Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/I-on

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

I-on[change source]

I-on (talk · contribs)
RfA of I-on
global contribs · pie chart · edit count · list user · blocklog ·contribs · deleted
Last comment by: ShakespeareFan00.

Final: (9/9). Withdrawn by candidate. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, everyone! I'm nominating Ian for an administrator on Simple English Wikipedia. Ian has been a hardworking and steady vandal fighter for more than three months here, and he's been active for a longer time than that on the English Wikipedia. He's a very kind, nice user who thinks things through before doing them, and is very clever. He's made literally hundreds of articles (and not all of them are stubs, either), he's very often joined in at discussions at Simple Talk, DYK, GA proposals, Very good article proposals, and much more. He's welcomed many, warned many (all fairly), QDed a great deal of pages, and yet just over fifty percent of his work is on articles. He's also very good at computers and knows Wikipedia's policies. I think he's ready to be an administrator now. Just a reminder to everyone (including me and Ian), though, adminship is just a lot of extra tools that Ian won't destroy Wikipedia with. :) Thankyou! ♥ Belinda ♥ 12:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate's acceptance:I accept. Thank you Belinda for the kind words. mccon99 12:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Optional question from Either way[change source]

  1. We have heard from others, such as the nominator, why you should be an admin, but I think we would benefit from hearing more from you. Why do you believe you are ready for adminship? How do you plan to utilize the admin tools if granted?
I may be young, and a bit excited, but I don't think that's a reason to think I'm not ready. I think I'm ready because as Kansan said, it comes down to if I would damage the site with the tools, or improve it. I think I would improve the site. If I get granted with the tools, I would be more keen with vandalism, as it sometimes takes awhile before by requests for QD and blocking users are taken care of (no offense to current admins!). Especially the whole episode with Doktor Nooo was unacceptable in my mind. Being able to rely on myself and help others to take care of those things, is how I would utilize the tools. mccon99 15:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from Nifky?[change source]

  • Q: If you had administrator rights, what would you plan to do with them?
A: Same as above.
  • Q: When is it appropriate in certain circumstances to delete a newly made <3 sentence long article or stub it?
A: If it follows the main QD circumstances (vandalism, nonsense, hoax etc), then delete it. If I am not sure if its true or not true, I would google it and see if there's any hits about it. If not, I would check en. If nothing there, delete it as hoax or nonsense etc. If there is something, then I would mark it as a stub.

Optional questions from Pmlineditor[change source]

  1. What administrative actions do you take when:
a) A user blanks his user page.
b) A vandal makes 4 bad edits and requests unblocking saying that they are sorry and will never repeat what they did again after you block him.
Addendum: I should have clarified more, but I meant a vandal username and not an IP. Not a very big issue, but even then... Pmlineditor ∞ 13:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would start a discussion on AN just to see what other admins think. But if they were not that bad of changes, maybe a few being GF, I would immediately give him/her another shot. mccon99 12:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. When, if ever, should you block a user without any warning?
If he/she puts very bad spam on wikipedia or (if possible) hack into wikipedia, and change user's rights etc.
  1. Is the be bold policy or the ignore all rules one acceptable for administrative actions?
I would say both. They are both very good policies. If an admin sees something that should be fixed, do it. And if there's a rule in your way, then ignore it. I don't see how its any different from it being a user following the policies. Admins and users alike should follow them all. mccon99 12:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Since your nominator says you are "very good at computers", what are open proxies? Do you know how to perform IP-range blocks?
Open proxies are proxy servers (servers which people can use to use other computers to forward internet services, web pages etc. so that it doesn't use that much bandwidth.) An open proxy is like this, but any user on the Internet is able to use the forwarding service. Do you know how to perform IP-range blocks? The other question however, I don't know. I looked and looked to see if I could find any info on it but didn't find anything. I don't know how to do it, but I do know about it and when it should be used. mccon99 12:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pmlineditor ∞ 11:56, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support[change source]

  1. One bad QD out of hundreds is not unforgivable, especially if he understands his mistake and is taking steps not to repeat it, and I simply don't see his previously announced desire to run as a negative so much as I see it as the signs of a user who wants to do his best to help the site. Ultimately, my vote comes down to whether I think the site would be better or worse with him having these tools, and my personal belief is that it would be better. Kansan (talk) 19:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Weak support: 250 QDs? That's unreal! Purplebackpack89 22:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support As nominator. :) ♥ Belinda ♥ 23:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. You're an amazing editor, Ian, and I'm not that much older than you, but I know that as a kid sometimes I take things the wrong way or act too hastily. That said, all I've seen from you is an impeccable standard of thoughtfulness and courtesy, so I trust you enough to keep my vote a Weak support. SS✞(Kay) 00:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. +1 --vector ^_^ (talk) 13:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support I've been waiting for Ian's answer to Either way and Nifky's questions to finalize my vote, and I've decided to vote support. Everyone makes mistakes, and I-on's good far outweighs his mistakes. I trust I-on and I don't think he was being power hungry. He wasn't setting a time for adminship at first, but when Belinda first offered to nominate him in March, he turned it down and said he might run sometime in April, justly feeling that he was not ready. All in all, he would do his best to help this site and having these tools would make it easier for him. Sincerely, Classical Esther♣ 22:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The people opposing haven't brought up any points that worry me. Yottie =talk= 19:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support I am not concerned with regards to his ability. Will do a good job. Chenzw  Talk  09:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Based on his edits, I think he'll do a fine job with the mop and will be an assist to the current team. If he hadn't said his name, people wouldn't oppose for ageism. (Maybe they would support?) Most of our editors (and also admins) are under aged and this system works well. I doubt that we would abuse the trust. Furthermore, from my experience when I became an admin, you are much more careful with the tools as you are without them. -Barras talk 15:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose[change source]

  1. No. Not ready yet. The comments I made in his editor review are still valid. I see a very recent error in QD tagging. The error was in no way insignificant. He does not use edit summaries a lot, which although not great, is a concern. I don't see him doing a lot of "GA deciding", what is GA deciding anyways? Also, I remember him wanting comments for a future RfA in ST, showing that he is a bit power hungry. Sorry, you are doing a great job, but not now, please. Pmlineditor ∞ 12:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Power hungry? I don't think he's "power hungry", just trying to be helpful and learn the opinion of other people on what he has to improve before his RFA. But I do agree he'd better be more careful. And about the GA - I fixed the sentence on my nom. :)♥ Belinda ♥ 12:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Here is the discussion on Simple Talk that Pmlineditor is referring to: Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_79#improving_skills. Either way (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Re Pmlineditor: I argee with some things your saying, but I believe I fixed everything in my Editor review. 1. I have continued to try and lower my user and user talk namespaces. Before when you put both of them together, it was about 40%. Now its about 33%. Its not the biggest change in the world, but I'm certainly trying. 2. All the links you gave me (t:tdyk, wp:pgood, and wp:simple talk etc.) I've put comments on all (except wp:an. I probably had something I could have posted there, but I put it on simple talk before I realized.) Now my wp namespace is up to 160 edits, and my template talk to 60. 3. And last, you wanted me to create a (V)GA article. Rise Against is currently up for approval for GA and I'm sure it will pass. Thus I think all the comments on editor review have been fixed or almost fixed. If I didn't think so, I would have declined the nom. And yes I made a mistake in tagging a page, and I humbly apologize and will learn from it, but doesn't everyone make mistakes? If I get the tools, I will be more careful. But overall, my vandal fighting skills aren't to bad if I do say so myself. The other comments I admit I can improve on. But I don't think I'm power hungry. :) I just want to be the best editor I can be. :) mccon99 13:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    >50% of your edits are in article space. Writing in User talk space is perfectly fine; we need to talk to each other if we're going to build an encyclopedia together. EhJJTALK 15:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    To err is human. I-on has about 250 QD requests that were deleted. If this is the only error, then he's not making a lot of mistakes. However, I am a bit concerned by the lack of edit summaries. EhJJTALK 15:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Admittedly, to err is human, but I might note that the oppose is not on the basis of a single QD. I remember there being another QD which he tagged as G3 when it was not vandalism. Adminship is not a reward for editing well; neither is it a prize. However, I might change my opinion if I-on answers the questions I will ask (in a short while) well. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Agree with some of what Pmlineditor said. The tagging of Flushing, Queens is a little troubling. You should be checking article histories before tagging articles. If you had admin rights, that page would have likely just been deleted and forgotten with the content there wiped out. Additionally, today marks the end of your 3rd month here. I think that this is too soon for granting admin rights to you. If we were in dire need of admins, I'd consider, but I think with the amount we have now, we can wait a few months to consider adding the tools to you. Keep up the good work though. Your article work and work overall is really beneficial to the project and in a few months time, I would have no problem supporting, Either way (talk) 13:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The answer to the questions that Pmlineditor poses are very weak and I agree with BG7's analysis of them. I hope that those supporting take some time to look the answers over. Either way (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. No. As has been pointed out the bad QD tag is not a good thing. Saying if you get the tools you'll be more careful worries me an awful lot as well. It shows that you don't understand what adminship is - it's not a right but more a 'reward' for good editing (though even that isn't completely accurate). You should be careful before getting sysop, not after. Other than that, per Either way and Pmlineditor. Goblin 15:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton![reply]
    To expand following the answering of some questions... Still a no. The answers to 1 and 2 don't particularly convince me, while I wouldn't necessarily agree with 3 and suggest reading up some more. Please note, this isn't an ageist comment at all. Goblin 15:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Kennedy![reply]
    What don't 1 and 2 convince you of? That he won't destroy the wiki? As for 3, what's wrong with it? Griffinofwales (talk) 19:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Further expansion... see DJSasso's note on his talk page. Goblin 15:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Meganmccarty![reply]
    Not a good thing, yes, but what does it have to do with the admin tools? Griffinofwales (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you the closing bureaucrat? No. So stop commenting on every single oppose. It is up to the opposer how much they say, and up to the closing bureaucrat how much they are counted. It is not up to you to ask people to 'explain more' and comment on every single oppose. Stop. Goblin 09:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman![reply]
    Lolmore - the answers to Pmlineditor's are not what I would expect from a potential admin and shows that he isn't ready yet. 1 a) Has no answer, while 1 b) is somewhat substandard. Ok, wasn't the best question (Anon? Username?) but Admins should be able to determine unblock requests without other administrators' input at AN - unless it's a user who is the subject of a ban. Question 2... If a user is spamming they should receive, imo, a spam4im at minimum. Unless it's lots of edits in a short space of time, then there should always be a warning issued, not a straight block. It's also extremely hard to 'hack' into Wikipedia, and if it was an account that was hacked then you would obviously block the account, though that's unlikely. As for BOLD and IAR, in principle, yes, but no examples of when and won't? Finally, it seems that the last two have been researched rather than known. Not necessarily a bad thing (I don't know how to make a range block myself, and I run MW installations) but just re-iterates my above oppose. Perhaps the commenters will leave me alone now I've carefully analysed the question answers? Goblin 12:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Yottie![reply]
  4. Not really ready at this time. More experience is needed, perhaps teaming up with a current admin for some mentoring? fr33kman 01:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. No. Far too soon for someone so young. All admins inevitably run across situations which require maturity and judgement. Though my experience of him is good, and I recognise his positive work, I don't think he has demonstrated those qualities yet. Being an admin is not just about 'more tools'. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Per this, mostly, and per Either way and Goblin, et al. I'm sorry.  — laurynashby 10:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot that Ian was twelve years old; but after all, what makes you think he acts immature? Just because he is twelve does not mean that his /actions/ itself are immature... ♥ Belinda ♥ 10:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Although answers to the three questions are okay, you seem to have gone over a large vandalism revert in the history of Powderfinger where you didn't seem to report this vandal at WP:VIP. I'm not too concerned about QD'ing new articles wrong, but the Flushing, Queens article needed more thought. Another thing I want to say that edit summaries are somewhat important, and that you have more edits to userspace than wikipedia. Participating with the community is quite important than just reverting/blocking as an administrator, to have your say on things on Simple talk and at AN. Hopefully you will settle these issues before your next RfA. Nifky^ 01:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I would like to note that I-on has dramatically improved in his WP/user space ratios. His last 50 edits in WP space go back a month, while his last 50 in user go back 2 months. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    He may have recently, but some of his responses to the questions are not really the main answer of the question. Hacking Wikipedia will be hard, and that an admin blocking a user for hacking the whole wikipedia database will have little or no effect. Secondly, he says he's search hard over the internet of how to range block; he says he doesn't know and then says I do know when and how to use it. This is an uncertain indicator of how to rangeblock. He doesn't fully give the scope of why people use open proxies on wikipedia either. Nifky^ 13:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I admit, I'm in over my head. The first thing you mentioned question 3, your right I had no clue. Second one you mentioned, the last question, I answered what I could. I know that wasn't really the question, but I didn't know. The last thing you mention is completely insane. I didn't answer why people use proxies because that wasn't the question! The question was what are open proxies. Not why. I wanted to answer them straight. All in all, I'm over my head. I've known that for awhile now and its time for me to withdraw. mccon99 18:37, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Not ready yet. -DJSasso (talk) 15:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    May you please give reason why I'm "not ready yet" so I may improve in the areas you are concerned with? Thanks, mccon99 17:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Just take a look at the many reasons above. Plus I generally don't think its a good idea to give adminship to people trying to get it which you clearly were. People who actively seek it in the way you did generally make bad admins. -DJSasso (talk) 18:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Not now. Maybe later. —§ stay (sic)! 01:07, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Why? Griffinofwales (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I had no interactions with this user before. However a large part of the community feels that the candidate shows potential to eventually be a sysop, but the candidate is not ready for adminship right now. There are other issues rasied in this RfA regarding the candidate's age and about QD-tagging, although I believe that the former is mostly irrevelant for adminship. —§ stay (sic)! 01:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[change source]

I'm not going to toss up a vote yet, but I will say a little something. I-on has tagged many articles(Admin only) for QD, and I'm not sure one mistake is enough to base a whole oppose on. When you go to delete a page, you are given a warning to check the page history, so I will have to assume that people pay attention to that warning and check it out. I don't expect another error like that. Comments?--Gordonrox24 | Talk 15:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it before too a month or so back, so I can be sympathetic. I-on's was relatively recent, so I can understand the desire to ensure that it doesn't happen again for a period of time. I'm struggling with the idea of him being power hungry. Self nominations are allowed on the site and his question was a legitimate one for somebody considering it. Would we consider seeking an editor review to be power hungry? In my view, he simply wanted to see how he could be a better editor, and that can never be a bad thing regardless of the motivation. Kansan (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Adminship shouldn't be seen as a 'goal', which in I-on's instance seemed to be the intent of his comments. As I said in my oppose, adminship is a 'reward' (used loosely), not a goal or something that is handed out to everyone. One bad QD is fine, yes (i've made them myself), but this close to an RFA? No. We need to see that it can't happen again, otherwise we would have been without the article on Flushing now. Goblin 15:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Yottie![reply]
I don't even think adminship is a reward, it is an extra set of buttons that can be used to further help the encyclopedia, given to people who can use them for the betterment of the encyclopedia and not destroy it. I don't think I-on will destroy anything, and It is very easy to undelete a page. I would rather not have to clean up after another admin, but it isn't the end of the world. I do agree that have a set time laid out for yourself to run at RFA is a little concerning. The admin tools require patience, and I'm not sure that I-on has that. I'm fine with the one bad QD, it's the rush for the tools that concerns me.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 15:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree with that sentiment. As I say, it's 'reward' in the loosest possible sense of the word; a better way to describe it might be 'something available to you to further help the wiki when you show that you have the trust of the community'. The speed bit is the point I was trying to make! Goblin 16:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw![reply]
BG7, I make mistakes now as an admin. I don't think it matters so much as when he made it, as long as he understands what he did wrong, and that he will be more careful in the future. We shouldn't expect perfect users. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE Gordon: If I may ask, what makes you think I'm not that patient? Or that I'm in a "rush" to get the tools? Was it something I said? Was it because of the message on simple talk? Is it how I word things? Because I can assure you I'm in no rush to get the tools. I'm certainly excited to have an opportunity like this (who wouldn't be?) but certainly not rushed. And I don't lack patience. I don't think I do anyway. ;) mccon99 16:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah It's the whole ST thing where you already had "I'm going to run in April" on the agenda. When I read the ST thread, It sounds like you are asking us what you can do to make sure you could run in April. If you had said, "What can I work on to get myself ready to run for RFA at some point in the future" maybe I wouldn't be writing this. Maybe I am taking everything to literal, I dunno.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 17:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Ian's having the administrator tools will certainly be a "net positive" for Wikipedia. I'm sure he'll be more careful in the future. Lots of really short articles can be confusing! And I'm quite sure he's not "power hungry". He just wanted to be a better editor. His request on ST might have sounded as if he had adminship as a goal, but I think his main goal is that he just likes Wikipedia and wants to improve it. Maybe he has a bit exaggerated idea of adminship...but that doesn't mean he's power hungry, it just means he thinks too highly of administrator rights. Anyway, I can see no great problem with his being an admin. ♥ Belinda ♥ 23:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It should be noted that many QD articles can be QDed under multiple criteria Purplebackpack89 00:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
May I, or am I being too curious, if I could ask why you abstain? ^^* Thanks anyway. ♥ Belinda ♥ 05:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Well, I have no reasons to support or oppose, that's why I'm abstaining. I know he does a good job there, but... I just don't want to vote. That's all. --Diego let's talk 22:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh... Thanks for the reason. I understand, but I don't see why you have no reason to support or oppose. Ian made many wonderful edits as well as a few sad mistakes. Those both make good reasons for either one. But well, if you don't want to, sure, you don't need to vote. :) ♥ Belinda ♥ 03:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just want to make a comment that I hope users will vote honestly and after some careful thinking over I-on's merits and mistakes before voting, and not just because the majority of administrators, at present, is voting oppose. Thank you. :) Classical Esther♣ 22:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I along with MisterWiki, have decided not to place a vote in this RFA. I have come to this decision after a long time spent thinking. I work with people I-on's age all the time at my other online commitment, and I can very easily say that many of the users there are intelligent, thoughtful, and careful in what they do. However, they have good days and bad days, and on bad days they are unpredictable. That is not a desirable trait for an admin. However, I do not feel right opposing the RFA based on age, as I-on's contributions are just fine. I just don't feel ready to support, and don't want to oppose.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to his userpage, twelve.  — laurynashby 23:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hasn't hit the emotional hurricane of puberty, and seems old enough to make mature decisions. I'd disregard his age completely and try basing this RfA entirely on his edits. Seems to be where this RfA is going, should be alright... Gwib -(talk)- 23:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a side comment not intended to sway the vote or anything: I think that we can all agree that, regardless of how this vote ends up, his contributions are far better than what you would expect from the average person his age and that he is a very gifted young man. Kansan (talk) 23:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well said, Kansan! I'm entirely of your opinion. :) Classical Esther♣ 05:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Disregard, man. Disregard :) Gwib -(talk)- 23:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree wholly with Kansan, he put the words in the exactly right way I wanted. I've never seen a more mature twelve-year-old user in my life. I don't think age is the matter right now; getting a couple of tools are no big deal, people. Even though I don't have them myself, there's no really big difference between an experienced, skilled, nice rollbacker and an admin. It's just that you can delete and block some stuff. Making less than five QD mistakes are okay. As long as you aren't "power-hungry", which I hope and think Ian isn't, it's alright, isn't it? Everybody is allowed to make a tiny mistakes. Even admins do! And I know Ian isn't the kind of person to use the tools badly. If he does, you can just take it back - though I guarantee you he will not. @ Ian: I think, if it wouldn't be rude, maybe it would be better for you to change your signature? I prefered the Ian Mccarty one in Monotype Corsiva with the chess mark. It was most professional, and the present signature might make you sound more immature than you are (though I don't think so very much :p). Thanks, ♥ Belinda ♥ 03:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You do not need to make the same point over and over again. Once is enough. Other people are able to make their own minds up, and being pushy does not help the discussion. Discussion should be dispassionate. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
O-kay.... Sorry. I was getting too worked up, I'll try to keep my head cool. Thankyou, Macdonald, for reminding me. :) --♥ Belinda ♥ 08:42, 9 April 2010 (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://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/I-on&oldid=8895572"