Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vianello

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] Vianello

Final (0/6/1); Closed by Anthøny at 21:29, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Vianello (talk · contribs) - I'll be up front. I used to be one of Wikipedia's floating IP vandals. It was never bad enough to get me more than warned. Mostly it was just taking opinionated little potshots. But I was rather taken aback by how civilly and swiftly my impish acts were dealt with. It made me feel guilty, rather than amused. The impressive response I faced prompted me to start looking at Wikipedia in a more serious way. Now, my contributions page probably clarifies what happened subsequently. I've taken to using Twinkle to do recent changes patrols, and am also an authorized Vandalproof user. I tend to shy away from doing much actual article writing, as it often seems I lack the sources and expertise to really give my additions any weight. But aside from not having created "my own" articles yet, I feel that I have accumulated a well-rounded and hopefully credible track record with Wikipedia. Though I may sometimes lack the gift for diplomatically handling vandals that those who inspired me did, I otherwise feel that my established record is a firm testament to my conviction and intentions. Vianello (talk) 18:48, 26 May 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: My primary work has been as a recent changes patroller using Twinkle and, now, Vandalproof. Ideally, I would like to use admin priveleges to facilitate this function. Admin response, when needed, has generally been prompt and efficient in my experience. But there's a lot for admins to do on Wikipedia, and thus, this response can never be perfect. I'd like, however, to tweak it toward that unreachable goal. This primarily includes monitoring WP:aiv and pages for speedy deletion. However, I feel that I have a broad enough palette of experience to be able to contribute in other areas, such as AfD.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: If we set aside my anti-vandalism work, I've always felt strangely proud of handling some information-adding and dispute negotiation in Necronomicon. It's a minor thing, but it's always made me sit back with satisfaction and go, "Hey, I feel scholarly." I've also had many pleasing experiences with helping coach authors of speedy-deletion tagged pages in understanding notability criteria and how to get their pages to "stick" better in the future. I was also pretty proud of my spiffing up of Sacculina, until I realized to my mortification that I had failed to notice the page concerned a genus, not a species, and had to undo all my modifications.
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: Heavens yes. Sometimes, vandals get beligerant, and that's rarely cozy. I've never resorted to outright obscenity, but my responses have sometimes been regretfully and unproductively harsh. It hasn't affected how I actually handle issuing warnings, AIV reports, etc., but my tone in these situations has not always been professional. In future, I plan to put more of a lid on it, and try to embody the diplomatic spirit that won me over from "the dark side".

[edit] General comments

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

[edit] Discussion

  • Can't say that I disagree with the opposition grounds given, unfortunately. In the interest of rectifying this for the future, I'd love to hear some more specific "admin related areas" I could improve my experience in. I'm also a little unsure what the comment regarding CSD tagging specifically meant. - Vianello (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
WP:AIV (you have a couple of reports here already), WP:RFPP, WP:UAA, etc. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 20:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Thank you (and everyone else - I'm glad the spirit of civility is still strong) kindly! I'll make a priority of looking into these. I do make a point of hopping on AIV any time it's clearly necessary, but sometimes there's just nothing to report, and other times one gets beaten to it. - Vianello (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
  1. Oppose. While I believe you are sincere, I cannot support you at this time. I'd like to see you come back in 3-6 months with more edits to the mainspace and more admin related areas. And keep a close eye on the CSD tagging. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 19:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. As your contributions only go back to February. I'm happy that you turned around, but I feel as if you need more experience.  Mm40 (talk | guestbook | contribs)  19:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose with moral support. Sorry, but you simply haven't enough edits to prove experience, and there is minimal XfD activity. Apologies. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose (also with moral support) - a little premature I think. I might also suggest archiving your talk page rather than just deleting old messages. People like to see how potential admins interact with others and it helps not to have to dig through old versions. Widen your breadth of administrative-type activity per the above suggestions and come back in a few months and I would probably be able to support. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 19:28, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Not enough experience yet, but don't sweat it (I applied early too). Come back in about 6 months and I will support if you keep up the good work. RedThunder 20:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose I really would like to see more experience over a longer period of time, before I could consider supporting. MBisanz talk 21:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral
  1. Neutral I will not oppose, since there is nothing on which to base an oppose - as there is nothing on which to base a support. I suggest that getting involved in article space (you don't need sources to contribute, and you learn a lot about the important side of WP in doing so) and the discussion pages. I like the honesty and heartfelt commitment, and look forward to supporting toward the end of the year. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:25, 26 May 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.