Candidate Statement: I have been working on this wiki for over a year. I have been an administrator for quite a while. I have written a lot of articles, expanded lots of stubs, added lots of pictures, simplified lots of articles and fixed lots of categories (over 6000 total edits). My goal is to make this a really good encyclopedia. As one of the older people involved in the project I think I have the maturity and wisdom (I hope I do!) to be a very responsible Oversighter. --Peterdownunder (talk) 12:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Q: You say you think you'd be a "very responsible Oversighter". Can you explain why? I understand you're good with articles, categories etc, but Oversight is very, very different. What relevant experience do you have? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A: I have relevant experience in several of the key areas of oversight. Firstly protecting the privacy of individuals. In part of my current job I have to deal with special needs students. This gives me access to quite detailed confidential reports and assessments. There are strict privacy laws operating in Australia which control how such info is stored, who and when people can have access to it. For example, sometimes I have to provide information as part of a court hearing, and this requires me to remove the names on reports or other identifying information, where they are not relevant to the case. I am able to understand and comply with this privacy legislation on a daily basis. I believe that the SEWP needs to be vigilant in order to protect a person's privacy and take I this matter very seriously.
Secondly on removing libellous information. I have deleted this several times in my role as an administrator when I have found it. In order to keep the wiki community running smoothly there is no place for this kind of material. It needs to be deleted promptly as it does the wiki no credit and only harms its reputation to leave it in place. It is very important for a credible encyclopedia to have a neutral style, so I believe in quickly removing anything that can be seen to have lack a neutral POV and/or makes critical and unsubstantiated claims about anyone. I am happy to take legal or other advice about such material, and the community could expect both considered and decisive action from me.
Thirdly on copyright. I take copyright very seriously as people may remember from my arguments in the recent debate about allowing fair-use images not supported by the Wikimedia commons. I am a published author who has written several books on naval history, Australian political history, and music. Copies of these are included in the National Library of Australia's collection. I have also written a number of plays and musicals. I take my copyright very seriously and would not hesitate to take action if my rights were being infringed. As part of my current job, I am responsible for school music programs across about 25% of regional Victoria (Australia). This means I have had proper training in copyright law so that I am able to advise teachers on their legal obligations under the copyright laws. Copyright is an issue that has to be dealt with, and not to be avoided or ignored. I have been keeping a close watch on the current debate on the Wikimedia commons about fair use of reproduced images of art works held in art galleries. I don't see any place for copyright violations on this wikipedia and would not hesitate to remove them as soon as possible Peterdownunder (talk) 08:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
what do you feel is the main quality one should have to deal with "oversight" requests ?
17:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Bubblycanuck (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
A The main quality a person needs to do this job is to be able to remain calm and rational, carefully consider the evidence, and then take prompt and decisive action. I believe that I have these qualities. As well, I am able to work together with other editors, and have done so on several projects. I need to be available - the SEWP is my main wiki, I do add images to the Wikimedia Commons, and sometimes have edited on the Simple English Wiktionary, but I am usually editing here most days of the week. I can be reached quickly by email or on IRC. Peterdownunder (talk) 08:31, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I trust Peterdownunder to be a responsible oversigher; so fa, working with him as an admin has been a pleasure. I therefore see no reason why he should not be able to handle the extra responsibility. --Eptalon (talk) 12:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
There are other candidates I trust more; I don't want too many oversighters on wiki. —MC8 (b · t) 00:44, Monday August 10 2009 (UTC)
Only the top two or three get promoted. Don't worry about it. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually that is not the case. -Djsasso (talk) 00:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, that's what I heard. But, I also heard that we were starting in September. Griffinofwales (talk) 00:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
There are a few other candidates that I trust more than Peterdownunder. This is nothing personal; I just think that there are others who would be better off with the flag. Razorflame 00:20, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Really? Peterdownunder is probably our least controversial editor on the whole project. He keeps his head down, rarely gets into issues and just adds quality to the project, day-after-day! He's also active when most of us are off counting sheep. Please think about this one Flamey. fr33kmantalk 00:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I have thought this over, and I just don't have the level of trust that I do with some of the other administrators like Eptalon and yourself. Razorflame 02:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to support or oppose, not that it will make any difference, due to my views that these elections are being improperly conducted. We should not be extending any time periods to get a required amount of votes - that's why we weren't going to start until September. I think we have some power hungry people wanting to get these started early...Goblin 13:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Yotty!
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.