Wikipedia talk:Requests for bureaucratship/Riana
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
[edit] Edit count
Category talk: 8
Category: 80
Help: 2
Image talk: 22
Image: 1350
Mainspace 10380
MediaWiki talk: 10
MediaWiki: 5
Portal talk: 104
Portal: 972
Talk: 618
Template talk: 20
Template: 639
User talk: 11408
User: 1288
Wikipedia talk: 257
Wikipedia: 3650
avg edits per page 1.77
earliest 12:10, 17 May 2006
number of unique pages 17422
total 30813
2006/5 95
2006/6 383
2006/7 1606
2006/8 829
2006/9 923
2006/10 1780
2006/11 2062
2006/12 966
2007/1 50
2007/2 1520
2007/3 2455
2007/4 2959
2007/5 2449
2007/6 2130
2007/7 1335
2007/8 1754
2007/9 1893
2007/10 2242
2007/11 261
2007/12 736
2008/1 796
2008/2 1589
Mainspace
47 Middle Ages
37 Wolfmother
32 Darwin, Northern Territory
28 Victorian era
23 Pants
21 Geography of Uttar Pradesh
21 Dmitri Mendeleev
20 Tsunami
19 Spain
19 India
18 Cunt
17 Jordan
16 Hinduism
16 Malta
15 Jean Cocteau
Talk:
24 Main Page
9 Priory Community School
8 Ice Cube
6 Sarod
6 Griffith University
4 The Cat Empire
4 Graham Chapman
4 Cow tipping
4 George Galloway
4 Ted Egan
3 SkitHOUSE
3 Rajkumar
3 4,4'-Biphenol
3 List of hill stations of Pakistan
3 Aryl hydrocarbon receptor
Category:
8 Candidates for speedy deletion
8 Rescaled fairuse images
4 Rescaled fairuse images more than 7 days old
3 Wikipedia sockpuppets of Punk Boi 8
3 Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Nipponese Dog Calvero
2 Mid-importance Northern Territory articles
2 High-importance Northern Territory articles
2 Northern Territory lists
2 Bulgaria Portal
2 Wikipedians by alma mater: Flinders University
2 Alternate Wikipedia accounts of Riana
2 Top-importance Northern Territory articles
2 Monty Python
2 Unknown-importance Northern Territory articles
2 Low-importance Northern Territory articles
Help:
2 Reverting
Image:
7 Skithouse.jpg
7 The-sleepy-jackson-logo.gif
4 Wolfmother album cover.jpg
4 Space- Above and Beyond - Chig (2).jpg
4 Panterawalk.jpg
4 Triptych May-June, 1973.jpg
4 Jeffrey-dahmer.jpg
3 Originalkingsofcomedy.jpg
3 1.jpg
3 Batchelor Institute logo.gif
3 School.jpg
3 Hoyts Jan07.jpg
3 BronzeSaint-Nachi.jpg
3 Huangju.jpg
3 NoFX Pumpupvaluum.jpg
Image talk:
2 Roachies.JPG
2 Janet&Riana-Adelaide2008.JPG
2 KolkataFlowermarket.jpg
MediaWiki talk:
3 Captchahelp-text
3 Bad image list
Portal:
44 Chemistry
24 Bulgaria
17 West Bengal
14 South Australia
14 South Australia/News
13 South Australia/News/Archive
13 Chemistry/box-header
12 Buddhism
12 Chemistry/Intro
8 Bulgaria/box-header
7 Chemistry/Elements/Periodic Table
7 Chemistry/Selected picture
7 West Bengal/Selected articles/Layout
6 Queensland/Topics
6 Science/News
Portal talk:
67 Chemistry
6 Chemistry/to do
6 Scientific method
4 West Bengal
2 Psychology
2 Queensland
2 South Australia
2 Chemistry/archivelist
2 Scientific method/to do
2 Science
2 Fish
2 Chemistry/Archive
Template:
7 Did you know/Next update
4 User wikipedia-editor
4 Meetup
4 Adelaide tasks
3 City of Darwin suburbs
3 2008 Republican presidential candidates
3 Uw-uaa
3 Infobox road/browse
3 U.S. Roads WikiProject/subtopic
3 R from misspelling
3 Infobox road
3 U.S. Roads WikiProject
2 Geobox row
2 Lang-ru
2 WPBooks
Template talk:
4 Talkinarticle
2 Former French colonies in Africa and the Indian Ocean
2 Current
2 Glycolysis
User:
71 Riana/Aw, shucks
52 Riana/RfA
46 Riana/Sandbox
41 Riana
41 Riana/Bad
24 Riana/Icons
21 Riana/monobook.js
21 Xcentaur/Admin coaching
17 Riana/monobook.css
14 Riana/Helpful
13 Riana/Admin coaching
13 Riana/Browsebar
13 Natalie Erin
10 Riana/Contributions
10 Riana/Poetry
User talk:
133 Daveydweeb
107 Riana/Archive 32
100 Alison
100 Riana/Archive 29
92 Springeragh
90 Riana/Archive 4
88 Editor at Large
88 Moreschi
84 Daniel
82 Riana/Archive 33
69 Arjun01
62 Riana/Archive 30
60 Riana/Archive 16
60 Riana/Archive 26
58 Riana/Archive 31
Wikipedia:
707 Requests for page protection
381 Administrator intervention against vandalism
197 Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
105 Administrators' noticeboard
51 Usernames for administrator attention
26 Miscellany for deletion
23 Usernames for administrator attention/Bot
20 Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 3
19 Community sanction noticeboard
18 Requests for adminship/Daveydweeb
15 Australian Wikipedians' notice board
14 User categories for discussion
13 Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 2
13 Requests for adminship/Michaelas10
13 Requests for rollback
Wikipedia talk:
73 Requests for adminship
14 Usernames for administrator attention
11 Administrator intervention against vandalism
10 Requests for mediation/Danah Boyd
9 WikiProject Northern Territory
8 Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Esperanza/Archive1
7 Manual of Style (spelling)
5 WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
5 Featured portal candidates
4 Requests for comment/Elaragirl
4 Requests for page protection
3 WikiProject Portals
3 Signatures
3 WikiProject Chemistry
3 Criteria for speedy deletion
[edit] Admin actions
Delete: 13718 Restore: 144 Block: 2316 Unblock: 182 Protect: 958 Unprotect: 104
[edit] Just a note
To anyone opposing on the basis of my previous RfA nominations - I will not attempt to defend or attack my positions; I do not believe this relevant to this discussion. All I'll say is that I'm highly unlikely to promote someone I've nominated, and I've stated that if I have any personal investment whatsoever in an RfA, I'll not take part as a 'crat. That's all. Respectfully, ~ Riana ⁂ 07:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- This might be better off in the Discussion section, Riana -- not many people read these pages. GlassCobra 07:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- It gets so messy though :( ~ Riana ⁂ 07:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Riana, I'd like to ask you to reconsider your decision not to respond to questions about this. You don't need to defend or attack, but just explain really. For a lot of people this was a very surprising nomination and some of us were labeled "seething idiots" for participating. Also, it was a Request for Adminship, and although nominators and bureaucrats are different capacities, I was struck by the gulf between the rosy nominating statements, and the reality that had been witnessed around this particular candidate. I don't expect bureaucrats to never make (what I think are) bad decisions, but I do like to see some explanation when they do. --JayHenry (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Riana, I am in total agreeance with JayHenry on this. Pedro : Chat 16:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll try very hard to respond to some of these concerns, and please do ask me more specific questions if you need to - it's difficult to satisfactorily respond to what basically amounts to 'Why'd you do this?' I'm going to be really honest, and going to try very hard not to offend anyone. I may get even more opposition because of my answer, but I'd rather not leave people unsatisfied. OK.
- Did I knowingly facilitate trolling? No. Kelly has told me that she was not trolling, and I believe her. She is nothing if not honest.
- Did I think the RfA would pass? No. I didn't think it would receive the vast ocean of opposition that it did, but I completely underestimated the amount of animosity people bear towards Kelly. Some of this is merited. Some of it is not. Some were real issues which one wishes Kelly would work on, to lend her wisdom to us better. Some were guided purely by long-held grudges, old wounds which didn't heal (or weren't allowed to).
- Did Kelly voodoo me into this? Uh, no. This kinda hurts my pride! I have a mind of my own. I'm happy to say it's rather a good one. My personal motivation in nominating Kelly was to seek some insight into the community's readiness to... how shall I put it? Receive the black sheep back into the fold. AGF. Put the past behind us. All that stuff. And I thought she'd make a good admin, given a chance - oh, with lots of community supervision of course! As we all should be. Kelly was made an admin in the Wild West days of Wikipedia. In these times, we have lots more people watching each other, and lots more opportunities to catch people up and call them out when they mess up.
- Would I, as a bureaucrat, have closed Kelly's RfA as successful? No.
- Would I, as a bureaucrat, close a similarly controversial nomination as successful? Not without kilobytes and kilobytes of discussion.
- Am I too nice? This one... kinda burns. And makes me laugh. And would make my best friends fall off their chairs. I'm the first person to make the offensive joke or laugh when someone falls over, so... :) Yeah, I'm nice. I try not to go out of my way to hurt people. I try to focus on positives rather than negatives. I try to make a good result come from a bad situation. I try to help out rather than shun. But I'm far, far too smart to be too nice. I knew exactly what I was doing with Kelly's nomination statement. I knew people would bring up matters to oppose about. How could I not? My job as a nominator is to discuss positives and what benefits a person brings to the table. I did my job. I did not think for a moment that people would be swept off their feet by my statement and support in droves. I'm nice. I'm not naïve.
- That's all I've got. If this brings me more opposition, this is your call. But I hope this addresses at least some questions. ~ Riana ⁂ 17:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- It gets so messy though :( ~ Riana ⁂ 07:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
My own motives for nominating Kelly were a good deal more cynical: but Riana's logic above is perfectly valid and correct. There were good motives for that RFA (none of which I can exactly lay claim too), but I see no cause for lambasting Riana here. I suggest people take a look back at her ideas and arguments and stop thinking about Kelly in terms of the Big Bad Wolf. Moreschi (talk) 17:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've asked a very direct question concerning the above on the main page. Pedro : Chat 20:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Another comment
Regarding the Kelly Martin incident - Riana comes across as a human being, she is particularly special, partially because she's made mistakes on occasion, and has demonstrated vulnerability, clearly she is willing to risk being wrong, risking the idea that she might be right, based on her sense of WP:UCS. she shows courage and most of the time - 99.999% of the time - good judgment. Nobody who matters...is perfect. Modernist (talk) 21:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I 100% support this. Riana has made so many good decisions and has given so much to this community. And she made one bad nomination. (Note how that's not plural.) I just can't fathom how anyone can oppose based on that. I like Pedro, and not not just because his kid is friggin adorable, but I just can't wrap my brain around his oppose. Sorry Pedro, I think you've missed the bigger picture here. I know I'm a relative N00b, especially as an admin, but I'm at a loss on this one. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Check the support column! Pedro : Chat 22:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I see the support column now. A good decision, IMO. I don't know if anyone opposed previously "per pedro", but if they did, perhaps a message to them would be in order? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I have reviewed the opposes, and don't seem to see any - I would however have done exactly that had I seen any (let me know if I've missed one). Pedro : Chat 22:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I reviewed them myself, and I agree non were specifically "per Pedro", although they did express opposition based on similar concerns as yours. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm kind of hoping they may read my extensive support rationale, in which I specifically refrained from using blue links / bullets to draw attention. I'm afraid WP:CANVASS is a double edged sword, and I am uncomfortable with approaching opposers directly on their talk pages to say "Hey, look, I changed my mind, so you ought to as well". I just wish I could see a few less "Oppose - per Pedro" comments at RfA/B in general. Pedro : Chat 22:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Cripes, what is this, seven colons? Eight? The important thing is whether the other 'crats, who would in the end promote Riana, see your "change of mind" and weigh that against others that have similar concerns. No need to canvas. No need to do anything really, because the existing crats are crats for a reason, and will certainly look here before closing this particular RfB. Cheers, Pedro. PS. I really want a cigarette. Cripes, I hate being a non-smoker. I miss them terribly. (See your talkpage for context.) Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm kind of hoping they may read my extensive support rationale, in which I specifically refrained from using blue links / bullets to draw attention. I'm afraid WP:CANVASS is a double edged sword, and I am uncomfortable with approaching opposers directly on their talk pages to say "Hey, look, I changed my mind, so you ought to as well". I just wish I could see a few less "Oppose - per Pedro" comments at RfA/B in general. Pedro : Chat 22:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I reviewed them myself, and I agree non were specifically "per Pedro", although they did express opposition based on similar concerns as yours. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I have reviewed the opposes, and don't seem to see any - I would however have done exactly that had I seen any (let me know if I've missed one). Pedro : Chat 22:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I see the support column now. A good decision, IMO. I don't know if anyone opposed previously "per pedro", but if they did, perhaps a message to them would be in order? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- I hope Pedro's concerns are somewhat resolved, and I love the guy as much as I ever did. :)
- I also hope anyone else with concerns will request explanation about specific matters. ~ Riana ⁂ 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Check the support column! Pedro : Chat 22:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
