Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Poetic Decay

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Poetic Decay

[edit]

Final: (6/10/0); Ended 23:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Poetic Decay (talk · contribs) - The community, I wish to present you with my next RfA nominee, Poetic Decay.

Poetic Decay has been editing Wikipedia since 2006. Since then, they have amassed roughly 12,000 since then. For a breakdown of those contributions, Poetic Decay has over 7200 to the mainspace, over 590 to the Wikipedia-space, and over 2600 to talk/user talk combined. Poetic Decay does a lot of article work, and has contributed a lot to articles such as Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2, Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2, Evanescence, and Wii.

In the Wikipedia-space, Poetic Decay is a member of various Wikiprojects, including Anime and manga, Japan, Evanescence, and The Legend of Zelda series. Poetic Decay has made over 200 reports to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and has made consistently good reports to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.

I believe that Poetic Decay will make a good administrator, and I am sure they will use the tools efficiently. I hope the community will share that view. Acalamari 18:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I, Poetic Decay, wholeheartedly accept this nomination. // DecaimientoPoético 19:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC) I don't need this right now. I'm happy where I stand as it is, and I'm simply not ready for such a burden. Being a young teen, these are the best years of my life and I should be out there enjoying them, not taking on a pretty big responsibility such as this. There will always be other chances for me. ^^ As for my past behaviour, I'm taking an oath to drastically turn my attitude around. Wish me luck for when my time comes again (don't worry, that won't be very soon ;). // DecaimientoPoético 23:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: Most of my focus would go towards stopping vandals from doing their nasty little deeds on articles and user pages. Other administrators (such as User:Persian Poet Gal) have always been there for me, stopping vandals from attacking my page and even protecting it from time to time. Knowing I will be able to do that for others myself makes me happy.
To be honest, however, I cannot see myself blocking users very often. Granted, there will be times when I see it as necessary, though lately I haven't been one to warn/report vandals on a regular basis, so I don't see why banning would be much different for me. I also realize that there are times when protecting pages isn't quiet necessary. At first, I may be hasty (aren't we all at times?), though I'm a fast learner and I'm sure I'll quickly learn when to protect pages and when it's okay not to. I also see myself participating in a lot more AfDs, as well as RfDs and IfDs, more than I do now. I've seen a lot of speedy deletions canditates in my time as well, a few articles nominated by myself, and I'll be glad to help clear any kind of backlog out.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My best - or rather, my most cherished - contributions would probably be at Bleach: Heat the Soul (series) and Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2/3. The reason I choose these pages is pretty simple: Since the day I created the page, no one has edited Bleach: Heat the Soul (series) unless to fix typos and the like. Knowing I can create such a thing myself makes me proud. With the Budokai Tenakichi articles, it's slightly more complicated. Since I'm just a regular user at this point, I can't do much to stop vandals besides report them and protect pages. Ever since the day of these pages' creations, I've been fighting off vandals like crazy (obviously not on my own, which I am very grateful for). As with what I expect to do as an admin, it makes me somewhat happy to know I'll be there for others in a time of need and will be able to block users/protect pages when necessary.
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 hardly ever let people on the Internet cause me stress (no matter how they may act), though I suppose I have been in some conflicts from time to time. I try to avoid reverting pages too often in coordinance with WP:3RR, but sometimes it has to be done (see the Tenkaichi 3 edit history). While the users I was reverting were adding unsourced/unconfirmed information, I was still in danger of being blocked due to 3RR issues, which caused slight frustration every once in a while. However, I never let it purposely show. Most of the time, I simply warn them and hope they learn. For those who don't, they either get a final warning or get reported to WP:AIV.
Question from DBZROCKS
[edit]
4 Do you think there are times where you should break the rules of wikipedia? What would these times be?
A: To be honest, I can't think of many instances when such a thing would be acceptable or even appropriate. We have WP:IAR, which implies it is okay to go against certain guidelines at certain times, though not many situations comes to mind. However, an example of such a thing would be being bold and adding something you feel should belong in an article, despite the fact it's not necessarily appropriate nor is it considered vandalism. Granted, it's not the best example. // DecaimientoPoético 21:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

[edit]

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Poetic Decay before commenting.

Discussion

[edit]

This use strikes me as not very well suited to adminship. Just reading his edit summaries alone is chilling [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Comments such as "There should really be a policy on not allowing kindergardeners to edit pages", "Are you that bored?", "Stop being arrogant" and "Learn to take a hint" are entirely inappropriate. These are all recent diffs. Their existence subsequent to a warning on the use of inappropriate edit summaries back in June (see [11]) is disturbing. Bibliomaniac says below that this editor will probably tone it down if he passes. Given that he was warned about it before, and didn't, I have no faith that he will cut back the sarcasm. That said, it is not on this alone that I think this person is not well suited to adminship. This editor also engages in contentious edit warring, and did so just a few days ago. Review these diffs; [12][13][14][15][16][17][18]. Seven reverts on the same article in one day. Plus, he clearly knows about WP:3RR and violated it anyways (see edit summary during the edit war). Even worse, he made no attempt at communication with the editor he was warring with other than in edit summaries (see lack of any messages to this user's talk page), and no attempts to gain consensus on the talk page of the article in question (see lack of contributions by this editor to the article's talk page). I am not at all comfortable with the idea of this editor having the admin tools. --Durin 20:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Weak support A large number of edits spred across the namespaces but Q1 reduces my support significantly--Pheonix15 (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Weak support. While I know you have experience in the field of vandalism and protection, I'm still sort of concerned about your sarcastic, somewhat bitey edit summaries that others have brought up, but I know that you'll probably keep it down should this nom pass. bibliomaniac15 Prepare to be deleted! 20:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Very Strong Support A great editor who works hard to prevent vandalism and make wikipedia's information reliable. Poetic Decay constantally works on new articles that have heavy levels of vandalism, with the administrator tools, he could block these vandals much faster and allow these articles to grow without continually being interupted by vandalism. Such pages are usually prone to spelling errors which with the tools Poetic Decay could easily fix. His high edit count clearly shows that he wants to help Wikipedia. Maybe once in awhile he loses his cool when reverting vandalism, but he is normally nice and open to suggestion when editing on talk pages. I truly believe that Poetic Decay will make a great admin. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 20:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Er... how are the admin tools going to help them fix grammatical errors? — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Spelling, I ment to say spelling. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Even so, I don't see how being an admin makes it easier to correct spelling. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Support This editor has tirelessly edited pages, and has a extremely large mainspace edit count, sure he may lose control of his mouth once in a while, but that is merely a small obstacle to overcome. I cant even express how it would benifit Wikipedia by making Poetic Decay a administrator.--ÄtΘmicR€£igionesїgñ
    Comment See WP:AAAD, RFA is to judge how well an editor will perform as an administrator, not the quality or quantity of their edits. Many editors that edit tirelessly would make horrible admins, whereas some that are fairly casual would be great --lucid 21:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Considering Firday's reason for opposition, do we ask for a more expansive reason, or simply remove it? --ÄtΘmicR€£igionesїgñ
    Comment It's pretty much always unacceptable to remove a vote, no matter how irrelevant it is, if the editor isn't a blatant vandal/sock. It's not a big deal, bcrats will probably ignore frivolous votes --lucid 21:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - If Adminship is No Big Deal Then why the Heck are people opposing..I will not oppose based on Someone's AGE (its Experience which counts ) since people who oppose along those lines, themselves are too "narrow minded".. Good Luck Poetic Decay and I hope you succeed... ;) ..--Cometstyles 21:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Not being a big deal doesn't mean that we should give every Tom, WP:DICK and Harry the mop. The entire point of RFA is to determine if an editor was suitable for being an admin, if we supported everyone that passed through we might as well eliminate the process. And please don't lump every editor that opposes in with someone who has a poor reason, trying to discredit other editors does not help your case --lucid 21:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support as the nominator. Acalamari 22:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose. I'm sorry, but you're way too young. Friday (talk) 20:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Stongly disagree with friday. No one is too young. Also see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in adminship discussions--Pheonix15 (talk) 20:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That has nothing to do with RFA-- RFA is about determining if someone can be trusted with the mop based on their actions on Wikipedia, not their age or anything else. This would be like disallowing anyone with a political opinion or religion from being an admin due to NPOV concerns-- if they don't actually HAVE problems, don't act like they do --lucid 20:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I require good judgment and mature behavior from admin candidates. Yes, there is the odd kid who can act reasonably adult-like, but I have no reason to believe this editor is one such exceptional person. Is this such a shocking way to think? Most localities only let people vote or enter into contracts at a certain age- children simply aren't responsible enough. The comments above by Durin reinforce my suspicion that rather than being an exceptionally mature kid, this candidate is probably more like a fairly typical kid. Friday (talk) 21:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I've seen admins roughly the same age as me, [[User:Arjun01] the perfect example. I may not act like the most mature user on this site, but that alone is still not a very good reason to oppose anyone IMHO. // DecaimientoPoético 21:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, the RFA is to determine if the candidate is responsible, not if people like the candidate are. How would you like it if I asked for you to be banned because I found your user page ugly-- same as many vandals. If you don't think the candidate has maturity or responsibility, vote on that, do not make blanket statements about people out of your own assumptions. There are immature people of all ages, opposing based off of age alone is pure bias --lucid 21:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong Oppose Answer to Q1 makes me think you might not know much about being an admin, and if you do, you're a bit too happy with the banstick. In your move log, two of your edit summaries say Cut the crap, Kyuubi. You're not getting it your way, which may have been two months ago, but is still very rude, and cannot possibly be taken in a non-offensive manner. This diff shows a lack of understanding of policy-- it is in fact permissible to remove warnings from your talk page, although it is discouraged. This diff is rather bitey. This edit summary smells like beans, although I understand your frustration. I'm sorry, but you just seem very incivil. I'm afraid of you biting newbs and then banning them when they get insulted. --lucid 20:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I can see your concern and completely understand why you'd oppose. I apologize for such behaviour, but I suppose that won't get me off the hook. Also, I never had the intention of mkaing it seem blocking users would be simply for fun; I simply meant being able to help others would make me happy.
    As for the move comment, I guess I was a bit frustrated. Kyuubi kept trying to "get his way" through content disputes, going so far as moving the article. // DecaimientoPoético 20:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    A quick note, you should look at other RFAs to see how the "#" tag works, you need to put it after your comment and then add a space, like this: "#:", or you mess up the numbering. Anyway, I don't think you'll block users for fun, however I do think that you will give rude warnings if they get a warning at all, and be a bit too soon to push the red button. --lucid 20:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose - On the one hand, it's clear that you have tonnes of experience, and so probably know the policies etc. better than a few existing admins. On the other hand, however, your tone (esp. in edit comments) is unnecessarily curt, sometimes plain rude, and I too fear that you'll scare newbies. Also, the start of your answer to question one is a little, well, odd. Strange wording, makes it sound uneasy. Sorry. TheIslander 20:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Oppose per Lucid. Can't support such a recent edit warrior. It doesn't help when if our admins are going to mock users they are in disputes with. T Rex | talk 20:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Changing to oppose having re-read your answer to Q3. Yes, everyone has to make judgement calls, and WP:IAR is there for a reason, but complaining that "it causes frustration" to know you're in danger of being blocked for knowingly violating a core policy is IMO unacceptable. The combination of hair-trigger incivility & wilful disregard for policy isn't appropriate for an admin — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Strong oppose. We have enough admins who think they can break 3RR (or other policies) when defending The Truth, we don't need another. -Amarkov moo! 21:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose -- Although I like the way your edits are spread around, and I don't have any issue at all with your age, the diffs don't lie, and they did seem a bit bitey, non-knowledgeable of policy, and looked like beans. I'm sorry, but I can't support you at this time. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 22:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No reason to apologize. I respect your decision to oppose me, as well as everyone else's. // DecaimientoPoético 22:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Strong oppose- Durin's diffs are truly troubling. It scares me just to imagine this user having the mop. --Boricuaeddie 22:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong oppose per Durin. --Coredesat 22:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. STRONG Oppose Per Durin, Boriceddie. Politics rule 23:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Neutral changing to oppose I've never run across you (unsurprising as we don't overlap), was going to support but I'm concerned at edit summaries like these[19], [20], [21] (all in the last couple of days) and can imagine you WP:BITEing people. Not enough to oppose though — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Neutral You have been a good editor over your time on Wikipedia, the only problem I've got is that those diffs are a bit biting. This could translate into admin issues down the line; you may be a bit "trigger-happy". However, I don't feel like that's a big enough concern for me to oppose. However, I trust Acalamari, and feel that in a few months' time, if you resolve those issues, and put them behind you, then you will be qualified. Please email me if you need advice/discussion/what have you. As for the opposes based on age, I will never oppose a user based on their age in real life, only on the maturity and quality of their edits and behavior on Wikipedia; I myself am 13. Good luck! Cheers, Neranei (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Poetic_Decay&oldid=1243740642"