Commons:Requests and votes/Nick 2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Nick


Symbol support vote.svg Support = 12; Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose = 1; Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral = 1 + 2 people who essentially "abstained" :) - 75% if you count one way, 92% if you count another way. So guess what, this one isn't just a nose count, it's another one where judgment is required. oh goodie, why do I always get these? There were significant concerns raised about Nick's temperament and judgment by several people (I myself asked a question intended to show my concern) so it comes down to this, is the community satisfied with Nick's answers, and satisfied that Nick will be able to be a good admin? That's a judgment call... but looking at the comments by many, I'm satisfied that the community generally thinks he will be. (more personally, (and I didn't count this in my evaluation!!!), I'm personally satisfied he's taken the point on board and will try hard and will accept feedback more graciously, and if he doesn't I'm going to remind him of what he said here...) Promoted. ++Lar: t/c 16:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Vote

Links for Nick: Nick (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · SULinfo)

Well, I requested adminship a month ago in an effort to help Commons deal with deletions and other copyright issues. I was rejected because a couple of people were concerned that I didn't have the necessary experience on Commons, so I've been busy over the past month tagging images (mainly complicated derivative works) for deletion, dealing with Freedom of Panorama problems and generally trying to advise on images that need to be deleted and those that don't.

I've also written an essay on Flickr, how to spot copyright violations and other problematic images on the project, and I hope to move that into the Commons namespace shortly (there's a little extra to add) and I have had encouragement from users over the page. I'm a fairly experienced user at Flickr, quite handy with a camera myself, and I don't like to boast, but I'm quite knowledgable when it comes to image copyright law and of course, policy on the Commons.

I also understand that I've ruffled a few feathers over the past few weeks, and I'd like to apologise for my part in what has been some rather bizarre episodes. I realise I will need to be a little less forthright in my opinions and views as this is a multilingual project.

However, I believe that the experience and knowledge that I bring to the position is of benefit to the project. I am an administrator on the English Wikipedia, a contributor to Commons, and I have access to the OTRS system. I will have been an administrator on the English Wikipedia for a year in February and have had access to the OTRS system for a similar length of time, so this is certainly not a vanity request, I firmly believe that I can continue to help, and be of more benefit with the additional tools, than without. Nick 04:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Votes

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I have seen Nick on en-wiki and I consider him trustworthy and reliable. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I am afraid that I was not as informed as I thought I was. I must now Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Herby. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
      • I now abstain. I have been thinking on this for a while, and I just can't come to conclusion. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 15:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is no question of trust here nor of the fact that the user comes from en wp even if they think it is an issue. My problem is with attitude. To vote in an RfA just over a week ago with this edit and its rationale does not indicate to me someone who has the approach that I see as required for an admin in collaborative working in Commons. I would say I have seen some good work from this user and had been leaning towards support but the attitude is just unhelpful I'm afraid and I see the potential for difficulties. --Herby talk thyme 08:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Please consider my vote suspended for now. I find this difficult - I see Nick doing valuable work, I personally feel Nick is abrasive. I'd like to be able to reconcile those poles. Not for the first time I find pfctdayelise's words wise & I'm going to think about it and would urge other to vote on how they see Nick's work rather than anything else. Please do not vote per Herby as I currently have no vote I might even support! --Herby talk thyme 18:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Herby. __ ABF __ ϑ 09:12, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Symbol support vote.svg Support with really much AGF. __ ABF __ ϑ 15:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Cautious Symbol support vote.svg Support. There can be no doubting Nick's skills, commitment or willingness to do good work here. The work he has done at COM:DEL since his last RfA and this one has been excellent. The only question remains on his attitude. Because of his apology, I look forward to Nick communicating in a less confrontational way. Nick is potentially a great asset to Commons and I prefer to have him on-side than not. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — I have no doubt in my mind your work would be great as an admin, but being an admin is not about deleting stuff like a bot. You have to deal with users who have an attitude as bad as yours and don't even understand your language. I'm sorry, but I don't see you willing to work well with newbies who are just trying to pretty-fy Wikimedia projects with some media, but don't know how to do it. --Boricuæddie 15:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Furthermore, I think that your inability to handle a petty dispute with a newbie can lead you to abuse your tools, as you have at en.wp. However, I'm not a fan of evaluating admin candidates because of their contribs to other wikis, so I'm not opposing because of this. --Boricuæddie 15:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Hi, that's a rather serious accusation, could you supply some diffs to show my abuse of the tools at en.wp. Thanks. Nick 16:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • [1] [2]. But like I said, they are irrelevant here. --Boricuæddie 16:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Hi, could you possibly supply some diffs purely from Commons which show I am incapable of working well with "newbies". Thanks in advance (P.S - There's also a reply on your talk page concerning the diffs above, which I hope you and others will read). Nick 16:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, applying Pfctdayelise principles, here you have Nick's comments on Boricuaeddie arguments:
Hi, I noticed your recent comment concerning an allegation where you allege I have abused the administrator tools on the English Wikipedia. I am most concerned by this and would appreciate diffs to show your complaint. This marks the very first occasion where someone has alleged I have abused the tools and I would appreciate feedback in this case. Thanks in advance. Nick 16:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I've looked at the diffs you provided, and from what I can see, there was no abuse of the tools (and nobody else thought there was either), we had a clear difference of opinion regarding blocking users for making inaccurate reports on usernames, and you reduced the thread to a personal level with "If you can't do this and you think everyone who makes an erroneous report is acting in bad faith and looking to destroy Wikipedia, then you obviously are not fit to have admin rights." - I still consider such comments unnecessary and inflammatory, especially considering the discussion was over a simple difference in opinion. Nick 16:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
The whole story about Boricuaeddie incident with Nick in the English Wikipedia is here. Best regards --Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 01:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - and not cautious. I've seen admins here with a worse attitude than Nick (and to be honest, I don't think his is that bad at all). He'd clearly be an excellent addition; he has excellent experience here and on English Wikipedia, and opposes because of a comment on an RFA (I happen to agree with the comment somewhat, enwiki editors are treated differently) are insufficient in my mind. Good luck. Majorly (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support He's responsible and trustworthy, if he wants a mop why deny it?--Doc glasgow2 16:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm confident in Nick's abilities. Cary Bass demandez 16:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think Nick would make a fine admin here on commons. RlevseTalk 17:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Herby. Mønobi 17:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    • No opinion. Mønobi 01:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per pfctdayelise. --Ecemaml (talk to me/habla conmigo) 01:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I support this user's request for adminship. Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington 17:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
    I would like to support Nick's request for adminship, however I do not have the requisite number of edits to be considered a regular here. He is an experienced sysop from the English Wikipedia, and I believe that the project can benefit with him gaining the tools on the Commons. Nick is helpful, trustworthy and kind and I do hereby vouch for his integrity. Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington 13:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
    As far as I'm aware we don't have an edit quota to participate in RfA here, so feel free to add a {{support}} and comment above (unless someone proves me wrong). Giggy 22:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. While its true that Nick has occasionally been a little abrasive, he does excellent work as administrator. He is trustworthy and knowledgable - I have every reason to think he would make a fine administrator on Commons. WjBscribe 21:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — A brilliant administrator at Wikipedia; I doubt he'll misuse or abuse the tools here. --DarkFalls talk 04:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — I believe his knowledge of copyright law and Commons policies coupled with the respect he's earned as an en-wiki admin will prove him to be a valuable asset to the administrative team here as well. LaraLove 06:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Being a admin elsewhere usually benefits the candidate, but sometimes not. I didn't like some of what I've seen on en.WP. (For example, I don't approve of protecting pages where you made the last major change or revert and I don't like the removal/prevention of talk page content) Here on Commons, there's no admin actions to judge you on, but plenty of comments. As a normal user, I have no problem with the attitude (ok, maybe a little - like with the interaction with Giggy), but I think admins need to be little kinder and little less defensive. If I based this on Commons experience alone, I would support, yet the other issues keep me from supporting. Rocket000 01:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm willing to assume good faith based on his response to Lar. Giggy 00:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for his knowledge of copyright law. Cowardly Lion 03:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • Sorry, I've lost the link to your Flickr guide - could you help me out please? Giggy 08:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I had one little paragraph I wanted to add, which I've now done, so feel free to use the page as you wish. I hope it's of some use for users. Nick 23:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Could you put the {{Babel}} template somewhere in your userspace, please? --Boricuæddie 02:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Hi, I've gone ahead and added this to my user page. Cheers. Nick 02:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I have serious concerns about whether Nick is likely to have the "mellow approach" we favour here. I wonder if a bit more time passing since the incidents which he is apologising for would be helpful? Nick, what do you personally think, will you be able to take counsel to calm down on board amicably? ++Lar: t/c 21:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I made a conscious decision before submitting this RfA to improve the way I interact with other editors across all the projects I'm involved with. I can do mellow just as well as I can do aggressive, it's just a case of making the decision to do mellow more and aggressive much less, and that's a decision I've already made. Nick 15:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)