Misplaced Pages

:Requests for adminship/Mister Alcohol - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ironholds (talk | contribs) at 21:24, 1 January 2009 (closed RfA early per WP:SNOW). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:24, 1 January 2009 by Ironholds (talk | contribs) (closed RfA early per WP:SNOW)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Mister Alcohol

Final (8/25/6); WP:SNOW non-bureaucrat closure by User:Ironholds at 21:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Mister Alcohol (talk · contribs) - Hi there. I began editing Misplaced Pages with this account on October 1, 2008 and since then have contributed to the project with 4000+ edits. I have loads of experience in articlespace - see here. I have had a lot of community interaction, evidenced by a large number of edits to the various talk namespaces. Finally, I have a couple of hundred edits to the projectspace.

Based on an examination of my own edits, I am satisfied that I'm sufficiently knowledgeable in policy and will exercise discretion when using the administrator tools.

In this time, 4000+ edits since October, I would appear to be with you for the long haul. Just over half of my edits are to the encyclopedia, striking a nice balance between writing the encyclopedia and engaging with the community. In my interactions I have always found myself to be polite, helpful and calm. My contributions to debates are carefully considered and clearly articulated, and this reveals a good working understanding of Misplaced Pages's policy and culture. I am certain that only good can come of you extending me a little more trust.

Thanks for your time, MISTER ALCOHOL 03:01, 1 January 2009 (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 administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A:
  1. WP:AIV - I will take action against vandals on my watchlist that need to be dealt with, acting within guidelines.
  2. WP:UAA - I intend to help out here.
  3. WP:AFD - I would look at the consensus being achieved, comment on nominations (although admittedly this is not a sysop privilege), and delete as appropriate.
  4. CAT:PROD - I would work with deleting expired PRODs, checking the reason and viability of that reason per guidelines before deletion or action.
  5. CAT:CSD - This category is never empty. I would see if the article falls into this and if it did, I would delete it. I admit I have been somewhat slapdash with this in the past, but as you will see, I have cleaned up my act, now helping out newcomers confused by the process of article deletion and always making sure that the article is criteria for speedy deletion before nomination.
  6. WP:BLOCK - I will also indefinitely block users with inappropriate usernames though I would have to think who would have such usernames. I will also repeatedly block users who perform persistent vandalism on the pages of my favourite subjects and others.
  7. WP:BAN - I will also organize any types of bans for continuously, and hugely, distruptive users, no matter what they do and how they appeal.
  8. WP:RfAR - I will take very distruptive users here to be given an arbitration, the last step in dispute resolution, by ArbCom.
  9. WP:QUALITY - I have also worked in other areas of Misplaced Pages, like templates and categories, trying to update them to top-notch quality.
Although the above would be my main areas of activity within sysop work, if somebody were to request for me to do something else that required my permissions for a time, I would certainly oblige (if I had the knowledge or I could gain the knowledge needed to efficiently participate).
Being a sysop would mostly be about doing what at this time I have to request to be done.
2. What are your best contributions to Misplaced Pages, and why?
A: My best contributions to Misplaced Pages are to the articles of my favorite things because I get to polish them all off with incredible results. I have uploaded some images to go with these articles and I do hope to keep up the good contributions. I am also particularly proud of creating WikiProject Indiana Jones and the Indiana Jones Portal entirely by myself. I have also created several templates to put on the mainspace. I am very familiar with markup and I am also an eloquent writer. Again, I hope to keep up the good contributions.
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 haven't been in a lot of conflict, though there was a debate with the image on the Quincy Jones page, and eventually the debate ended up unresolved. I have also been wrongly accused, though I managed to convince the accuser (by using various methods including his talk page) that I was innocent, and another user then agreed with me.
With the future, let me think about that.


Optional questions from Davidwr:

4. Of the areas listed in part one that non-admins can participate in, which have you participated in or at least monitored for more than a few days prior to accepting this RFA? Are there other admin-ish areas you didn't list which you have participated in or at least monitored for more than a few days at any time before running for admin? I ask because if you haven't, you should probably withdraw and reapply after you have hung around and watched other admins up close and personal. I will compliment you on your ambition and your dedication: I've been here 2 years and I don't see myself getting involved in nearly that many areas, at least not all at once.
A.

General comments

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

Discussion

A note, I have requested that MA commented on the plagiarism - hopefully he will come on tonight and clarify here. — neuro 19:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Support
  1. Moral Support. With more experience over time, you will be well-qualified to gain the additional responsibilities in the near future. Please do not be discouraged, and keep up the good work. - Mailer Diablo 05:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  2. Moral Support How could I not support a candidate, Mr. Alcohol, who nommed himself on New Year's Eve. Seriously, keep up the good work, and I'm sure you'll be fine next time! Lazulilasher (talk) 05:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. Hm.. you know what? Why not? Support. Wizardman 05:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Support, no reason to believe this user would abuse the tools. Lankiveil 05:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC). Jeepers, moved to Oppose. Lankiveil 06:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC).
  4. I like his username; Plus, I agree with Wizardman and Lankiveil. With a few major reservations with regards to time, he doesn't seem like he'll do badly. I don't think this'll pass, but I just wanted to say that I really like his attitude, and recommend he comes back in a few months. I'm sure it'll pass then. Master&Expert (Talk) 05:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  5. Per Euryalus; Because Mr. Alcohol understands what it is we actually do around here; steal words from other sources, then shift them around slightly so we can claim there's no copyright violation. --barneca (talk) 06:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Comment - Hesperian should be flattered his RfA statement was considered good enough to reuse, and everyone reads old nominations while considering what to say in their own. The point I was making is a simple cut and paste doesn't show much effort or original thought. Plus unless Mr Alcohol is my sockpuppet, my RfA nomination is probably not a good guide to his contributions. Euryalus (talk) 06:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. Support Seems like he would fit in with the other admins around here.--Gen. Bedford 09:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  7. Support per Wizardman. ayematthew @ 14:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Moral Support plus his username absolutely rules Yeah it's probably gonna get snow closed but your on the right track. Some tips head over to AFD and do some work there and go over to the reference and help desks and answer questions (Wikipedians love that).
    The above unsigned comment was written by Iamawesome800 (talk · contribs). --Dylan620 Contribs 15:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Oh yep, sorry forgot to sign, my bad.--Iamawesome800 17:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Switched to oppose.--Iamawesome800 19:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  8. Moral Support Although he's only been here for three months, I see no other reasons to oppose. LittleMountain5 18:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Very strong oppose - Mister Alcohol, you are a very fine Wikipedian with very good contributions, but if you have only been around since the dawn of October, well, I'm afraid 3 months just isn't enough. Sorry, Mr. Alcohol. :-( --Dylan620 Contribs 04:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    Plagiarism? No way, dude. Immediate strong oppose. --Dylan620 Contribs 19:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  2. Weak Oppose - I think your intentions are good, but only contributing for only 3 months, it's just too soon. Try again after three months of experience, which brings your contributing to six months, like a major administrator would do before applying. HTH, MHLU 04:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. Strong oppose: Per User:Dendodge/Admin criteria/Log#Mister Alcohol. Dendodge Talk 05:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  4. Very strong oppose - Editor misunderstood WP:CBLANK on an SSP against them, which by itself wouldn't be enough to justify an oppose, but I don't believe the editor is ready (only contributed for three months), less than 250 projectspace contributions, almost no comment in administrative discussions (and when there is it is minimal at best), answers to questions are not satisfactory, and some other things which I could harp on about that would only serve to act as some sort of gratuitously unneeded lecture. Sorry, but I cannot support at this time. — neuro 05:04, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    If I understand what I'm reading, changing to strong per stolen introduction. I thought something was up, glad someone could work out what it was. — neuro 10:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    I've never known 'very' to be used as an additional quantifier, but now I don't even think I can support in future without seeing... well, I don't know if I can support in future full stop. Too many issues, this multiplier per Balloonman. — neuro 16:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  5. Suggest SNOW closure. Sorry, –Juliancolton 05:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    If someone were to close this, it would either be me or Rlevse (talk · contribs). As Jimmy Wales puts it: "Administratorship is no big deal". -- MISTER ALCOHOL 05:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    I strongly suggests the candidate (and would like to give the candidate time to) withdraw, as it is very likely that WP:NOTNOW will be applied possibly by myself or another editor.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 05:43, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. Oppose, partly due to the lack opf experience that others mention above, and partly because almost your entire nomination statement is copied from the one at my RfA - see Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_adminship/Euryalus. While imitation is a form of flattery, I think the fact you didn't take the time to actually write your own nomination suggests you're not taking this process very seriously. It's generally preferable to write your own nomination statement rather than using someone else's, as the statement is a good guide to other editors about who you are and why you'd make a good admin. Euryalus (talk) 06:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC) I reworded this last sentence to bea little less bitey. The point I was making remains, but I could have put it more politely. Euryalus (talk) 06:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  7. Oppose, per User:Euryalus. I didn't pick that up, but wow. Clearly not ready. Lankiveil 06:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC).
  8. Oppose his reponse that the only people who can close this would be "me or Rlevse (talk · contribs)" is enough for me. The user has only been here for 3 months and has amassed 4000 edits primarily through the use of tools. It doesn't take much to use tools. I was equally unimpressed with Based on an examination of my own edits, I am satisfied that I'm sufficiently knowledgeable in policy. Of course, we can't tell that on our own, because Mister Alcohol has virtually no experience in either the Misplaced Pages or the Misplaced Pages Talk spaces. If you ignore the three wikiprojects (where he has 33 edits) he has 40 edits on his next 12 most visited Misplaced Pages space areas! But based upon edit counts (which is all that his introductory statement cites) he has "loads of experience" in article space "a lot of community interaction, evidenced by a large number of edits to the various talk namespaces." By my count he has a total of 38 edits on the five article talk spaces where he has the most activity; 5 in category talk; only two users besides himself where he has more than 10 edits; and 21 total edits in the wikipedia talk space. So how about his impressive 280 user talk space edits? A fair number of those posts are standardized message (Eg wishing merry christmas, happy new year, thanksgiving, giving barnstars, announcing 11 days after creating his account that he has "finally created" an Indiana Jones Project.) That doesn't go far towards supporting his self proclaimed "large number of edits to the various talk namespaces." I'm glad he has "always found self to be polite, helpful and calm." When asked where he wants to work, he throws out an alphabet soup of areas where he wants to work, but his edit history shows a complete dearth of working in those areas. Of course, if he wrote his own nomination, and didn't plagerize, the nom might have actually matched his skillset.---Balloonman Take the CSD Survey 06:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)NOTE: I started writing this before Euryalus pointed out the plagerism.---Balloonman Take the CSD Survey 06:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  9. Oppose per Euralyus. We have only an contribution history and your statement above to make a judgement on your suitability. Copying, word for word, from someone else (without any attribution as required under the GFDL) does not reflect well on your judgement. Sorry, Mattinbgn\ 06:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  10. Oppose per Euralyus and Balloonman. There are many ways to shoot yourself in the foot; this is one of the most crippling ones. Ironholds (talk) 07:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  11. Oppose as per above and moral support. I support your commitment and desire to contribute to WikiPedia.It is only WP:NOTNOW.Please try again later .Sorry and Good Luck.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  12. Oppose - approx 500 of the 4,500 edits are announcing that Mister Alcohol has gone off-line; the claimed high amount of interaction through the user talk space seems to mostly be feel-good stuff (Barnstars and holiday greetings) or announcing the Indiana Jones Project; Most article space edits seem to be clean-up (don't get me wrong, I think clean-up is important, but one doesn't need the admin tools to do it) or using tools to add categories. I have no doubt of the sincerity of Mister Alcohol, but when I receive application letters like this one in the non-wikipedia world, the applicant doesn't get a look in. For example, "I am satisfied that I'm sufficiently knowledgeable" "I have always found myself to be polite, helpful and calm." Before applying again, I would like to see some articles shepherded through to GA if not FA (by that I mean evidence of the negotiations required to get an article to these statuses will go a long way to demonstrating true wikipedia community interaction). Beeswaxcandle (talk) 09:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  13. Oppose The plagiarized nom is enough. The "me or Rlevse" statement almost makes it seem like alcohol is involved in more than just the username. The sig has got to go, too. Most talk page edits are "Merry Christmas" et. al. spam, Guestbooks are rather Facebook-y, gave barnstar spams for signing said guestbook, never participated in AfD until right before self-nom, plagiarized some responses in said AfD and gave no knowledge whatsoever of policy, just blanked his SSP before self-nom only to be reverted, ah that's enough. Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 10:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  14. Per the two opposes above. Daniel (talk) 10:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  15. Oppose I know admins talk about him all the time, just without the Mister (oh, that's something else? Never mind). Seriously, though, the plagarism shows immaturity and the likelihood that he will not be a good guardian of wikipolicies.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  16. Oppose. Not ready yet, as I see from recent contact, but your heart is in the right place and I will consider supporting you next time around. Deb (talk) 13:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  17. Oppose - Little or no work in admin-related areas (AIV, SD, AfD, ANI) and concerns raised by others above. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 13:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    I think you need to change your username. Opposing this RfA seems anything but an unpopular opinion :P. Ironholds (talk) 13:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  18. Strong oppose - Sorry, but you've only had this account since October. WP:NOTNOW John Sloan (view / chat) 14:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  19. Strong oppose Three months experiance is not enough. On top of that, plagarism and little work in admin-related areas warrents strong oppose. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  20. Oppose per Euryalus, Balloonman, the sig, and occasional questionable judgement in AN/I which says "not ready yet" to me. I agree with the person who suggested getting an FA through before trying again - I did that before applying for adminship and learned so much about the whole process which I found genuinely helpful once I became an admin. Orderinchaos 16:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  21. Oppose Not quite yet. Needs another 2 months at least. PXK /C 17:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  22. Oppose. I really wanted to WP:AGF here and just go support, but stealing the self-nom... DARTH PANDA 18:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  23. Oppose. Please withdraw the nomination, it won't be successful. —macy 18:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  24. Extremely Strong Oppose Per plagarism, that's not good.--Iamawesome800 19:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  25. Strong oppose If a candidate cannot create his own Rfa nomination I don't want to see him with the tools. Also, no significant experience in admin related areas, and minimal experience in total. I suggest that you try again after another three months, with 3000+ manual edits spread across all aspects of the encyclopedia. --Anthony.bradbury 21:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Neutral Don't want to oppose, because the user seems like they know what's going on and won't abuse the tools. However, I think three months is a little too little. Would definitely support if reapplied in a few months. – Alex43223 06:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  2. Neutral - while I really like to support just about anyone because of WP:WTHN, "it's no big deal" and "net positive", the plagiarism and Balloonman's comments are way too much. Suggest WP:NOTNOW... —Ed 17 08:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  3. Neutral with enormous moral support - you mean well. Let me repeat that: You mean well. I have no doubt whatsoever that improving the project is the goal of your participation here. My only reservation is that you seem, based on when and where I have seen your name come up, to be about five degrees off from where policies and guidelines aim to be. You are very, very close. I'd suggest 2-3 months of more contributions, get a GA under your belt (content is, after all, king), and contribute incisively to an ANI or two. Do this and I will be the first to support when you RFA again. // roux   12:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  4. Neutral You are doing useful work here, and I believe that there is a role here for editors like you and I who make small improvements to a myriad of articles. But there is a lot that admins need to know and RFA candidates need to demonstrate they know and I'm afraid I don't think you have had time to demonstrate enough of that in the three months you've been here. But I do think you are going in the right direction and hope to support you in your next RFA later this year. ϢereSpielChequers 13:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  5. Neutral Your interest in helping the project is commendable, but I think this RfA was uncorked a bit too soon. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. NeuralMister Alcohol is a great editor and I trust he would use the tools well even with only 3 months experience. I would support but the fact that he abused the GDFL for his introduction puts me off. I may change but I will stay here for now. Andy (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2009 (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.
 Category:
Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Mister Alcohol Add topic