Jump to content

Project:Requests for adminship/The Flying Spaghetti Monster

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further changes should be made to this discussion.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster[change]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster (talk · contribs)

End date: 30 August 2008

Right. I thought long and hard about this and several things made up my mind.

1. I recently passed 1000 edits, 59% of which are mainspace edits. This is not a reason in itself merely a statistic that I think shows my experience on this encyclopedia.

2. Waiting times. I often find having tagged a page for QD there is often a wait of an hour or more before it is deleted. When I edit most, between 5.00 PM and 10/11 PM my time there are often no admins online at all. Often at these times it is just me and Tholly, of which neither of us can delete pages, block vandals etc. One night this week I believe we tagged around 8 or 9 articles for QD in one night, yet none of them were deleted until the next morning. As it was the vandals stopped after a level 2 warning but if they hadn't, asides from constant reverts ther wouldn't be much we could have done. I'm not blaming anyone, it's just the way the times work out on an international encyclopedia. That means, if anyone came across this wiki at these times they would find a lot of vandalised/nonsense/downright offensive articles. The other day I tagged the artice Souljaboy, which had blatant racism and homophobia, for QD and it stayed for eight hours. If I could delete pages as an admin I think I would neatly fill this time slot gap that I have often noticed. It's not every night but its often enough.

3. After the debacle of the Razorflame RfA, sorry Razor, I made it my bussiness to learn all the rules in case I ever wanted to apply for sysop privileges, so I think I know the rules well enough.

4. Asides from all that, I think I would be a worthwhile contributor to this encylopedia and even more so with admin powers. I have got Jupiter up to (hopefully) VGA standard, have expanded quite a lot of articles including Human and NASA and created at least 100. I have also tagged at least 40 or so articles for QD and not as many but still some for RfD.

I won't reapply for quite a while if I don't get this but I think I have a good chance this time. (Fingers crossed ( : ) Thankyou for reading. F S M 18:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Self Nomination

Candidate's acceptance: F S M 18:53, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I withdraw this nomination with 6 opposes and 0 supports F S M 20:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Support[change]

#File:Symbol partial support vote.svg Weak support. Alright, when I vote/discuss RfAs, I compare myself at the time of my RfA to them now. I have no problem with trusting you. You've been here for 8+ months, I was a 3 months. Your QD tags were done well, but I had a more. You don't have many VIP reports, I didn't have many either and haven't blocked many users/IPs since. Page protection isn't needed very much here, so that's mostly irrelevant. In the next week ('til the end of this RfA), continue to revert as much vandalism as possible, even going back through the rest of the day and checking for missed vandalism. Read any policies we have here, read/skim over all the most basic policies on EN:WP, and keep active, and I'll give you a weak support. Changed to weak oppose, below. — AE (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou. Now I just have to do some hard work ( : F S M 21:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Oppose[change]

  1. File:Weak Oppose.svg Weakly oppose - While I think your a fine contributor to Simple English Wikipedia, in particular in your work in articles, which I am most impressed of, I'm not entirely sure you'll be a good administrator. Looking through WP:VIP archives, I really only saw 1 VIP report, which is not enough to show you'll use the block tool for good use. From below, you have a few QD tags which have been found to be at 10. Not enough for me to think you'll use the deletion tool to good use either. I didn't see much vandalism reverting also in your contributions also, which worries me if you know what vandalism actually is. I would suggest working in more adminly areas like reporting more users accurately at VIP and tagging more articles for QD. For sure you have no problems with articles, but I would like to see more admin-like experience. I'm sure if you work in those areas, you'll do just fine next time. Sorry, but continue your good work in articles! That's why we're here. But if you would like to become an administrator, you would have to show you would be a good one. Maybe wait to someone nominates you would be good also. Good luck, RyanCross (talk) 20:36, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
    Well half the time I don't put edit summaries when I revert vandalism... but ok I take your points and I will act on them. Thanks. F S M 20:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
    Ah, I see. That reminds me, I would like to see you use more edit summaries often. It shows others what your doing in your edits, which is what administrators should do often (preferably all the time). Other than that, nice job! :) -- RyanCross (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
  2. File:Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry FSM, but these edits don't show the qualities that an administrator should have. You say that you know all the rules here, but you posted a new vandal at the bottom of the WP:VIP list, where it says in several places to chuck them at the top. One most basic rule remains unlearned for now. You also posted the same vandal 3 times for some reason. This (to me) shows excessive unneeded editing and, again, lack of knowledge. Once it's there, it will be assessed. You also forget to place IW links on most of your articles created (eg. Vet, Chariot, In Flames etc) and bots need to fill in these. This shows both lack of knowledge on creation of articles and also that you're hurrying to fill up your mainspace edits to the point of not caring about the quality of your articles. Even now, I would deem your mainspace edit count a tad low. 700+ would be alright, but with the low quality of the edits, I wouldn't say you knew SEWP enough to be given the mop. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    To be fair to myself I nearly always add interwikis, those were just two or three articles I forgot, saying I always forget is a an exaggeration. I posted that vandal three times becuase they continued vandalising three times quite a while after I posted the first warning. Still I guess I won't change your mind. F S M 18:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    And I object to the phrase 'low quality edits'. Even if I am not admin material, my edits at least are good. Look at Jupiter and Human on which I did a lot the work. They aren't low quality. F S M 18:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. File:Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I think you need a better grapple on seWP policies before I can support your RFA. This is based on this.--  † ChristianMan16  17:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    Or you could say that the edit showed maturity in asking what the policy was instead of making something up. (devil's advocate response) --Philosopher Let us reason together. 18:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  4. File:Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Gwib covered part my main concern on the ViP. The most recent ViP report I found troubling. An IP makes a single edit (to this page actually) and 13 minutes later with no other action from the IP you file a ViP report on the IP. The vandalism had been reverted by an admin just before you file and could have been missed, but probably should have been reverted prior to filing the report. Also, the vandal was never warned prior to the report. A single act (13 minutes old) with no steps taken to correct the vandalism nor steps to warn the vandal prior to asking for the IP to be blocked - Definitely not in keeping with the blocking policy and the vandalism was not "in Progress". Above and below are comments of low need for the mop due to lack of ViP reports and QD of articles. You originally claimed some 40 QD, though oddly the link you yourself provide to the edit counter only shows 17 deleted edits. Of these, 12 are QDs and one is an RfD. Overall, low need for the mop for deletion and doubts about both need for blocking and the understanding of the deletion policy lead me to oppose. -- Creol(talk) 17:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
    I guess I was wrong there, but I know that IP, it is one of my real life 'friends' so I assumed that he would continue vandalising based on my personal knowledge of him. I over reacted in the end. F S M 18:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
  5. File:Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Real life friend? Aren't you from England? Beefball Talk 12:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
    TFSM = England 1,2 and IP vandal = Singapore.. RL.. That is an oddity.
    I'm shooting myself in the foot with bad guesses and estimations ... I'm sorry. Is that a reason to oppose though, because I was wrong about the location of an IP? F S M 14:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. File:Weak Oppose.svg Weak oppose - per Gwib and Creol, sorry. — AE (talk) 17:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
No need to apologise. F S M 20:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments[change]

  • "40 or so articles for QD," according to your deleted edits, it's at 10. Am I wrong? — AE (talk) 19:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Isn't deleted edits just articles I made that have been deleted. I'm sure I tagged more than 10 in one night last week. I can't look to check, I'm not allowed. F S M 19:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Total deleted edits: July 14 = 1 page; August 12 = 1 RfD; August 19 = 1 page; August 20 = 4 pages; August 21 = 1 pages - that is all. They're pretty good deleted edits, but it's not 40. — AE (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
It was a guesstimation as I can't look myself, but looks like it was bad one. Sorry. F S M 20:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
You're fine. They were good QD tags and were done right, try to do more of them from now on. ;) — AE (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.nynox.solutions/index.php?title=Project:Requests_for_adminship/The_Flying_Spaghetti_Monster&oldid=57777"