Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tanner-Christopher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

[edit] Tanner-Christopher

(19/10/4); Originally scheduled to end 18:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC). No clear consensus to promote. --Deskana (talk) 20:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Tanner-Christopher (talk · contribs) - Hello, this is my first time applying for an Administrator position. I first started out with Wikipedia editing articles for the WikiProject Wine. After finding the WikiProject Food and Drink which is the parent project of the wine project I decided my efforts were better spent there. In the time I have been with the project I have completely updated the project page for visual appeal and ease of use. I have moderated discussion on the project's talk page as well as worked with the project's upkeep. I have assessed and tagged many of the articles for the project and when I found I was overworked by doing that and working on articles and other items for the project I sought out new members to assist me in the task of tagging. I also created the monthly newsletter that goes out to our members. Since I became a member and spread the presence of the project through Wikipedia, our membership has gone from sixteen members to thirty-nine. I also update the Food Portal each month, which had been abandoned some months before hand.

My articles contributions are all in the realm of food and wine, but mostly food. My largest contributions so far have been on the French cuisine article and I am working on the Italian cuisine article amongst many others. I am also extremely diligent in reverting edits identified as vandalism and I attempt to warn and submit vandals when deemed necessary. I am a strong supporter of Wikipedia and feel that if I was given the abilities of an administrator on Wikipedia, I would be able to better serve the members of Wikipedia by being a definitive person that they can goto for assistantship with their personal work here. I thank you for your consideration and look forward to answering your questions. Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 18:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Before the nomination closes and this page goes into archives, I just wanted to say thanks to the people who supported me and an equal thanks to the people who opposed as most of you gave me some great perspective into how I can be helping out Wikipedia even more. I truly support Wikipedia and would love to see it one day accepted as an appreciated academic source. As a graduate student one often hears how Wikipedia is not to be trusted, but it is those of us who work through proper editing and those of you whom are administrators that respect the tools you have that will bring Wikipedia to the level of our hard-copy encyclopedias. The advantage we have is that we have many more experts in many more subjects than they do. Thanks again and I hope to get to know more of you after this. If any of you are into food or drink, I kindly invite you to the WikiProject Food and Drink to help out. If the probable happens and my nomination does not got through, you will see me at the end of my semester applying again (I do more work during the semester, don't tell my professors).--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 03:47, 20 September 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: Numerous, including deletion of articles deemed to be not to the standards of Wikipedia, locking articles with excessive unregistered user vandalisms, blocking of users that are vandals after proper review, etc.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have revitalized the WikiProject Food and Drink and work toward keeping it active, I revise the Food Portal monthly which had been adandoned for quite a few months, Creation of WikiProject Food and Drink Monthly Newsletter, for articles French cuisine, Italian cuisine (A work still in progress) and others.
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: I have had discussions over edits on a few articles such as Italian cuisine and my use of the Chicago citation format on the Chef article, but in each instance the discussion has ended in amicable terms. I strive to not get involved in conflict. When I first started I had an issue with an article entitled Wine country and learned from that initial incident that we all need to work toward the better good of the whole of Wikipedia, not just our own personal viewpoints and since then the issue has resolved itself.

[edit] General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Tanner-Christopher before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

  • Regardless of the eventual outcome, I want to commend the candidate for his mature and level-headed behaviour during this RfA. Unlike most candidates, he's responded to criticism calmly and reasonably, and in a few months I hope to see him re-apply for RfA. WaltonOne 10:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, one has to take it in stride, Wikipedia is fun and enjoyable to me. The thought just came to me the other day that I could help out more when I was doing something if I had some of the extra tools. If people take this too seriously, then that is why we end up with arguments all the time in regular life, let alone on Wikipedia. Working on Wikipedia however has certainly helped me to increase my academic knowledge as a chef and a graduate student. With or without administrative tools I wouldn't stop being a part of the community, thanks again.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 13:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Support

  1. Moral Support - As Pedro says, you need more experience with the deletion policy and other admin-related areas. Don't be discouraged, though; you're a good editor, and your careful and well-written nomination statement shows that you certainly have the potential and maturity to be an admin one day. This request will probably fail, but I urge you to try again in a couple of months; I'd be happy to give you any help and advice you need. WaltonOne 20:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    Not a problem, I appreciate the support. Besides getting to know some administrators, this has given me some advice even to work on the project I support. Thanks again for the kind words, if my 16 credits of grad school doesn't get to me this semester, you will see me in a few months perhaps.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 20:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support appears to be a quality editor. Acalamari 20:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support--U.S.A. (talk contribs) 21:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support. There is no reason to believe this user will abuse the tools, so there is no reason to oppose. RyanGerbil10(C-Town) 21:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  5. Support - I agree. Deb 21:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  6. Support Switched from oppose. The more talk page comments I read, the more I see a calm, polite person with the reasonable disposition suitable for someone who has access to a few extra tools. I don't think, based on what he's saying above, that he wants to delete things from CAT:CSD or WP:AFD, but rather articles he comes across in his normal editing on wiki, and probably those related to his subject area, of which he has valuable specialist knowledge. Even if Christopher takes a few moments to figure out the difference between hard blocks and soft, I can't see how the net effect of his adminship could be anything but positive. Per RyanGerbil10. --Chaser - T 09:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    Thank you for the comments, my intention is only to use the tools for articles in my "specialty" area as I am an academic chef and would honestly only be using them in the areas in which I am familiar with. It is my opinion that areas of Wikipedia are best addressed by people who have expertise in that area. I also would not use a tool unless I completly understood it, it would be detrimental to Wikipedia and myself as many new colleagues from the hospitality industry have met me through Wikipedia.
  7. Very weak support Although this is someone I'd usually oppose due to lack of experience, the very fact that he seems to have always confined himself to his specialist field gives me the confidence that he'd only stick to areas he understood — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    Thank you and yes, my intention is to only use the tools in my area of expertise.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 17:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support Unless there are incivility issues I've not seen, i doubt nom will abuse the tools. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  9. Support I don't see any problems, looks like a quality editor. Tiddly-Tom 19:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  10. Extremely Weak Support. Good editor, but has little admin related experience. •Malinaccier• T/C 21:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  11. Support. Has barely sufficient number of edits, but has worked on many high-quality articles. He has learned to use edit summaries more consistently. Wikiproject edits are, in my mind, as good as AIV, XfD, or AfD work. It's possible that he doesn't need the mop, but on the other hand, will probably not abuse it. Bearian 22:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    "Has barely sufficient number of edits..." He has nearly 4,000 edits! For crying out loud. ➪HiDrNick! 15:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
  12. Support I normally would be more uncertain with a user with fewer project-space edits, but I think I will be more lenient here because of the good things I see. Captain panda 00:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  13. Why the hell not? Ral315 » 05:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
  14. Support Even though this RFA may not succeed due to a lot of "lack of experience" type opposes below, I still want to offer my support per your valuable contributions as an expert in your area, as well as your calmness, humility and composition that you show here, including this very nice response above: "With or without administrative tools I wouldn't stop being a part of the community, thanks again.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 13:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC) ". Best of luck, Kudret abiTalk 02:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  15. Support - I see no evidence that this user will execute the tools in anything but a mature and level-headed manner. --Haemo 03:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  16. Support. While agree with those below that more experience would be desirable, everything in your contribs looks good. You seem calm and sensible and make good comments in deletion discussions. Vandal-fighting activity suggests you'd know when to use the block button. Not all vandals keep going past the last warning and need to be reported to WP:AIV and sometimes another will report them first - the reports you made were appropriate. Hopefully if this request fails you'll pass without incident in a couple of months or so - I suspect a bit more contribution in admin areas, and perhaps some experience of tagging articles for speedy deletion (Special:Newpages is a useful starting point) would address the concerns below. WjBscribe 14:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  17. Support You may not have all the experience in the world, but your contributions and conduct during this RFA show that you have the temperment and restraint to use the tools appropriately. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 16:18, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  18. Support User:Tanner-Christopher has made substantial contributions to Wikipedia's coverage of food and drink, and I am confident he would make a good admin. --Daniel11 06:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
  19. Support In line with iridescent's reasoning. Hiberniantears 14:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Weak oppose. You're a good contributor, and your WikiProject is doing great, but I'm concerned that you may have a bit of a lack of experience in the project namespace (with no contributions to XfD, admin-related areas or anything except WikiProjects) and that you may need some more experience before becoming an admin. Try to gain some familiarity with the criteria for speedy deletion and the notability guidelines. Voice your opinion in some XfDs. I'd be glad to support you in a few months' time. Melsaran (talk) 18:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    Thank you for your comments, I will follow your suggestions.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 19:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    Weak oppose switched to support You don't really have enough non-admin contributions in areas that you plan to use the admin tools to tell me about how you would use them. For example, you want to block editors, but I see three eight reports to WP:AIV and no requests for blocks elsewhere. You also want to deleted articles, but I don't see any WP:AFD discussion or WP:CSD tagging. I suggest you do a little new page patrol and counter-vandalism and re-apply. It's helpful to predict how you'll handle the admin tools. Best of luck with your WikiProject, which looks to be coming along nicely.--Chaser - T 19:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    I usually discuss the deletion proposals on the pages themselves, but I see what you mean. As for only three reports to WP:AIV, I know I have reported more than that, but not recently. I'll keep up with you suggestions though, thank you.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 19:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    You're right. I missed some. It was eight.--Chaser - T 19:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Weak oppose per above, try to participate at WP:XFD especially WP:AFD, you gain much experience about WP:PG. You are doing a good job to main space. Good luck. Carlosguitar 19:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Strong oppose changed to Weak oppose. Gross lack of experience in general is concerning - but contribs seem to be good. I hope to see you back here in a few months, however. --Benchat 19:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    So why the strong oppose?--Chaser - T 19:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    That's what I meant :-) --Benchat 04:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. I agree with Melsaran. 8 AIV edits, but you want to block vandals...nada. More project space experience, and come back soon! Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 22:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  5. Oppose I'd like a bit more expierience. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  6. Weak Oppose candidates has a good attitude, but more experience is required for me to fully support. VanTucky Talk 23:54, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  7. Oppose You need more experience. In the meantime, do not be discouraged over this and try again after a few months. --Siva1979Talk to me 05:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  8. Oppose Per lack of overall experience. Jmlk17 09:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  9. Oppose per lack of exp. I would suggest working for another month or two before returning. Thanks. Marlith T/C 22:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  10. Oppose - more experience needed yet, although you are moving in the correct direction. Keep up the great work and in two or three months time, your RfA should look more attractive. :-) Lradrama 08:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
  11. As above - let me know at your next RfA in 2-3 months, and I'll support then. For now I have to oppose. DS 19:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral I see no reason to pile on. The concerns by others in oppose are very valid, and I really can't support this RfA. However I don't see anything that can't be "fixed". This is simply a question of gaining some experience in admin related areas, perhaps though more input at WP:XFD and via Recent Change patrol and New Page patrol with resulting contributions to WP:AIV and WP:CSD. Do not be discouraged and certainly do not think that your work so far is not appreciated. If you would like to discuss further my talk page is always open, as, I am sure, is that of all contributors to this RfA and wider. Very Best. Pedro |  Chat  20:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    I appreciate the suggestions, thanks.--Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 20:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Neutral I am in agreeance with Pedro, user has demonstrated calmness, and experience in his area. But use of AIV is a tad low, but no doubt will make great admin in future. Phgao 15:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Neutral In terms of civility and maturity I see absolutely no problem, but I'd be a bit concerned about experience. I can see you've made some great edits and contributed well but, unfortunately, experience is the key. Contributing to an area where you are comfortable in is a plus for me. I would definitely support in the future if you had just a tad more experience in admin related areas. Hooah. ScarianTalk 10:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Neutral but moral support. Would love to give support, but you're just too inexperienced in crucial policy areas, even for occasional tool usage. But I can't wait to support you next time. Please do drop me a line when you next run at RfA. --Dweller 15:41, 19 September 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.