Onel5969 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Samwalton9's nomination edit
Allow me to bend your ear once more, this time to present Onel5969 for your consideration for administrator rights. Onel has amassed a huge 113,000 edits over the course of the 3 years he has been actively editing Wikipedia, amassing a wealth of experience across a range of areas. Onel is an accomplished content creator, with somewhere in the region of 800 article creations, including a number of Good Articles. He has also contributed extensively to AfD, where his votes have a good record of matching outcomes and appear to always sensible and well argued, has one of the longest CSD logs I've ever seen, and does great work at AfC. From browsing Onel's posts and replies to talk pages I found him to be civil, helpful, and happy to ask other editors with more experience in an area for their opinions on a topic rather than make an edit he wasn't completely certain about; qualities that I think would make him a great administrator.
I had a couple of minor concerns prior to nominating Onel, but he answered my questions in more than sufficient quality and depth to alleviate them; I invite you to read his answers to avoid duplicating the questions. Overall, Onel is a highly qualified editor who I think could do great work with the mop, and if you take a look at his contributions I'm sure you'll agree.
Co-nomination by MelanieN edit
I am delighted to be able to co-nominate Onel5969. I first began urging him to consider adminship more than a year ago, and I am glad he has finally decided to take the plunge. His record, as detailed by SamWalton above, is outstanding, particular in deletion areas and in content creation. I was also impressed by his work at Articles for Creation, where gentleness and patience are very important - qualities that an admin needs in abundance. I have personally experienced his helpfulness and collaborative spirit. And anyone who can get to more than 100,000 edits with a clean block log clearly knows how to get along with other editors. I believe he will be a strong addition to our admin corps. MelanieN (talk) 20:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate edit
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: - Initially, I think I would be more involved in what I perceive as the grunt work: CSD, RPP, vandal blocking, page moves, closing AfD discussions. Beyond that I would look at where there are currently backlogs, and then begin to help out in those areas. That’s how I try to operate now as an editor: AfC becomes backlogged, I try to help get that backlog down, same with NPP (although that seems endless), AfD, AfC. But I’ve learned not to leap into things, but take things slowly, watchlist articles and see how other editors deal with issues. As I deal more and more with questions and issues which as an editor I’ve never had to deal with, I intend to be very cautious, and probably be obnoxious in asking other admins for help/advice.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: - A very interesting self-reflective question. I think anti-vandalism is very important, and I’m pretty proud of my work in that area, although in recent months I’ve focused more in other areas. Helping new editors get their articles published through AfC is something I’m extremely proud of. That can be very time-consuming, and so I occasionally take breaks from it. I assisted another editor in getting an article, The FP, to FA status, and I worked pretty hard to bring the Phoenix, Arizona piece to GA status. Also pretty proud of the improvements I made to List of RKO Pictures films (although I was disappointed it didn’t make it to Featured List status). And I really enjoy researching and developing articles on older films and film personalities; being particularly proud of Edward Cronjager, Nick Stuart, Robert Kurrle and Samuel J. Briskin. But sometimes there simply isn’t enough citable material to bring an article further along. A perfect case in point would be the article I created on Blaise Diesbourg. I was copy-editing an article (for the life of me, I can’t remember the name), and came across his name. Started to research him and found his story fascinating. But sometimes it’s the little things, like helping a stub article like Putong along; taking a one-line unreferenced piece and doing a bit of research to get it into something more than a simply dictionary definition.
- 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: - While I attempt to avoid conflicts, sometimes when you are active it seems to be unavoidable. Recently, I can’t think of a conflict, more of disagreements which were resolved within a day or two. Back on May 23, I had a disagreement over the concept of WP:UNDUE on the Americans for Prosperity article. The back and forth lasted for that day, and when it was clear consensus was not going to go my way, I backed away from the discussion. That’s how most disagreements are: differing interpretations of policy/guidelines/essays, etc. I’ve had disagreements with users about WP:GEOLAND, and what constitutes legal recognition. The only real issue (in my viewpoint) that I’ve had is with an editor in the Spring and Fall of 2015. Said editor has since been banned from editing on Wikipedia (not due to the conflict between us), so I see no point in further disparaging them by naming them. My pattern of dealing with such disagreements is to seek consensus, and then abide by that consensus.