Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Thunderhead 1

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

User:Thunderhead

Not to be standoffish, but I am nominating myself for Adminship. I don't really expect complete support, since I've only been here for a while, but I feel that I have made quite significant edits to the wiki, and that I have been marking articles for quite a while. I have launched the Wikinews Humor project, and I have made anon edits at work, school, and home. I also admin the Ace Combat Wikia on w:Wikia, so I have some knowledge of the admin tools. Thunderhead(talk) 22:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC) I was once known as User:Urameshi2[reply]

Accept Just in case nomination doesn't count. Thunderhead(talk) 22:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

I know I'm doing something more wikipedia-like but I don't think a little structure can harm.

I'm a bit confused by your account rename, that's why I have some questions, to make sure that I understand your level of experience here correctly.

How long have you been on Wikinews? Have you been on other Wikimedia projects as well (besides wikia)?
Which articles have you started or made major contributions too? Any ones you're particularly proud of, or that show your understanding of Wikinews and how it works?
Have you ran into any conflicts with other users before? How was the problem resolved?
What sysop chores would you like to do?
What are your strong sides and your pitfalls here on WikiNews?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I'd be happy to answer your questions!

At least a year, with my recent edits being in the past two months.
Yes, I am on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and Wikibooks, although I have not made major edits except on News or 'Pedia.
Check here. I have started Wikinews:Humor, and I have been a Wikignome for most of my career here.
Nope. No conflicts ever. :)
I would just like to be able to help Wikinews in the best way I can, and I have found that I would like to be an administrator to help with my gnome edits.
Well, I have always tried my best to be helpful, I haven't really run in to any problems, and I have alot of knowledge of Mediawiki I also consider myself to be polite.. My pitfalls are that I tend to ask fairly obvious questions sometimes, and that I have occasionally copy/pasted before I was reminded to not to do so.

Any other questions? Go ahead! Thunderhead(talk) 20:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what stories have you written as an anon? It's hard to find if the ip-address changes a lot... Although you have some confirmed. And which did you start when you where logged in, only the latest Al-Qaeda 9/11 story?
Do you still make anon edits? Why is that?

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my last logged-in was the latest FDA E. coli (I think), although a few were deleted for Template:copyvio, although I did write a temp article. I never recieved anything on that. Another one I wrote is US Air Force chief proposes using non-lethal military weapons domestically, and Sharapova takes U.S. tennis title. One more I wrote is Child abuse case in West Virginia ends in jail time
My school does not allow us to login to anything, so I have to make anon edits on WN at school, although i will say unlogged @ school on mine.

Comments

Usage of edit summary seems rather low.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AAAAAAAAA! Hang in there <cough cough> remember Rosey <splutter splutter> and sign in often <even when they treat you like a dog> -Edbrown05 08:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Support. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Seems like a sensible chap---Eloquence 01:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Certainly deserves it. By the way, Erik's comments on Wikinews are not representative of the Board of Trustees in any way. I know that should sound obvious, but it's gotten Erik slapped around a bit I believe. —this is messedrocker (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jason Safoutin 21:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nzgabriel | Talk 19:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

neutral, yes, i feel more neutral for that case,i don't agree with some PVJ actions but i do not think it's the solution. PVJ59 shown us something we must manage. But he must also understand that categories, that are usefull and meaningfull as topics used to describe articles, are not involved to insult or critics anyone. Have you read phylosophe Terry Pratchett Discworld books ? The last (or something) called "Thud!" is about war between Trolls and Dwarves, about racial intolerance (and coppers and Where's my cow™). But to understand it fully you'ld read the 29th previous!!! :) Jacques Divol 20:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for the comments. Trust me, I will be applying for adminship later (because I sure won't get it now :P). Thanks again! Thunderhead(talk) 21:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i apologies very much. I write my comment on the wrong place, it was about PVJ59, not you, sorry ... Jacques Divol

Oppose

Oppose We have more than enough Administrators already. Besides, some of this user's actions have led me to doubt whether he will be capable of handling the responsibility of being a sysop. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)} 08:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask what I did wrong? I understand that we have alot of Admins, but what did I do wrong? Thunderhead(talk) 13:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would not be comfortable revealing exactly what you did to influence my opinion of you in this manner. However I can tell you that I do not think that users who go "behind the backs" of other users should be allowed to have Administrator privileges. Transperency is a must on Wikinews, as anywhere else. Best of luck with your RfA. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)}

14:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for telling me that. I will do my best to "be bold" on Wikinews. Thanks! Thunderhead(talk) 17:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PVJ...and you're the pot calling the kettle black. Jason Safoutin 21:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm, I've seen a lot of people (basicly almost every admin, besides well, Karen is the only exception I can think of. Note I'm including myself in that list.) go behind peoples back at one time or another (I'm not saying Everyones done major stuff behind someone elses back, but most people have dones something minnor at one point.) I know you don't want to reveal specifics, but I'm really curious as to what happened Bawolff ☺☻

02:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was just my personal judgement that if he is given sysop access, he may use it in a way that is not compatible with the level of openness that we except from our Administrators, especially when dealing with blocks of users. PVJ^(Talk)_{(Articles I have written)}

02:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Bawolff ☺☻

03:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: This user has obvious good qualities: humour, friendly, helpful, knows MediaWiki... Although I'm sure this is admin material because he loves gnome edits, this user has a such a high level of those edits with very few (~~only one? I'll change my opinion if I'm mistaken here~~) story he started. I believe you learn how this place works by writing news stories, which might explain the "obvious questions". Also, usage of edit summary seems rather low, which I think is a kind of Good Admin Practice. I really don't want to sound pretentious since I'm quite the newbie-admin, but maybe it's better to wait a month and a few stories?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Stevenfruitsmaak has it down exactly. Thunderhead has alot of good qualities, but also a lack of any major story writing. With no real urgent need for adminship, I think it is best to wait a bit. --Cspurrier 01:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why thats such a problem. Lets look at Admin tasks: Fixing images that commons deleted, Gnome like edits to archiving, Archiving, Deleting, protecting edit war zones, Blocking. These Are all Matinance/Gnome like tasks. Also Some other admins, have made very few articles (my grand total is 2 - which wern't very good, I don't think Karen has made very many either (don't quote me on that)) Bawolff ☺☻

03:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A lack of story writing can be made up for by a lot on talk pages or community pages, by a urgent need for new admins (iirc when you became an admin we were still getting off hour vandalism) or by am overwhelming amount Gnome tasks (like Karen). Since Thunderhead has not done any of these, I can not say I know him well enough to trust him with adminship.--Cspurrier 17:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, no real criticisms but try again when you've more edits and given people time to build a better picture of you as a contributor. I don't think we should refuse on the grounds of "enough administrators", but less than 100 edits in the Main namespace isn't enough to form an opinion. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for your comments! Thunderhead(talk) 20:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I don't want to discourage you as a contributor because you do useful work. However, I want to see you being more involved by doing things like rescuing poorly sourced articles instead of tagging them. Best summed up as, "Practice random acts of kindness". Nobody can do it all the time, and some things just need tagged, but contributing at a level where you get more feedback on - or more viewing of - your contributions will build people's trust. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 13:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the advice. I am pretty sure I'm not going to get it this time, although I do see that I have earned the trust, and support from many contributors (including some who oppose). I will try again in a while, but until then, thanks for the advice. Thunderhead(talk) 16:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, based on [1]. Why the hell is there a) a need for a NS wikia when there's already an individual NationStates wiki, and b) a need to advertise this RFA there? NSLE 05:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about, and how can you base a decsision off that? Wikia is an entirely seperate Wiki, and has nothing to do with my Wiki status here. Thunderhead(talk) 05:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think desicions for this should be allowed to be based on actions at other wikis, unless it directly has to do with Wikinews. Bawolff ☺☻

17:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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