Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pumpmeup

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.

Contents

[edit] Pumpmeup

Final (0/7/0); ended 05:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC) - closed by non-bureaucrat User:Anonymous Dissident per WP:SNOW at 05:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC) (Signed, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk at 05:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC))

Pumpmeup (talk · contribs) - Hello! I am requesting sysop tools so I can extend my helpfulness through the project. I've always thought of myself as a good helper and teacher, and I know there is much more work I could do with the buttons. I have been left wanting many times where a substantial amount of "fixing stuff" needs to be done and I was left waiting for a sysop to come along and do a part of it that needed the buttons for me - often with more harm being done in the waiting time. Having sysop tools would greatly help me (and everyone else's workload!) during my time spent on Wikipedia, speeding many processes up and obviously allowing me to branch into more areas. Pumpmeup 23:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Further info regarding alternate users and Wikimedia experience: No, Special:Contributions/Pumpmeup isn't the extent of my Wikimedia project experience! I've been active on Wikimedia since November 2006, but changed to a new account in October 2007 for a variety of reasons - to make a fresh start :-). A flashy table at User:Pumpmeup/Request for adminship explains the transitions further, and makes it easier for editcounitis sufferers - take a look if you're suspicious :-).

[edit] Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: First and foremost (while starting out) the tools would be a welcome addition to what I already do. That is, for the most part, just drifting around Wikipedia reading up on new and interesting subjects (I spent most of my time actually reading the information already here) and then going off on a tangent fixing problems I see. Also I go through recent changes and new pages (it rhymes!) patrolling sessions (an activity I take with a grain of salt, and have a laugh along the way) and as many users can relate to I find numerous uses for the tools there, to speed everything up. I'm also a big fan of clearing backlogs, so anywhere where I know the policies and trust myself not to horribly screw everything up, I would have a crack at. In short, I plan to start with blocking persistent vandals (for a short period as most of the time I believe they get bored after 30 minutes of seeing the block notice and it gives them a chance to come back and edit positively), deleting obviously inappropriate articles and images (I do a fair bit of work on the Commons already). As I got further dug into to the community I would branch out. Keep in mind this is just in relation to using the tools, I would carry on doing heaps of non-admin work as well.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: Honestly, I have no favourites. Although I may spend some time judging myself and pondering why I'm here, nothing stands out alone. The one thing I can consider myself proud of is making an effort to such a worthy project the best way I can. If I absolutely had to (which I guess I do) choose a favourite activity, it is without a doubt helping newcomers. There's been times where I've been able to really help someone and I hope make their day a little better. I can then look back and say "I made a positive difference to this person's Wikipedia experience (however small or large), and hopefully encouraged them to donate their time and knowledge into the project." That is the best personal reward of all.
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: Yep, I've had my fair share of little niggles - I'm a "subscriber" of Stoicism and it relates well to many issues on the 'pedia. The conflicts that many non-admin users can relate to, with the individuals seem to get a kick out of annoying others (I must admit I've been in that frame of mind a few times!). The way I deal with less complex altercations such as these: try and get them to see the bigger picture, the error of their ways. Show them alternative avenues for something to do (refer the "funny guys" to Uncyclopedia :-P), and let them know it's silly. With newbies I find many problems can be solved by pointing out to them in a friendly and personal way what I might consider the bleeding obvious. For more complex cases, it's important to see it from their side, realize the other user might have no idea about the way the Wikipedian community usually deals with this issue, or realize you yourself might be clueless despite what you think. I always try and see it from the other person's point of view and come to a solution with the least name-calling, insults, irrationality and incivility possible. It of course all depends on the situation at hand and I can adapt and think on my feet at any one time.
Questions from Maxim
4. Have you stood for adminship before?
A: Yes I have - that was a long time a go and I got bitter and red in the face about it not succeeding. Since then I've figured out it wasn't the end of the world and I've got into the "vibe" of the community plus a higher count (:-P). I'm not linking to it as there are issues with that username - but if you really want to find it, it's easy. Pumpmeup 01:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Right to vanish covers when you've actually left the project. It is an abuse to cover up things like previous blocks and other problems... Maxim(talk) 01:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, I guess I'll have to spit it out. After a real-life altercation with someone, I needed to distance myself from that username. Believe me I've nothing to hide (only from the individual - but hopefully the whole saga is over). I attempted to cover it up as I'd had a threat made to me after he came across it. The association is me, obviously - I'd just prefer it if it wasn't easy to find for this individual. I apologize for the secrecy and cover-up, and if this isn't enough detail. In short: A less-than-nice individual was out to get me (on unrelated to Wikipedia stuff) - and I was trying to protect myself from them, not the Wikipedia community! -Pumpmeup 02:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
5: Can you please explain the relation between you an the anon in this post? How did you find this discussion a few hours after it started?
A

[edit] General comments

RfAs for this user:
Requests for adminship/Pumpmeup

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Pumpmeup before commenting.

[edit] Discussion

  • I'm not entirely sure you are ready... Can you be a little bit more specific about the areas you would like to work in with the sysop. tools? AGK (contact) 01:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Certainly - I should have been more specific probably. The biggies I would frequent are AIV, CSD, and a bit off AfD and any backlogs I see around that I feel confident with to start off. Pumpmeup 01:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
I have, the answer is above it. Besides, all questions are optional Pumpmeup 04:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
It might just be my browser but you haven't answered it. And in my opinion, all questions being optional is not an acceptable excuse. RC-0722 communicator/kills 04:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Support
[edit] Oppose
Oppose Sorry, but 537 edits in the mainspace are not enough. —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
So how much is? 553? Maxim(talk) 01:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hm, I think at least ~1000. —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Please, before anyone else opposes on editcount, take a look at User:Pumpmeup/Request for adminship, this isn't my first account, I have 4500 Wikipedia edits on both. Cheers! :-) Pumpmeup 01:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you stood for adminship on those other accounts? Maxim(talk) 01:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict with above comment) I must be missing something. If you include the new account and the old account you have over 1500 mainspace edits. JoshuaZ (talk) 01:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, my mistake. —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - sorry I should have made the fact my total edits are higher clear. Cheers, -Pumpmeup 01:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  1. Oppose - Ok, the answer to Q#4 settled this one for me. That situation didn't show good judgement at all, and what's to say that you won't show bad judgement again with the mop? ArcAngel (talk) 02:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    I don't like to sound "snippy" replying to all of the oppose votes, but I see this as taking it right out of context. What I did had absolutely no relation to my own or other's Wikipedian activities other than the fact it existed here and was a threat to my personal safety. If their was another alternative, so that I wouldn't be worried about this person (and I must stress that this altercation had no relation to Wikipedia), I would have taken it. If this wasn't the intended direction of your oppose please let me know. Even if you don't believe/accept this rationale, it occurred over 5 months ago, and I certainly haven't had any such problems since (I hope! :-) --Pumpmeup 02:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Be that as it may, did you ever try admin/crat help with that situation? Or did you just make a snap decision to hide, without seeking aforementioned help? ArcAngel (talk) 04:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, I did. Pumpmeup 04:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  2. Oppose With the amount of user talk edits it appears that you just use WP as a social networking service. RC-0722 communicator/kills 02:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    What? It just illustrates that I have a wide range of interaction with users, if anything. But certainly it is bulked up by the speedy deletion/vandalism warnings and such. Cheers, Pumpmeup 02:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, I agree that communication with other editors is important; as is warning vandals. But, can you give me an estimate of how many of those edits are warnings/notifications and how many are just chit chat with other users? Also, another reason I forgot to put in my earlier edits was, like my fellow WP ArcAngel, I didn't like some of your answers. RC-0722 communicator/kills 02:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Have you looked at those edits? Warnings/notifications: 80% / Chit chat: 0.1%. For me Wikipedia is a place for "me time" (although it is spent helping others), and I certainly don't use it as a social networking service. Heck, I even don't use instant messengers 'cos I think they're silly! Cheers, Pumpmeup 02:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Reeeaaally now. Then what is the other 19.9%? Also, that isn't my only reason; as I said above. RC-0722 communicator/kills 02:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, really now! The other 19.9% is Wikipedia-related communication regarding other's and my own activities, welcoming new users or follow-up regarding questions asked on my talk page or answering {{helpme}} requests. If you have basis for your oppose is on the grounds of something else then fine, but I urge you to look through my User talk: space edits if you are concerned. --Pumpmeup 03:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. Oppose You have a grand total of a little over 2100 edits. That's decent in my opinion. Your edit summary usage is good. However, you have 900+ edits to user talk, and 150+ edits to user. And only 537 edits to the mainspace does not show enough experience. I would recommend AIV reports (looks like you are a great vandal fighter), and voting in AFD's and I would be glad to suppose in 3-4 months. Sorry - Milk's Favorite Cookie 03:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    As above, please take a look at User:Pumpmeup/Request for adminship and my comments under "discussion" above. Cheers, Pumpmeup 03:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    You seem fixated on your number of user edits, instead of what others are saying about experience in the mainspace. ArcAngel (talk) 04:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    I'm not - it's just that I know others are fixated. The number of mainspace edits is the same Pumpmeup 04:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Per MFC. A little more experience with AIV, XfD, RFPP etc..etc.. in lieu of just bouncing around wikipedia and patrolling. You seem to be a socialite, which is cool, but a little flighty. Wisdom89 (T / C) 03:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  5. Oppose: Sorry, but due to all the above and past social interactions, I'll have to pass this time :-( Thedjatclubrock :-) (T/C) 04:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  6. Oppose — I view self-noms as prima facie evidence of power hunger. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 04:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  7. This may be a long term bar for adminship for you. Sorry. Avruch T 04:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Why? Pumpmeup 04:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
    Because it presents a number of very serious personality issues. I think it will take a considerably long period of time from that RfA to convince the community that the issues that failed that request have been resolved. Avruch T 04:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutral

Template:NeutralVote - I am not sure on this one. In my view an adminship isn't about how many edits you have over how many whatever accounts - it's how many you have the Rfa for. Will need to see some more opinions on this Rfa before I cast my final vote. ArcAngel (talk) 01:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

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.