Commons:Requests and votes/Cool Cat (02)

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

Cool Cat

Vote
User's Commons Edit Count

I am nominating Cool Cat once more for admin. I believe he has done an incredible job at Commons with a tremendous amount of edits. He has not lately been involved in any major disputes, and I sincerely believe that he will be an asset to Commons as a sysop.

I believe this user has worked hard enough in the trenches here at Commons and has earned the position. He has taken the advice from the last RFA and acted without reproach in the months since.

I know from personal experience that users involved in heated disputes can go on and mend their ways and become valued contributors and editors, and administrators. Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 00:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

 Support as nom Cary "Bastique" Bass parler voir 00:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral When you only make 85 edits in 3 months, it's pretty easy to "act without reproach". Would like to see more community activity, such as helping out on the Welcome log or comments at Template:Deletion requests and/or Commons:Village pump. pfctdayelise (translate?) 01:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I frequently assisted in dealing with people who did not know english. I also aranged translation of various copy vio notices to Turkish. I wasn't idleing. My edit count will likely skyrocket if I were to be adminised.--Cool CatTalk|@ 17:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Cool Cat helped me with the turkih tranlations of licenses, which allowed me to remove hundreds of copyvios at en: Drini 00:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see how that makes him suitable to wield power, something he has shown himself repeatedly to be utterly incapable of doing. James F. (talk) 16:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That is an excelent point. Since I was never an admin, I couldn't have ever abused "power" as I never had any. I also object the referance of "power" when talking about admin privilages which is a mop not a warp engine. --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Taichi 05:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose --Broc 11:13, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --WarX 18:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Valepert 21:13, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support -- and my apologizes for my bad tone in the section below, but it was on purpose to test your temper. / Fred Chess 09:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support--Shanel 17:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support. A couple of stretches of inactivity, but overall extensive contributions. --tomf688 (talk - email) 19:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support - I voted against last time, but you will get my {{Support}} now. Btw, there is no need to thank the users voting by putting a large “thank you-template” in their talk pages! ;-) Kjetil_r 19:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Sanbec ✉ 17:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose - Cool Cat is an attention whore, a privilege seeker, and a highly disruptive individual; he should not be trusted with any privilege anywhere in Wikimedia. Kelly Martin 12:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont recall seeking attention... --Cool CatTalk|@ 14:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you implying that that would be Cool Cat's profession, or are you just being useless rude? Effeietsanders 14:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool Cat has a long history of seeking acceptance and validation through seeking status, all across Wikimedia. This is just the latest chapter in that process. (An example of this status-seeking was when he requested adminship on all small Wikipedia projects. See Meta:Requests for permissions/Archive 2006/June#Cool_Cat.) He is subject to substantial conduct restrictions on en.wiki (although these may have expired by now) and was very nearly banned from enwiki by the Arbitration Committee, in a case where I acted as his advocate (it is probably the case that my intervention in that case prevented him from being banned entirely; he was a very difficult client to work with). He is currently banned from the Wikipedia IRC channel as well as several other Wikipedia-related channels. In the few cases where he has obtained status, he has proven unsuitable to continue holding it. He was ousted from the Counter Vandalism Unit on enwiki, an organization which he founded, because he was not able to work cooperatively with the other members. He also has a history of wikistalking people who he thinks are stalking him, even going so far as to request CheckUsers of people who he fantasizes are sockpuppets of his nemeses. He is profoundly biased on Turkish topics, but refuses to acknowledge that bias (which is why he is banned for life from editing topics related to Turkey or Armenia on enwiki). I have no faith that he is competent to exercise any authority in an fair and unbiased way; it would be a grave mistake for Commons to grant him administrator status, and one which Commons would eventually regret. At least Brion has made it possible to undelete images, since if you make him one you will almost certainly have to undelete all your images related to Kurds or the Armenian Genocide (topics which Cool Cat feels passionately and is unable to remain objective about). Kelly Martin 16:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You say this just days I declined to get involved with the Armenian Genocide article, quoting that very arbitration hearing which by the way only restricts me for a year (not a lifetime) and does not actualy ban me from editing the topics. However, I haven't edited the actual Armenian Genocide article for perhaps months now. I also declined to even comment on an article related to kurdistan pointing out that I wasn't completely impartial. I acknowlege my bias openly, and frequently and make an effort to keep it under check. You are welcome to cite any evidence suggesting otherwise.
Furtheremore, all of your reasoning has nothing to do with commons. A commons administrators dutiy is primarily to delete images that are in violation of copyrights and to block users vandalising or uploading copyrighted images (regardless of warnings) which I intend to do if I were to be promoted. Given the backlog, a capable helping hand should be welcomed.
I have no intention of mass-deleting every image related to the kurds or armenians. Why on earth would I do such a thing? What gave you that idea?
--Cool CatTalk|@ 17:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also an interesting point, why would I "seek attention" by requesting adminship on wikis with less than ten articles (wikis with noone around). There is no one there to give me their attention... --Cool CatTalk|@ 19:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, you don't give really an answer here, but I guess it's the second option. Maybe Cool Cat shouldn't be admin here, but I just wonder why people can't tell that in a civil way :S Effeietsanders 22:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose. Sorry, but Cool Cat has had far, far too many run-ins and difficulties with, well, everyone, to be anything like a good sysop. James F. (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In addendum, I really think that there should be a veto to be exercised in situations such as this. James F. (talk) 16:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not particularly see a situation that prompts a veto, can you elaborate what exactly is you have in mind? --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support a friendly uncontroversial editor ;) Computerjoe 14:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support FireFox 14:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support--Orgullomoore 20:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Connel MacKenzie 03:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Since at the moment this RfA appears it will succeed, and yet given the strong opposition registered above, perhaps a bureaucrat could consider offering an abridged version of adminship, such as a 2 week term subject to review, with immediate revoking of rights at any sign of intentional harmful behaviour. Just an idea. --pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd prefer to be treated the same as others. I do not believe I have done anything requiring special treatment. having said that, I feel any inaproporate behavior by any admin is subject to a immidiate revoke, pending review. Also, Kelly's comment(s) were hadly civil. --Cool CatTalk|@ 13:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Slade [pics] 23:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose — per Kelly and James; not an appropriate person for adminship. See en.wiki for many issues. —Moby 05:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment User currently has an arb-com case in the en.wikipedia in which Cool Cat is involved Jaranda wat's sup 05:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment In which he is being accused of stalking me as per w:WP:HA... I think this will be additional evidence. --Cool CatTalk|@ 12:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Jaranda wat's sup 05:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Angus 11:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose History of attention seeking behavior and POV pushing. Explicitly stated on the commons IRC channel that he was interested in commons adminship to improve his chances of passing adminship on enwiki. Took down his antivandalism bot after throwing a fit because Freenode policy would not allow him exclusive control of an IRC channel, although he claimed that he took it down because it would take weeks of work to entirely reprogram it to simply use another channel name. --Gmaxwell 19:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My IRC life has nothing to do with my commons adminship which includes my vandal detection bot. Contrary to your claim, my bot has been active for months now and is still active.
I do seek comons adminship to help my future en.wiki adminship but not the way you put it. I intend to use my commons performance as a reference to en.wiki. I have to have a flawless performace in order to use commons adminship as such a referance. I cannot afford to screw up basicaly. adminship is no big deal so please do not make it a big deal.
There is no basis for this "attention seeking" claim. On the countrary, I complain about attention from Moby Dick which can be viewed on this very page.
--Cool CatTalk|@ 20:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Dbl2010 21:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose. Not only per Kelly Martin and Gmaxwell (and who would have thought I'd be agreeing with either of them!) but also because his recent comments at w:Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists#Pointless debate... indicate he either doesn't understand or doesn't care about the reasoning behind Wikipedia's policy on fair use images. Angr 09:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fun. Fair-use images are not welcome on commons. All implications of fair-use does not apply to commons. By voting you should know that. Fair-use is a necesariy evil on en.wiki and I only feel in that debate that they are the necesariy evil. I prefer free images when they are avalible. Check my commons contributions. You will see over a thousand pd images. --Cool CatTalk|@ 10:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair-use images are actually an unnecessary evil on en.wiki and I'm not convinced that if you're given the power to delete copyvios from Commons you will actually do so responsibly. Angr 10:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I as a user gotten many "fair-use" images deleted from commons such as TV station logos as well as google earth images. Are you suggesting I would keep copyrighted images if I were adminised? Kelly suggests I would go on a deletion spree. How can I do both? --Cool CatTalk|@ 11:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Guillom 10:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose. Someone who is a 'good' editor does not necessarily make a good admin. Admin is as much about working co-operatively with others as it is about the project content. I see evidence that this user will not work co-operatively. --AlisonW 11:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have been working cooperatively with Bastique as well as drini against images violating copyrights. I'd like to see this evidence of me not cooperating in commons. --Cool CatTalk|@ 14:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikimedia projects are more than just Commons, more than just Wikipedia (en: or otherwise), etc. It is incumbent upon everyone considering making someone an Admin to consider that candidate's track record across all our projects where such activities exist. --AlisonW 18:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... But I am already cooperating here on this wiki, why is that being ignored? What incident exactly are you refering to on which wiki? --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose. Per JamesF. ed g2s • talk 12:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose per JamesF, AlisonW and Gmaxwell. Alphax (talk) 14:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Yrithinnd 16:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral -- (per concerns raised to me) Tawker 18:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose I'll be able to write up my objections in a few hours when I get off from work -- Ned Scott 20:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how frequently I run into you. --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was alerted to your RfA by another user on en.wiki. -- Ned Scott 19:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My experience with Cool Cat on en.wiki has not been pleasant. He often makes comments and even states that he is not interested in working with other editors and feels that concepts such as consensus should not apply to him. See en:Talk:List of Air episodes. I totally agree with the above comments that suggest that Cool Cat seeks acceptance via status. He also seems to lack basic knowledge of copyright law and policy for en.wiki. From en:Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists#Pointless debate...:
"Wikipedias requirements regarding copyrights are in accordance with the law. The only reason fair-use is allowed on wikipedia is because US law allows it. And wikipeida's fair-use guidelines exist only and only to meet the law. I am unaware of reasons beyond the law."
Now I know this is commons.. but can you really make him an admin when he doesn't even know this much? A small issue, but a major red flag. -- Ned Scott 19:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We have a en:WP:STACK for stuff like that and that comment verifies just that.
That entier debate has nothing to do with commons. Fair use images (whatever the kind) are not welcome here. I would delete any and all on sight. Many existing commons admins from non en wikis have no understanding of fair-use as it isnt necesary.
--Cool CatTalk|@ 09:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Granted, but I still feel it's a bit of a red flag when you don't know such a basic policy on a wiki you spend so much time on. Even without that, my other comments still stand. -- Ned Scott 04:09, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Cool Cat is a good editor and a good bot maintainer. I don't see any reason why wouldn't he also be a good Commons admin. Taw 23:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support --Raymond Disc. 15:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose per editors above who know this user at en: -- I don't see a compelling reason to promote when those who know this user best seem to be so uncomfortable with it. Jkelly 16:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe any of those users know me best. I had no interaction with kelly at all for about a year plus aside from random irc comments from time to time, all very very brief. Something simmilar goes for others (I challenge anyone to cite evidence otherwise). Users I closely work with such as drini supported my rfa. --Cool CatTalk|@ 17:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Jon Harald Søby 10:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Support great man! HardDisk 15:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Per JamesF -- Igiveup 17:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Nope as per Kelly Martin. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

So, before I vote, I want to hassle you with a couple of questions. That shouldn't be a problem for you, should it? I mean, you are used to answering questions on your admin requests? Fred Chess 20:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A: Not long ago, you added lots of images to the deletion request that lacked source. In my opinion, images that lack source should be tagged with the {{Nsd}} template. But what is your opinion?
  • All of those images were uploaded by a banned user (per arbcom hearing) and I felt that all of the users users should be looked over due to users lack of understanging of copyrights. User preferd to use random tags even for copyrighted images such as one being a TV stations logo. I believe all of the images he uploaded were fished off of random websites. --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
B: Can you give some explaining of your previous provocative and unreasonable behaviour, or do you feel that it was you who was wrongly accused all along?
  • My issue with Anthere (I assume thats what this is reffering to) was an upleasant one, not just for me and her. I am guilty for my incivility as there is no excuse for that. It was however a very minor issue as far as I am concerned. I am not sure what the accusation is asside from that. --Cool CatTalk|@ 20:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think Cool Cat did not choose a very good name. He is often hot on issues, and what happened that day is that he got hot. That happens. That's not pleasant but that is not either the end of the world either. As far as I am concerned, I long forgave him and I chat now and then with him on irc. Anthere

Ok I think it was good answers so far. Now, I have one final question.

C: I'd like your opinion about your previous admin requests , both here and on English Wikipedia. What did you think about those procedures, the issues raised there, and the way you acted in response to those stated issues. / Fred Chess 21:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I try to improve myself per personal policy, and I use the negative feedback on the rfas to this end. I personaly find en.wiki rfa procedure to be broken. En RFA is more about how popular you are rather that what kind of an asset you are to wikipedia. That of course doesnt apply to ever vote but to an important number. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True indeed! --Kjetil_r 19:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@all: I want to remind everybody that Wikimedia Commons is a project with its own community. So please if you share experience out of other projects here (which is is naturally an integral part of Wikimedia Commons as the community of communities) consider if it is relevant to Wikimedia Commons. The fundamental question that needs to be answered is: Will Coolcat be an active admin that benefits Wikimedia Commons? It is up to you on which points you base your vote but try to avoid "per user" votes and take the time doing own investigations. Arnomane 19:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Requests_and_votes/Cool_Cat_(02)&oldid=33054457"