Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:03, 22 March 2008

Sceptre

Voice your opinion (talk page) (0/0/0); Scheduled to end 02:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sceptre (talk · contribs) - I would like to nominate Sceptre for adminship. After gaining adminship in Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Sceptre, Sceptre was desysopped . He then requested adminship at Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Sceptre 2, but was unsuccessful, due to some unacceptable behaviour, which has not been repeated.

That was a year and a half ago. Since then, Sceptre has done a stack of work in improving the encyclopedia, with several featured articles to his name. He has also done great work in protecting the project from harm, and this would only be benefited from regaining the tools.

There had been enough water under the bridge since Sceptre had the tools removed. Now, for the good of the project, it's time for him to take them back. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 01:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I too would like to nominate Sceptre for Adminship. I second all that was said before me by DHMO as If I had written it myself. I have seen Sceptre at work on Misplaced Pages, and his contributions (which are now at nearly 40,000) have substantially helped the project as a whole, from vandalism fighting and CSD tagging, to his featured article writing and all out improvement of the encyclopedia. I feel that Sceptre is ready to have the tools now and has a need for the tools as he did before he was desysoped. He has a passion for the project as can be seen by his 8905 edits in just this month alone, all of which show his need for adminship.

I feel Sceptre has learned from his mistakes, and that it has been long enough for him to have the tools back, it is for this reason that I have co-nominated him for re-adminship. --Chetblong_Sign 02:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Sure, why the hell not, I'll accept. I haven't self-nommed myself because people would see that as a possible reconfirmation RFA (which it isn't), giving people more reason to hate me. I might not answer all of the questions now, though; it's 2:05am and I'm a bit sleepy, so forgive me :D Sceptre 02:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages 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: I'd probably end up doing the same things I did when I was an administrator a couple of years ago; I was very active at WP:SPLICE and was quite proficient at history merging. As well as that, you'll probably see me issue a large number of blocks. I'm a vandal fighter at heart, and my contributions show that; I've made nearly 11,000 edits in three weeks, due to WP:HUGGLE. All that has made WP:AIV my most edited project page, with somewhere in the region of 500 reports. Finally, I'll be working on closing AFDs, but due to my strong deletionist views on BLPs and news events, to avoid a possible conflict of interest.

I'd just want to say, as there's no better place to say this, if I was an admin, you'd see the backlogs decrease somewhat. I make quite a lot of requests on AIV, RFPP, and I do usually use the "!admin" stalkword on #wikipedia-en a lot, as some of the respective regulars will agree.

2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?

A: I've written, as of 02:16, 22 March 2008 (UTC), 3 FAs, 1 FL, and 9 GAs. The reason I say "as of" is because I have, IIRC, three articles on GAC and one article on FAC. As to which I think is/are my best, I would have to say the article M62 motorway (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). It was the first article I ever edited, three years ago (), and since then, the article has gone to a mere stub to a featured article that on the main page. Whenever I talk about it, I often refer to it as my pride and joy, and to be honest, I actually look at the article and think, "Wow, did I write that?". As a general group, I'm proud of my contributions to Doctor Who articles. Since September, I've written 6 GAs, rewritten 1 FL, and written a FA for the project. In particular, I am very fond of Doomsday (Doctor Who) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Voyage of the Damned (Doctor Who) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), which I've written nearly from scratch to the quality they are today.

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: Forthcoming, I'll answer it in the morning as this will be a long-winded spiel more than a simple two sentence answer.

Questions from ArcAngel

4. Will you add yourself to WP:AOR? Why or why not?

A. I won't add myself to recall, because community consensus towards recall and reconfirmation RFAs is rather negative. However, if enough people have objections to my actions in a short period of time, I will open up a quasi-RFC, but not at WP:RFC/U - my opinions against that process are strong and well-known.

5. What is your interpretation of WP:IAR? And when are you willing to use it?

A. Exactly what it says on the tin. As for application:

With regards to my actions, I do what I think is best for the encyclopedia. That means that I will, on occasion, do something unorthodox, such as remove nearly the entire content of a page that's very badly written. I am not a big fan of the civility and AGF policies when they hinder actual work, and you may sometimes see me use the words fuck or shit, or see me explicitly label and close troll threads on the administrators' noticeboard.

Taken from my user page.

6. Why are edit summaries important?

A. So you get the idea of why someone's edited. I feel a lot better knowing what edits people make when they come up on my watchlist, rather than just blank or /→Section/ summaries.

7. What is your opinion on WP:3RR, do you believe that an attempt at communication should be made after the 2nd revert or the third?

A. I think 3RR is a good rule. I hate edit wars, I try to stay out of them, and I think 3RR is a good idea. As for communication, I tend to talk on the first or second revert, normally on talk or on user talk. However, I think 3RR is sometimes applied incorrectly. For instance, I don't think it should apply to heavily edited articles that are prone to speculation and crystal balling. I actually got a friendly warning for (unintentionally) going over 3RR on List of Doctor Who serials, but anyone who edits around that area know it's a landmine for speculation. God knows how it got to FL.

8. What is the difference between a ban and a block?

A. In practice, nothing. In writing, a ban is a decision to disallow editing, and a block is a means of enforcing it.

9. When should cool down blocks be used and why?

A. Sparingly. Try to talk, and if the offender is still spouting their mouths, give them a short block, possibly for civility or personal attacks.

To those quoting this question as a reason for opposing: I do know cool-down blocks are bad, yes. Hence why I said sparingly. I've said "try to talk" first. If after trying reasonably over, say, six hours, and the editor is still raging about being very uncivil and attacking, they should be blocked - they would've been anyway for personal attacks.

Questions from Astral

10. In your opinion, what is more important for an admin; to strictly adhere to policy or to ignore all rules?

A. See Question 5. Process for process' sake is silly. Process is good, but if it's good for the encyclopedia in the long run, I'd IAR.

11. What is your opinion on humour in edit summaries and in regards to one's attitude to Misplaced Pages? (If this doesn't make sense, I can expand a bit. I'm not the most cohesive person in the world).

I like humour. I tend to use it in certain circumstances, just to lighten the mood. e.g. this, which making light humour of gag names and people registering. I think it shows that sometimes editing Misplaced Pages is not always serious, but I don't think humour should be used where it gets too serious because it makes you look bad.

11(a). Given your response, can you expand on why you think using humour in serious situations "makes you look bad"?

I'm talking from personal experience here. I once was in a discussion about Jeffrey Vernon Merkey and his "paying to edit" back when I was an admin. I didn't grasp the seriousness of the situation, and I did make fun of it. I ended up feeling like an idiot after that.

General comments

• Requests for adminship/Sceptre
• Requests for adminship/Sceptre 2
• Requests for adminship/Sceptre 3

• Links for Sceptre: Sceptre (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• See Sceptre's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

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

Discussion

• Because I could not fully justify my decision due to the sensitive nature of my concerns, I will not submitting a formal opinion in this discussion. However, I do submit this diff for consideration by those who will. I would also be interested in hearing Sceptre's response. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• Hmm, only a few weeks ago too. A posting like that would have left any other admin candidate dead in the water. Still, we're all mates eh? Let's just forget about any past unpleasantness. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• To those quoting the candidate's userpage, the full quote is "I am not a big fan of the civility and AGF policies when they hinder actual work." Striking resemblance to ignore all rules (core policy and all...), don't you think? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 02:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• No, I don't actually. More like ignoring some rules, but expecting others to follow them regardless. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• What he states on his userpage is exactly what WP:IAR is for, "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore it." from WP:IAR, the AGF guideline and civility policy both fall under IAR. --Chetblong_Sign 03:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 02:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
2. Support - per my nom. --Chetblong_Sign 02:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
3. Support Your answer to the IAR question swayed me - we need more experienced editors with that sort of attitude to be honest. Orderinchaos 03:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

1. No. That behaviour was more than unacceptable, no matter how long ago it was. Wikifun is one thing, but when it boils over into physical intimidation that's quite another thing and can never be excused. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   I urge you to reconsider this when Q3 is answered. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 02:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   Why is it that only opposers get heckled? I didn't urge you to reconsider your support. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   You're more than welcome to "heckle" me. I've discussed what happened 1.5 years ago with Will, and I support his RfA. I don't think you've discussed it to the same extent, and so I ask you to do so. But it's up to you. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 02:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   I have no intention of heckling you, or anyone else. I have given my opinion, and based on the evidence I see little prospect of it changing no matter how much heckling goes on. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

2. Strong oppose Within the past few weeks, I have seen Sceptre tell editors to "shut the fuck up" at WP:AN/I and accuse them of having a "hard on" for other editors. This egregious incivility is absolutely unacceptable for an admin. In addition, Sceptre has abused the rollback function on numerous occasions, even after warnings. If Sceptre cannot be trusted to use one admin tool correctly, I certainly cannot trust him to use the other two. - auburnpilot talk 02:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   Two different editors, and you're misinterpreting it. The first was one where I said "shut the hell up" (not "the fuck", "the hell"), to someone who was trying to get an editor banned and the evidence didn't look compelling enough. Was a bit OTT, true. The second was to David Shankbone's secret admirer. He was getting very annoying and he got banned for stalking him. I really don't like civility for civility's sake, and neither do several members of the community, of which one, in one of those cases, said "a two-by-four is sometimes the best way to deal with a troll". Sceptre 02:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   And the fact that you were uncivil to two editors instead of one makes it better? I'm sorry for the memory lapse on the exact wording, but you are right. It was "shut the hell up" on WP:AN/I and "just fuck off" on the IP talk page. We don't reserve civility for just the "good editors". - auburnpilot talk 02:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

   I never said that. But being forced to be nice to someone to someone who got banned for being a nasty piece of work isn't on. Sceptre 02:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

3. Oppose I do not think an admin should have "I am not a big fan of the civility and AGF policies" on their user page for any reason. Plus his answer to #9 is just wrong and when it comes to blocking you can not be wrong. Gtstricky 02:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
4. Oppose Sorry, but your answer to Q9 concerns me. Also, "doing what's best for WP", to me, means being civil, and your statement regarding that is another concern that I don't believe you can overcome. ArcAngel (talk) 02:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
5. Oppose as Gtstricky states on user page states that not a fan of AGF or Civility. A non starter for me.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

And further I've read the full quote and H2O's explanation and still don't buy that it's an acceptable attitude for an admin to set up as a mission statement.--Cube lurker (talk) 03:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutral