4] is a netzine that was started by the zine's marketing dept and seemed to clearly lack notability. That is all I see through Jan 31, I can dig back further, but I wasn't using TW before then, so I won't be able to search by edit summaries as easily. Thank you though for taking the time look over my record, its always a good thing to look at the big picture of how one's edits trend. MBisanz talk 07:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
In this case, do you think a prod or AfD would have been the better choice? dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 07:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keeping in mind I didn't know it was a town, I'd say PROD with a reason of "Non-notable spa, no direct independent sources, written in a promotional tone". If I'd known it was a town (wow I totally missed the "Spa towns in the Czech Republic" Cat at the bottom, big whoopsie), then it have been tagged for Tone and Sources and maybe Wikify, depending on how big and out of place the picture was. MBisanz talk 07:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Valid point there...I mean, if you said prod regardless that'd be bad (because towns are teh controversyz). I'm gonna stay neutral until Dloh comments, though, just in case you did miss something on the scale of deleting the Main Page :) Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 07:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, my. Now I need to go back and get the dif's I looked at last night and makes sure we're talking about the same thing. Thanks, DHMO for doing what I should have. Pressed for time. Will probably change, though. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
You make me feel like I got diffs. The candidate did actually! dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 22:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Support
  1. Support as nom. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Support as nom also. Keilana|Parlez ici 03:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support Just looked at his contribs, he seems to do his job pretty well. BTW, is your username by any means intended to be a joke on M.Bison's name ? - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 04:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
    Hmm, interesting character. Nope, my username is based on my real-life identity. MBisanz talk 04:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. Support, because of the thoughtful answer to Q4. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 04:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. Support, great answers to the questions, good edit history. Will weild the mop well.Dreadstar † 05:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  6. Support. Has made good contributions at the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. I believe he has the judgment to carry out admin tasks effectively. EdJohnston (talk) 05:31, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  7. Support. As this user's main admin coach before I had to stop editing Wikipedia recently, I have particularly been impressed by his willingness to seek feedback when he is not sure about something, and his constant urge to improve. I am sure this would continue as an admin. Academic Challenger (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  8. Support As per Rlevse and has over 5000 mainspace edits and over 10000 overalll.good track no concerns.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  9. Support The minor concerns offered below seem minutia in the grand scheme of this user's contributions. Good show. Wisdom89 (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  10. Support Seems sincere, a good editor, and learns from mistakes, which we all make. Sumoeagle179 (talk) 11:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  11. Per this. Rlevse and Keilana nomination too. Rudget. 13:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  12. Support per above. NHRHS2010 13:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  13. Support - trustworthy editor. Addhoc (talk) 13:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  14. Support: I'm impressed by the quality of the edits, and the answers to the above questions. You'll do well with administrator tools. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 14:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  15. Support Thanks for allaying my concerns. Good luck with the mop. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  16. Support good editor. —αἰτίας •discussion• 14:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  17. About time super strong support. I don't quite recall where I first ran across MBisanz, but it was very positive and has remained so. Since our first encounter, I've seen him everywhere (hard to miss that signature:) He goes out of his way to communicate with good faith, out of his way to do things The Right WayTM, and has been active in more ways than most editors. I've seen him in the article space with aptitude, the Wiki-space with poise, always trying to find solutions to problems with tact. Embodies clue. I've been nothing but completely impressed with his dedication to this little world we all type in. Cheers, MBisanz. Always remember - if you don't know it, ask it; if you know it, do it!. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  18. Support. Can't put it any better than Rudget's support. Good luck, Malinaccier (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  19. Support will use tools well; also Rudget makes a good point. SpencerT♦C 19:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  20. Support - An excellent user who seems to know his stuff from his comments in admin discussions - will be fine with the tools. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  21. Support. I'm sure he'll make a fine admin. · AndonicO Hail! 21:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  22. Well, since Mike supports, I must too :) Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 22:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  23. Support. I was concerned earlier about the issues raised under "oppose" but I am now satisfied by the discussion there. He will make a good admin. --Bduke (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  24. Support Looks good, though I would ask MBisanz to take it slow at first. Good luck! GlassCobra 23:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  25. Support A good editor, the contributions say it all. Swirlex (talk) 01:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  26. Support Jmlk17 01:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  27. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 01:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  28. A contented support. Good, steady contributions. +sj + 07:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  29. Support - excellent noms, good history, good answers. Should be a fine admin :) - Alison ❤ 09:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  30. Sounds good. Snowolf How can I help? 15:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  31. If annoying signature is the biggest complaint against him, then support - Revolving Bugbear 21:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  32. Daniel (talk) 01:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  33. --PIO (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  34. Excellent candidate. Acalamari 17:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  35. Support, though I encourage him to use prod instead of speedy deletes if there's a shadow of a doubt (e.g., whether it's a spa or a spa _town_) so that whoever wrote it (or someone else) has a chance to clarify a notable topic. Rigadoun (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  36. Support, yes--Hu12 (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  37. Support Great candidate! нмŵוτнτ 01:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  38. Support - I have to say I was greatly surprised to find that you weren't already.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 07:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  39. Support - Give em' the mop! Tiptoety talk 15:03, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  40. Support: This is another user that I've been waiting to support. No hesitation, and I'm confident this user will make an excellent admin. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
  41. The Transhumanist 01:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  42. Support — Zerida 02:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  43. Support. Helpful and sensible. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 09:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  44. Support Seen around and impressed. Woody (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  45. Support for all the reasons listed above. Razorflame (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  46. Support - will make a fine admin and I’ve seen a lot worse signatures! —Travistalk 21:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  47. Support. Singopo (talk) 00:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  48. Support. Thoughtful and intelligent, good grasp of policy, already good participation at administrator noticeboards. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  49. Support Reasoned and a good editor. --Veritas (talk) 05:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  50. Will make one hell of an administrator. east.718 at 14:13, February 14, 2008
  51. Support: --Bhadani (talk) 16:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  52. Support: --Fred Plotz (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  53. Support. Have met him in person, gotten to know him and have no doubt he'll do great with the tools. Daniel Case (talk) 19:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  54. seresin | wasn't he just...? 05:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  55. Support I trust his judgment and his efforts at CAT:DFUI show a rare willingness to deal with administrative backlogs in a constructive manner. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 08:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  56. Support Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 10:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  57. Support Chalk one more up for this guy from me. Gary King (talk) 21:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  58. Support - would make a good admin. --BelovedFreak 22:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Oppose
oppose Nom is doing good work and is civil. Unfortunately, a quick review of the nom's contribs revealed at least 5 declined speedies this month, with concerns expressed over not recognizing notbility and the tagging of a town-- towns are generally inherently notable. I would like to see nom slow down and look harder for notability and how articles stack up against CSD criteria before being given the delete button. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 05:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Understand the concern, but I'm sure he's already learned from this. Sumoeagle179 (talk) 11:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmm. in week or two? If my argument is persuasive, then other opposes will follow. Doesn't look like it right now though. :} Apparently I've caused some confusion. I am referring to the candidate. Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Struck for now per polite and civil response above. Will probably change to support and congratulate nominee as this looks good so far. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral
On the one hand, I have great respect for Rlevse and (especially, and many of you will know why) Keilana. On the other hand, I have great respect for Mike's (in oppose) RfA judgement. Some diffs would be great. dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 07:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC) - to support
I found these four in the last 1,000 edits dating to January 31: [5], [6], [7], [8]. SorryGuy  Talk  08:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, I think I explained all except Jeffery M. Leving, which I CSD' on a WP:SPAM basis due to the highly promotional "Accolades" section and total lack of sources. MBisanz talk 08:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
As DHMO says. I had trouble reconciling my respect for the nominator with what I thought I was seeing. Good job to DHMO on providing the difs. And good job to MBisanz on responding to my o. Dlohcierekim Deleted? 14:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Wait, I provided diffs? ^_^ dihydrogen monoxide (H20) 22:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Actually it was sorry guy. My eye skipped his sig. Not enough coffee this AM. Cheers, Dlohcierekim Deleted? 22:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  1. I think that anyone using such signature simply does not respect other users. The candidate also decided not to answer to my comment at User talk:MBisanz#Signature. Naturally, I was going to vote against this nomination, but everyone says he is so much useful for the project ... well, if I'm the only one distracted by such signatures, I guess it's simply my loss here, and I'll try to visit Wikipedia discussion pages less often. Cheers. / AlexSm 17:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
    Wait, you aren't a fan of colorful signatures, ones with backgrounds, or both? Completely just curious. =) нмŵוτнτ 01:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
    I think you need to read WP:SIG a little more and maybe increase your tollerance a tad - it's a signature for god sake! I actually told him when he came to me for advice that your “complaint” was frivolous. There’s a lot more constructive (and friendly) things you can be doing with your time than complaining about non-issues with peoples signatures. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
    I also note that your “question” wasn’t a question; rather, it was a statement that didn’t seem to require an answer. —Travistalk 21:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Neutral. Great candidate, but I disapprove of the strong-arm tactics the community has used to force this "admins open for recall" notion. We already have that process (ArbCom), paranoid hysteria about "OMG rouge admin abuse" and grumblings about "X users, Y months, Z edits" are unnecessary. Bureaucrats, please count this as a support vote if it comes down to it. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 01:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
What has the community's strong arm tactics on recall (which I agree with BTW), got to do with this person's worthiness of being an admin or not? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Nothing, that's why I said both that MB is a great candidate and I signaled to the 'crats that if it comes close, I would care to have my opinion treated as a support. I merely object to the now apparently mandatory question about admin recall. I fail to see how admin recall judges a person's ability to be an able admin. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 02:33, 16 February 2008 (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.