Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ebikeguy

Ebikeguy

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (2/8/2); Scheduled to end 21:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination

Ebikeguy (talk · contribs) – Ebikeguy has been contributing to the project for almost 5 years, and through the interaction we have had for the last three years editing articles related to all kind of electric vehicles he always has shown knowledge of Wikipedia policies and above all, when facing conflicts he maintains a relaxed and non confrontational attitude, always trying to resolve conflict in a respectful manner and assuming good faith, and requesting mediation when necessary. Also notice at his edit count page that he does a very diverse work in the project, from creating content, removing vandalism, and participating in discussions, and always being quite polite when addressing editors in their talk pages. I believe Wikipedia does not have many veteran editors with such personal qualities.--Mariordo (talk) 03:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I am honored that a Wikipedian of Mariordo's stature would nominate me for adminship, and I humbly accept the nomination. I do recognize that my edit count is somewhat lower than many other admin candidates, but I think that my years of editing have given me a good understanding of what is required and expected from an admin. That said, if consensus indicates that I need more editing experience before I am qualified to be an admin, I will accept this judgment and work to gain experience in the areas indicated. Ebikeguy (talk) 20:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?

A: I have been spending time participating in AfD discussions, so I would be inclined to close them when appropriate as as admin. A large percentage of my edits these days involve reverting vandalism, and I would use admin powers to block persistent spammers and other vandals. I am also interested in the Speedy Deletion process.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I enjoyed my role in this RfC regarding the Chevrolet Vega page. I found the article through following the edits of a "virtual" friend, and saw a conflict brewing. A passionate, highly-knowledgeable editor who had been the driving force behind most of the language and photos in the article had disagreements with others who wanted to edit the article such that it presented what they felt was a more balanced presentation of the car's history. When an admin suggested that an RfC on the subject would be appropriate, I started one and monitored it throughout the process. When an involved editor was blocked, I requested that the RfC be held open to allow him time to comment after his block ended. Throughout the process, I put forth my best effort at being neutral, fair and relaxed throughout the ensuing discussions. When things began to get heated, I tried to be a calming force. Overall, I thought the process went very well.

I am also proud of the work I did on Plug-in hybrid which ultimately may have helped it become a featured article, as well as the vandalism protection I did on that article on its big day.

I do enjoy the work I do reverting vandalism. I think it is important work that makes Wikipedia the wonderful place it is.

Finally, I am proud of the work I do to rescue worthy articles, such as Blue Cruise and Kogswell Cycles.

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: Yes, absolutely. Abrasive, antagonistic editors make me mad, but I try to avoid allowing my anger to flow into the related talk page discussions. My biggest Wikihero is Gogo Dodo. He/she gets flamed ferociously on a regular basis, but he/she always remains calm, polite, helpful and informative. I strive to emulate his/her editing style. One way I achieve this goal is to ALWAYS take a break from a discussion when I get riled up. These things can always wait until the next morning, and my points will inevitably be more persuasive if I wait until I am calm before writing them down.

Another pet peeve of mine is the "Tyranny of the Majority," when the opinion of the majority of editors gets published even when it is wrong. I have seen this happen on a few occasions when the "Automobile Crowd" faces of against the "Environmental Crowd" regarding articles on alternative vehicles. Since there seem to be more editors interested in cars then there are editors interested in the environment, the gear heads tend to get their way in disagreements with the treehuggers. I have been on the losing side of those battles, and it is frustrating, but one must ultimately take these defeats with grace. Sometimes, good things come from such experiences, such as the formation of the Green vehicle task force which provides a means of uniting editors who are interested in alternative vehicles and giving them a forum in which to communicate their concerns.

Additional question from Salvio giuliano

4. What would your reaction be if, while doing WP:NPP as an admin, you were to stumble upon the following articles: [1], [2], [3] and [4]?

A:

Additional question from TCO

5. Please name the article to which you did most content creation in the last half of 2010. Please also describe the aspects of what you did. (I'm interested both in the content of your answer and in seeing how you think in terms of making a structured synthesized response to a question like this.) Thanks in advance...even if I don't end up supporting. Go Wiki!

A:

General comments

• Links for Ebikeguy: Ebikeguy (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Ebikeguy can be found here.

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.

Discussion

• Stats are on the talk page. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Support

1. As per my nomination.--Mariordo (talk) 22:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Support While Logan makes a very convincing argument, candidate does participate in AFDs frequently. I dont see NAC closures as being required to show knowledge of deletion policy. Also, I am impressed with how the candidate handled this RFC and his proposed closing rationale.Moving to neutral--v/r - TP 22:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   (edit conflict)x2Support - Candidate seems pretty well qualified to me. mauchoeagle _(c) 22:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Was this meant to be indented?   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 23:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Yes it was, see this edit. I also changed "What" to "Was" in your question, I hope you don't mind. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:55, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Nah, I don't mind at all. That's what I get for not having my coffee yet.  :)   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 02:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

2. I'd give moral support based on experiance. One word of advice, don't commit to thing you don't normally do if you wish to succeed in the future. –BuickCenturyDriver 01:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose This editor seems very level-headed and good in disputes. However, I do not believe that he demonstrates his need for the administrator tools. Looking at his answer to Question 1, he says that he wants to "close [AfD discussions] when appropriate as as admin," but I don't see any NAC closures in his contribution. He also says that he "would use admin powers to block persistent spammers and other vandals;" he doesn't have rollback/has used Huggle to revert vandalism (only using Twinkle), and, according to his edit stats, he has made 4 or fewer edits to AIV. I could not trust an administrator to block vandals if they have virtually no experience with rollback/AIV. Thirdly, and possibly most importantly, he states that he is "also interested in the Speedy Deletion process." The last CSD nominations I see in his contributions are from way back in the beginning of April, where, among them, he nominated a school for A7, which was quickly removed by an uninvolved editor since A7 does not apply to schools.
   Thus, I see a candidate who clearly wants to work in administrative areas but has virtually no experience in them as a non-admin. I would recommend gaining more experience in administrator-related areas and coming back in six months with a better resumé, for the lack of a better word. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Seems that Salvio literally just gave him rollback with the summary "Trusted user." Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Yes, but it's not meant to undermine your oppose; if Ebikeguy had requested rollback on WP:PERM/R I would have granted it, because he seems to know what he does and could use it, since he's fighting vandalism; so, while I was checking his 'tribs to cast a !vote, I gave him this flag. The summary "trusted user" was automatically added, since I used a nifty tool. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 22:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

2. See above, ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 22:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

   Have you read this? Or do you just like increasing your edit count with votes that don't contribute anything new to this discussion? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

3. Oppose Per Logan, except that I rarely oppose because of "bad" deletion requests, I figure that people will learn..--Wehwalt (talk) 22:47, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
4. Oppose I am not comfortable with the candidate's lack of mainspace experience, along with the low level of activity over a sustained period of time.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 23:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
5. Oppose, per the fact that the candidate really doesn't have any use for sysop tools. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
6. Oppose Sorry, but you don't seem to have a high level of experience in the areas you have stated a desire to work in. Your answer to Q1 was also too weak for my taste. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
7. There's simply no way that anyone can have the breadth of experience needed to be an effective and responsive administrator in only 2,000 edits. Not even 1,000 edits to the mainspace, and less than 200 to projectspace and projecttalkspace combined. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
8. Oppose User is not yet quite ready for adminship, may I suggest rollback? -posted using TwinkleJapanese Sysop! (talk) 03:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral Seems I !voted early. I didn't think it was necessary to look at his edit count. Generally ECs are higher than 2K on RFAs. I dont see 2K edits as enough to oppose and my rationale is still true above in the support, but I simply don't think editor has enough experience yet to have community trust with the tools and it is enough to move me to neutral.--v/r - TP 22:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
2. Neutral While I can not support at this time, based on the emerging consensus, I also can not oppose, based on the strong and sensibly mature statement made upon acceptance, and your undeniably positive tenure within the community. My76Strat ^talk 02:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)