Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tails Wx

< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Banks Irk (talk | contribs) at 03:45, 26 December 2023 (→‎Questions for the candidate: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Tails Wx

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (86/1/0); Scheduled to end 15:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination

Tails Wx (talk · contribs) – I would like to present to you Tails Wx today for your consideration. Over the last three years, Tails has worked in a variety of areas of the encyclopedia, with a focus on making sure there is high quality experience for our readers. This work has included content creation, with 4 Good Articles and has written DYKs about a handful of other articles. It has also included work to ensure spam and copyright material is deleted, while also contributing to places like the Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard. Besides offering a friendly and collaborative presence with others, Tails also has the sense to know what he doen't know which is an important quality for any administrator. This is why several people have approached him about running for adminship, on and off wiki. I hope you will join me in supporting Tails Wx for adminship. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination statement

Tails is an editor who excels in a number of areas. They have experience in content creation, with dozens of articles created and four good articles (plus another three nominations), in addition to working in New Page Patrol and Articles for Creation. I've found their work in admin areas, like anti-vandalism, speedy deletion, and Articles for Deletion to be extremely accurate as well. Tails is always patient and helpful, especially to new users through their work as a mentor. I believe that they have both the skills and temperament to make them a good administrator. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 17:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:I accept this nomination! Thanks to the nominators for their kind words and assistance. I have never edited for pay, and my two alternate accounts are Tails Wx9 and Tails Wx1, with both also noted on my userpage. ~ Tails Wx 14:00, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?
A: As an administrator, I’d like to assist and take action in several administrative areas around Wikipedia that I’ve already requested as a non-admin, including candidates for speedy deletion, copyright violation revision deletion requests, and both the Usernames for Administrator Attention noticeboard and the Administrator intervention against vandalism noticeboard, the latter area of which I’ve made more than 400 reports on.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: In terms of content creation, I’m proud of the articles that I have written. One example is 2013 Midwestern U.S. floods, an article which has been promoted to GA, and has appeared in the Did You Know section of the Main Page. I’m also proud of the effort that I’ve put into other articles, including December 2017 North American winter storm, November 2013 North American storm complex, and March 2023 North American winter storm, all of which are currently Good Article Nominees. Outside of content creation, I’m proud of the work I’ve done tagging spam and fixing copyright violations.
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: Although I’ve been in several conflicts and have had users causing me stress, I don’t get involved with conflicts and receive stress from other users often, aside from the harassment from vandals. However, if it happens, then I always try to keep a cool head and assume good faith. For example, one instance occurred in January this year, this discussion started after I did not complete a thorough BEFORE on a subject that was nominated for AfD; thankfully, I’ve learned from this experience. If the conflict is stressful enough, brief breaks and spending some time from Wikipedia are necessary.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.
Optional question from LindsayH

4. Hi Tails! You have my support, but can you tell me which you think is the most important of our WP:PAGS
A: Thanks for the support! Of course, they’re all important, but one stands out to me as the most important of Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines: Verifiability. Verifiability is one of Wikipedia’s core content policies, alongside no original research and neutral point of view. All content in mainspace should be verifiable with a reliable source. This especially applies to biographies of living persons. Myself, I have encountered unsourced material and have added sources, and I believe that all material in mainspace should be verified.

Optional question from AirshipJungleman29

5. Of your four listed GAs, you are the clear primary author only for 2013 Midwestern U.S. floods. Do you think you could take this article to FA status (you can say no! you'll likely have my support nonetheless), and if so, which parts of the article need improving to meet the FA criteria?
A: I believe the article could be improved further prior to the article being nominated for FAC. Some sections could definitely be expanded or merged into a different sub-section (for example, the North Dakota section on that article). Taking a look at Wikipedia:Featured article criteria, the article satisfies most criteria, though I believe the article’s lead and prose could be improved. I plan on nominating the article for FAC after those issues are fixed!

Optional question from Mach61

6. Would you delete a high-quality article created in violation of WP:ARBECR?
A:

Optional question from Cryptic

7. Why did you have your userpage deleted in September?
A:

Optional question from EggRoll97

8. You stated your intention to work in CSD and copyvio revdel. How would you respond to a user who questions a deletion you make (either to a page or a revision)?
A: I’ll listen to the user who’s questioning my page or revision deletion’s concerns, as I’m open to any concern or question an editor brings up following a page or revision deletion. I’d also respond in a civil, respectful manner while also assuming good faith. I’ll be happy to restore the page if the user concerning my page or revision deletion’s explanation is correct, otherwise I would explain why my deletion rationale was valid.

Optional question from Sdrqaz

9. Hello, Tails. Looking through your use of speedy deletion tags, you have sometimes tagged pages under both U5 and G11, while on other occasions you have used the criteria individually. Could you go through your understanding of the distinctions between them?
A: Sure! G11 applies to pages that are unambiguous advertising or promotion. U5 applies to only pages in userspace that contain information or writings that are not closely related to Wikipedia’s goals; as Wikipedia is not a web hosting service. G11 differs from U5 in a number of ways. G11 applies to basically any namespace, including articles, drafts, and userpages. U5, however, only applies to user space only, and not articles and drafts noted above. G11 is also used for advertising/promotion, as noted above, while U5 applies to pages in userspace that do not adhere to what you can have in your userpage. For example, I would tag both G11 and U5 criteria if a userpage contains excessive or inappropriate personal information that is unrelated to Wikipedia and the page is promoting something (e.g. person, company) and would need a fundamental re-write.

Optional question from Banks Irk

10. I'm somewhat disturbed by your answer to Q3. You say that you are occasionally stressed by interactions with other users, especially when being harassed by vandals. I looked through your edit summaries mentioning vandalism, and see a relative handful of instances of vandalism on articles you actively edited. These all seem to be garden variety mischief, and hardly anything I'd characterize as targeted or harassment or anything that could or should be stressful. If you are that sensitive to these minor inconveniences, what makes you think that you can deal with mop responsibilities without being overwhelmed?
A:.

Optional question from Red-tailed hawk

11. I note that you've expressed an interest in performing copyvio revision deletions. Should you become an admin, to what extent do you plan to become involved with resolving copyright problems and performing contributor copyright investigations, aside from evaluating and taking action on RD1/G12 requests?
A: Should I become an administrator, I will likely be involved in resolving copyright problems and performing contributor copyright investigations soon. If I had to start, give or take a week after becoming an administrator, then I would start at a lesser extent due to the fact that I’ve only made one report at copyright problems and have never been involved in contributor copyright investigations. I’ll also reach out to copyright clerks and other administrators experienced in those areas first to have a hold on how to handle requests. In other words, I'll likely be involved, but slow and steady first!

Optional questions from Indignant Flamingo

12. I was surprised to see your answer to Q9. So, a followup: what's an example (hypothetical is fine) of a userspace page that could be deleted under G11 but not U5?
A:
13. In your opinion, how does WP:SUSTAINED apply to articles about large storms that get large bursts of coverage right around the time they happen, but not afterward?
A:

Optional question from Spicy

14. What was the purpose of User:Sarrail/Administrator Map?
A: Originally, I created it in showing support and appreciation of administrators by creating a hand-drawn map full of streets named after current administrators at that time. I nominated it for deletion because it felt...unnecessary.

Optional question from Banks Irk

15. You've changed your username at least twice in just 2+ years, and stated in 10/22 that you'd been editing "several years". Why the multiple usernames, and what other undisclosed usernames have you edited under?
A: I have only used the accounts that are disclosed here. I've started editing in September 2020 and that is multiple years of editing. And for the username changes, I disliked my previous usernames, and this username is the one I like most.
To be clear, there are no prior usernames to disclose. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is categorically false. Banks Irk (talk) 03:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I noted on my user talk, I've never heard of undisclosed usernames being used the way you are using it. Only in the sense of Wikipedia:Clean_start#Requests_for_adminship. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've never seen an instance where an AFD candidate has changed their username and failed to disclose upfront the prior names, quite a part from "clean start" let alone twice in this short of time. Banks Irk (talk) 03:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

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

Support
  1. As nom. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Aha! I knew it! The Night Watch (talk) 15:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Bagsy last podium place! --DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  4. No concerns. 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 16:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Been wondering if this would happen. On the basis of who the nominator is, is sufficient reason for me; but let's add my basic position and the fact that (good heavens!) the candidate is willing to admit error and commit to changing their approach.... Certainly. Happy days, ~ LindsayHello 16:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Finally – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:28, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support net positive.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Was on my list of people to contact in the next month, I'm glad to have been pre-empted. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:31, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  9. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Obvious support, looks like a great addition to the mop corps. ~ Prodraxis (Merry Christmas!) 16:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support, I've run across them and their work a few times but haven't interacted with them much. That said what I've seen has always been professional interactions and quality work. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 16:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support- You betcha!   Aloha27  talk  16:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support, I do not see any issues.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support No issues, seems like a net positive! -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support, unflailingly nice fella from what I've seen Mach61 (talk) 17:37, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  18. With pleasure. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 17:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Have had great experiences with candidate’s work on Wikiproject Weather. JayTee⛈️ 17:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Always been an excellent editor. ✶Quxyz✶ 17:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  21. This is the candidate, net positive. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Seen him around and I'm glad to support Volten001 ☎ 18:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Can't recall editing in the same areas as them but other users I respect and trust have already thrown in their support. SportingFlyer T·C 18:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support — Sadko (words are wind) 18:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Strong support - One of the most wholesome and friendly people that ever volunteered for Wikipedia, furry, aroace - that's more than enough proof that Tails would be the perfect admin! <3 🖤🤍💜 Brat Forelli🦊 18:37, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. LGTM. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 18:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support on their user contributions, not following the crowd. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 19:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support per nom, no problems here. BD2412 T 19:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Trusted and kind editor, no issues here. Toadette (Merry Christmas, and a happy new year) 19:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  30. One of the very best weather editors we've got. --Dylan620 (he/him · talk · edits) 19:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Oppose Too experienced to be a administrator. (On a more serious note, I've had nothing but positive interactions with the candidate and have consistently been impressed by the breadth of their knowledge. I honestly sometimes forget that they are not a admin.) Sohom (talk) 19:37, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support, no issues. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 19:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  33. as nom — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 20:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. I have seen them do a lot of good work around here. DrowssapSMM 20:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support: able to create content, experienced in administrative areas, a polite communicator and can't see any temperament issues. — Bilorv (talk) 20:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. Another "you're not an admin?!" moment. SWinxy (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support: Seeing a decent amount of content creation and a lot of solid anti-vandalism work. Looks like another editor who can be trusted to wield the mop with an expectation of some on-the-job training. Glad to see Big Weather get another admin. Best of luck and happy holidays! ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  38. A name well known to any regular AIV admin. I've actioned a fair few of those 400 reports! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. Nice guy and a great editor, even if they are a Bears fan 😉 ULPS (talk • contribs) 21:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support: Has a clue, not a jerk & per nominator. Happy holidays — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 21:51, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  41. I'm not familiar with this candidate, so I checked a random sample of his contributions, and found nothing of concern.—S Marshall T/C 22:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support wholeheartedly! Tails Wx helped me out very much by getting my user talk page archived a while back! Super thankful and think Tails Wx would a great addition to the admin team as I've encountered them quite a bit during my antivandalism work. Philipnelson99 (talk) 22:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support good candidate. HouseBlastertalk 22:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  44. I've seen the candidate around and think he's been doing good work. No objection from me. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support A good new admin is a great Christmas gift! Tails does plenty of good administrative work and still finds time for content creation. He will make a great admin. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support Thank you for volunteering your time w Wikipedia! jengod (talk) 22:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support no concerns Sheep (talk • he/him) 23:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Oh wow. I didn't know you were running. I was recently thinking to myself, "Wouldn't TailsWx be a great admin?" and now here's my time to Definitely Support ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Trusted, competent. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support: no concerns at all. Lightoil (talk) 23:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Glad to support. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 23:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  52. 'Support Tick all the right boxes, and none of the wrong ones why not? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:37, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Very Strong Support. I've been waiting for this day to come... Even better as it's Christmas! Definitely supporting. Good luck with the mop my (two-tailed) friend! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 00:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support: I've known Tails for a while now and am very glad to see this. Schminnte [talk to me] 01:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support: I'm quite pleased to see this. I've worked quite a bit with Tails and I trust them to use the tools in a productive way. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Frostly (talk) 01:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  57. I like that the candidate is not last to ivote at AfDs and they usually get it right. I do not like that all of the DYK and GA experience was very recent- which makes it look like plan-for-RFA-box-checking exercise. The candidate has 275 edits to ANI and it looks like they started by closing many discussions. I see that they previously edited under a different name and changed it in 2023. I also see that they recently began participating in discussions at ANI as part of discussion. I land in support because I trust the nominators.Lightburst (talk) 02:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI: I see the candidate participated in the Optional RfA candidate poll October 5, 2022. It does appear that they were checking boxes after hearing from editors in the poll. Lightburst (talk) 19:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The candidate has changed their username at least twice. The statement at the linked poll that in Oct 22 they had been editing "a few years" suggests that there may have been other undisclosed prior accounts beyond the two prior renamed accounts. Banks Irk (talk) Banks Irk (talk) 19:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support - Imcdc Contact
  59. I salute you, user @Tails Wx: – had you achieved one more In the news entry in the third round of this past WikiCup, you would have eliminated me, the eventual champion! ;) BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support Last administrator of 2023, and decent activity in making articles/adminstrative actions. Just a random Wikipedian(talk) 03:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Saw this before it was transcluded and was still only #61. Very happy to see this and a strong support from me! - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 04:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support I've experience their work and can say that they would make a great admin. Good luck Tails! ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 04:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support - no concerns! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 04:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Stephen 04:35, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support per all the trusted people above. Bsoyka (talk) 05:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support. Per noms. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support Has my trust from quality interactions at ITN and AIV. SpencerT•C 06:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support Seems very experienced and nice. Mox Eden (talk) 07:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support Has shown a need for the tools and the temperament needed to use them appropriately. Wikipedialuva (talk) 10:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support I was considering nominating Tails myself until I heard that an RfA was already in the works, so an easy support from me. Sam Walton (talk) 10:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support – easily meets my criteria. They're also way more knowledgeable in regards to weather than I could ever hope to be. I look forward to passing the baton onwards! :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 11:52, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support no concerns here. TipsyElephant (talk) 12:43, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support being an admin needs to be easy and this is a Christmas Day. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support Not too much experience with this editor, but none of it bad, and the people with more experience vouching for them have a lot of credibility. Merry Christmas! Daniel Case (talk) 16:31, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support Net positive. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 17:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Hell yeah, Tails is pretty much the definition of a good editor, also it’s Christmas so 🤷🏻‍♂️ yeah. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (he|she|they) 17:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support—And a happy New Year! Kurtis (talk) 18:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Support Per noms. --qedk (t 愛 c) 19:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Good answer to a question they probably weren't expecting. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support - great editor. Merry Christmas! 141Pr {contribs} 20:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support Leijurv (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support No red or yellow flags. Has a clue and obvious net positive. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support EggRoll97 (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Support Lots of positive points, and no red flags. Hopefully you can keep the storms on the Admin noticeboards more under control. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:26, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Why of course. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 03:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support Tolly4bolly 03:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Strongest possible oppose. Not impressed by the prevarication and avoidance of pointed, relevant questions. Serious reservations about the candidate's judgement and temperament unsuitable to admin tools. Banks Irk (talk) 03:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
General comments

@AirshipJungleman29: I'm curious about your Q5. In what way is understanding the difference between the GA and FA standards a factor in deciding if somebody should be an admin or not? RoySmith (talk) 19:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith, see the talk page. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Tails_Wx&oldid=1191837921"