Contents

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MrDarcy

MrDarcy[edit]

Final (61/0/0) Ended 11:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

MrDarcy (talk · contribs) – Well, here is another candidate that I am just really delighted to nominate. MrDarcy, or Fitzwilliam (:P), has been with us since the start of 2005 and has made some absolutely stellar contributions. He has a great ability with language (in communication, but also translates Spanish), is extremly intelligent, civil, and dedicated to Wikipedia. The list of articles on his userpage show that he is someone that is more than willing to give themselves up to better the project. But, more importantly for an RfA, MrDarcy has deep and great knowledge of policy and is willing to put it forth. There is no doubt in my mind that MrDarcy is needed by Wikipedia and he will help progress the overall goals of the project.

Rundown from RfA/Crzrussian/Gwernol

Edit Count? 4856

Time around? First edit in start of 2005, started heavily in September of that year

Edit Summaries? Batting 100%

E-mail enabled? Yes, sir.

Mistakes? Can make them, but nothing visible, strong positive user

Userpage? Pretty simple, shows quality of contributions.

Any edit warring/blocks? No

FA participation? Perhaps MrDarcy could answer this. Look at his userpage for some of the important articles he has given us.

MrDarcy is a great asset to Wikipedia, and he will benefit with the tools for the betterment of Wikipedia. Yanksox 01:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept and am grateful to Yanksox for the nomination. | Mr. Darcy talk 01:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two things that voters may wish to know about me: I changed my username March of 2006 when a vandal whose edits I'd been reverting tried to connect the Wikipedia me to the real-world me. You will also see a slowdown in my editing in the summer of 2006, a period which started when I became a father for the first time.

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog and Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: I've become much more of a wikignome lately, and would certainly like to help more with vandal-blocking and page protections/unprotections. I've been rolling with VandalProof lately, so while rollback would be nice, I think I have 90% of the functionality I need (and just as much accountability too, since I presume my approval to use VP could be revoked at any time). I've also noticed backlogs over at copyvio and sometimes at AfD, and have wished I could help close them out.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: It's tough for me to single anything out, because so much of what I do now is gnome-work or anti-vandalism work. I responded to an RfC a while back on Moldovan language and tried to help craft a more neutral and more concise version of the article; I know it's a never-ending battle there, but I think I helped. I really enjoyed working on Spanish cuisine, a Spanish translation of the week, and one I'd like to get back to and clean up so that it can go for good-article status. I also responded to a request for sourcing in Notorious B.I.G. and was able to provide a number of citations and to clean up the content there as well. In general, if I can use a {{cite}} template when adding content, I'm pleased with the contribution, and if I can't provide a cite, I nearly always decide not to add, only to edit or remove.

Addendum: I had to think for a moment, but I remembered one more example: African literature, this diff in particular. It was a request for expansion, and I was able to help.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: I think my approach to Wiki-conflict is always changing, but at this point, I try to work under two guiding principles: Follow the policies and guidelines, and walk away if it gets hot. I might add a third principle to those - solicit an outside opinion, something I've found helpful in a few content disputes. I don't think anyone benefits when emotions start to run high. I ended up leading the charge against User:Mykungfu and his various socks after he tried to tag me as a sockpuppet and to have me blocked for 3RR violations (where I'd reverted his edits to my user page repeatedly), and I think that's an example of an extended conflict where I handled things well, incorporating lessons I'd learned along the way about keeping cool. Perhaps this isn't entirely relevant, but I do think parenthood has given me a good bit of perspective on Wikipedia - I'm a big believer in the project, but getting stressed or angry over conflicts here just seems silly to me now.

4. Question from Centrx: What is Wikipedia policy and how is it formed?

5. Question from Centrx: A user is blocked because "3RR" and requests to be unblocked because he did not ever revert more than 3 times in 24 hours. He was making formatting changes across several articles and reverting them severally despite many users disagreeing with his changes. The admin who blocked him is gone for the week. What do you do?

There's a good description of how to handle unblock requests on the blocking policy page. The situation you describe appears to fall under the primary exception; after posting to AN/I and trying to determine if the user in question is just forum-shopping, here's what I'd do. (BTW, I’m not sure what you mean by “reverting them severally,” but I’ll try to answer the question as best I can.) The first step is to investigate the actual charge of 3RR. If I determine that he didn’t actually violate the rule – e.g., he made many reverts to many articles, but never reverted any single article three times in a 24-hour span – then I’d unblock him, perhaps with a note asking him to consider voluntarily following WP:1RR on the controversial pages and working through the articles’ talk pages. I’d also put a note on the blocking admin’s talk page, asking him to review his block and my unblock when he returns. If he did violate the rule, and is adamant that he didn’t, or is trying to wikilawyer his way out of the violation, then I wouldn’t unblock him at all. If he did violate the rule, but is apologetic and offers to stop his frequent reverts and work through talk pages, then I’d try to get a discussion rolling on AN/I on whether and when to unblock the user in question (since the block in question would almost certainly expire before the blocking admin returns), and I'd go with the consensus from that discussion, leaning towards no unblock if we can't reach a consensus.

6. Optional Question from T-rex: Why did you feel that it was nessicary to change your username? (But if you feel this is a privacy issue for yourself I'll understnad if you choose not to answer, or to address the issue only vaguely...) --T-rex

A vandal whose nonsense edits I'd been reverting decided to Google me and discovered that there is a notable person with my name. He left a note on my talk page with heavy references to where that person works, which I considered a vague threat (why else would he be Googling me or trying to find out where I work?). So I went for the name change. I'm still email-accessible, and a few Wikipedians do know my real name; I just wanted to remain anonymous to vandals and other troublemakers. | Mr. Darcy talk 04:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

7. Question from Avriette: Ordinarily, I am not especially pleased when users come to RFA and ask for adminship so that they may better combat vandalism through blocking users and reverting. However, in your case, you seem to be more interested in contributing than regulating. As an example, a new user defaced the content of an article on my watchlist. The user then emailed a rather hostile message. Can you walk through the process you'd respond with here?

It's hard to answer that question without more details - user's first edit? vandalism-only account with several contribs? what was the nature of the defacement? As angry as you might get from one bad edit and a nastygram, I think you have to assume good faith for a little while, as long as the user isn't disrupting Wikipedia (e.g., with a vandalism spree, or with nastygrams to many editors). Many vandals here are just kids goofing off, and I think sometimes you can get a vandal like that to cool it without just slapping a punitive block on him. As I said, I'd be ready to block if there was a question of a wider disruption, but if it's contained, I'd make at least one effort to settle it without a block.

8. Question from Avriette: Can you estimate how much time you do now, and would as an administrator, spend on Main, Usertalk, and Wikipedia: articles, as well as on administrative actions?

The absolute amount of time I spend on Wikipedia each week is quite variable, and I don't think I can give a meaningful answer as a result. I participate in all three spaces, and would not expect administrator status to decrease my participation anywhere.

General comments

• See MrDarcy's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

Discussion

Support

1. Support As nominator. Yanksox 04:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support As someone who was waiting for this one. riana_dzasta 04:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   I am now furious that I was so excited to see this pop up on my watchlist, I neglected to make a Pride and Prejudice joke. But in vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I support and endorse you. riana_dzasta 06:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3. Everything seems to be in order. JoshuaZ 04:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support Notwithstanding that this user's answer to question two does not evidence a level of pride commensurate with his contributions, I think it quite plain that he is possessed of the deliberative disposition and cordial demeanor the presence of which in a prospective admin are rather auspicious and is well-acquainted with policy, such that the net effect on the project of his becoming an admin will surely be positive (the latter is my overarching RfA guideline; after all, success in adminship is not entirely a matter of chance); I should, then, be quite pleased to support, even were I not categorically prejudiced in favor of those candidates nominated by Yanksox. Joe 05:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

   Well played, my friend, well played. Yanksox 12:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

5. Support It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single editor in possession of ability must be in want of the admin tools. Any more cliches for support votes? (aeropagitica) 05:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support. (aeropagitica) summed it all up. bibliomaniac15 05:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. Support looks good. Strong editor -- Samir धर्म 07:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. I see no problems here. Go for it. (Radiant) 10:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support good candidate with a good history and valuable contributions. ← ANAS ^Talk? 11:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
10. --Dario vet 12:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support. Perfick. yandman 13:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
12. Support. As everyone else has said, he's knowledgable, civil, dedicated, and a good vandal fighter. As a side note, congratulations on your fatherhood. :) Srose (talk) 14:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
13. Support Great user. Nishkid64 15:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
14. Support, excellent indeed.__Seadog ^♪ 19:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support - much as I would like to oppose based on my loathing of Jane Austen, that's not really on, and no matter how hard I search for a pretext there doesn't seem to be one. So here I am in the support column. Damn! Moreschi 19:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
16. Support great candidate.-- danntm ^T _C 19:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support--Húsönd 20:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
18. Support per above Doc ♬ talk 20:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support Will make a fine admin. Hello32020 21:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
20. - crz crztalk 21:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support, though I would recommend stepping back when angry and waiting for the anger to pass before responding under stress. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 22:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
22. Support per all of above, and on the assumption that the candidate is not this Mr. Darcy. Newyorkbrad 01:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support John254 01:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
24. Support Great candidate. Give-em-the-mop^TM JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 02:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
25. "Of course" support :) Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 03:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
26. Yes. Khoikhoi 06:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
27. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 06:57, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support, user seems to like fighting vandalism, and isn't a grumpy old sod, so he's okay by me! Lankiveil 11:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]
29. Support. Seems responsible and willing to fight vandalism. - Darwinek 11:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support purely on the grounds that anyone who chooses such a great user name must be in want of promotion - and because I enjoyed the jokes above. Deb 12:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support Terence Ong 14:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
32. Support I love me some wiki-gnomes. IronDuke 15:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support a father-image for fighting vandalism.qualifications is impressive. - RebSkii 18:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
34. Support No problem here. Rettetast 18:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
35. Suport. Looks good. NauticaShades 23:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support There is no major concerns here. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 04:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support per all of the above. Make us proud with your use of the mop! Sharkface217 04:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
38. Support, but nothing original to say at this point, so..."per all of the above". Doc Tropics 05:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
39. Support per nom. utcursch | talk 11:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
40. Support per above. There doesn't seem any reason not to. He's good, too good. James086^{Talk | Contribs} 15:17, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Support Terence Ong 18:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    You already supported this candidate. =P —Lantoka ^{( talk | contrib)} 20:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

41. Support Looks like a great candidate. Dina 02:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support, looks good. —Doug Bell ^talk 02:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
43. --Rudjek 12:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
44. Support—Observed MrDarcy's work for some time. Absolutely comfortable with both the skill and the maturity. Tools are in safe hands here. Do us proud - Williamborg (Bill) 15:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support per nom. Acs4b 04:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-04 09:01Z
47. Not that this RFA needs any more support, heh, but I'll throw my two cents in. User looks like a rational, intelligent individual with a level head. Set 'im up! ♠PMC♠ 16:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
48. Support No evidence this nominee will abuse admin tools.--MONGO 19:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
49. Support per nom. Sarah Ewart 19:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
50. Support per nom --Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 04:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
51. Support. DarthVader 23:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
52. Support - per consensus.Bakaman 02:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
53. Support a good candidate --Steve _(Slf67) ^talk 04:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
54. Support --Connel MacKenzie - wikt 05:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
55. Support, Close to 5000 edits and participation in many Wikiprojects - Go Futurama!User:Sp3000 07:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
56. Support--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
57. Support MrDarcy will be a great addition to the administrator community. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 18:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
58. Support =) -Advanced 20:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
59. Support a prolific and valuable editor. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
60. Support. Nice candidate - no comment really needed. --PaxEquilibrium 23:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
61. Support per quality of user. Jorcoga^† 07:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

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.