Commons:Administrators/Requests/Günther Frager

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 Support = 19;  Oppose = 16 – 54%. Result: Unsuccessful. --Krd 12:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Günther Frager

Related requests:

Vote

Günther Frager (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (Activity: Talk Commons DR)

Scheduled to end: 21:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

After some encouraging comments from Yann and The Squirrel Conspiracy, and some reflection of my side I decided to apply for adminship. I roughly started collaborating in Commons 18 months ago after reporting some copyvios that I found while patrolling eswiki. While trying to upload old photos I was confused by URAA and other rules that lead me to the rabbit hole of learning copyright laws. I started more than 1.400 DRs and an uncountable number of SDs. I'm aware of the most important copyright issues like de minimis, freedom of panorama, URAA, etc, but I'm not an expert on specific legislation. I have a good grasp of Argentine law, Spanish law, German law with its weird rules on FoP, French law (WWII extensions, 50 years at URAA-time) and I can dig into US restorations, but I'm mostly clueless on Middle-East, African or Asian specific copyright laws. Thus, I will likely stick to tasks where I have confidence, e.g. closing FoP cases, and avoid controversial ones like scope-related DRs or user problems. The admin flag will also allow me to see deleted files while participating on undeletion requests. Günther Frager (talk) 21:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  • The intransigence on the User Page issue is not demonstrating good judgment. Bastique ☎ let's talk! 22:24, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine you changing your support, but I would prefer if you call me stubborn instead of saying I lack good judgment. I addressed the concern of the people that gave a justified argument with a counter-argument. I hope that you understand that I cannot give a counter-argument to a "I wish you do X" request. Also, such requests wouldn't fly in a DR where I'm supposed to apply my judgment. Günther Frager (talk) 00:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changing to  conditional neutral based on the discussion this RFA has triggered. Gunter, if this is the hill your going to fail your RFA over, then I'm unsure if you will ever pass RFA. At this point, its not about the userpage, its about Beating a dead horse. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Could you please add the language(s) you speak on your user page using Commons:Babel? Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Prior to submitting the request I placed that Babel template already on my user talk page Special:Diff/948915253, and I plan to set up an archive bot (but I'm still investigating which approach I will follow). Günther Frager (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please create Babel copy on your user page. It should not be blank. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I completely agree. A red page for an admin is not the best. --Msb (talk) 20:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @EugeneZelenko and Mosbatho: Why, exactly, is it a problem? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:59, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I might try to explore the underlying mindset.
    For new users of wiki projects, red link or blue link doesnt make much difference, coz they dont know shit about how the whole system works.
    But for users with some experience, they would know the fact that red username = no userpage, and that they would have built up an assumption that red username = rookies. Coupled with users' bias against new users, they would then come to the impression that red username = rookies = they should treat red link users less seriously. Then there's another assumption that "admins" should be treated preferentially.
    When the assumptions suddenly dont match, that makes them arrive at another deduction -- a red link sysop must have something wrong. RoyZuo (talk) 06:51, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I support the request, but I don't either agree with RoyZuo's words about the red links and his concepts in general. An userpage for admin should be mandatory beyond Gunther refuses to show some personal information. But if he is still reluctant to that, at least a babel template should be included. Fma12 (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not follow RoyZuo's explanation in any way. This is exclusively RoyZuo's world of thought, which has nothing to do with that of other users. I also find his choice of words unpleasant. In my opinion, it should be clearly recognizable on the user page that a particular user is an administrator, so the user page should also appear in the corresponding category (Category:Commons administrators). It is also quite clear here that the language in which someone can be contacted should be specified. A comprehensible reason is also given here. Especially as all these things are very easy to implement.
  • I would feel more comfortable voting if there was something personal about you anywhere. Like, any own uploads (even yesterday's breakfast mobile photo), or any quasi-personal information on user page (maybe nationality, or country of residence, maybe your languages, maybe age, even approximate, if you don't feel like being doxxed :)). Other than that, I'd support your Request.--Tupungato (talk) 11:31, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would also agree that for an admin, having a userpage can let others to know more about you, but I think information like residence and age is somehow private so I don't think Günther needs to disclose it. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although I am inclined to support, the red-linked user-page gives me a headache. May I know why is it so? Regards, Aafi (talk) 13:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    yeah, i love good looking userpages. modern_primat ඞඞඞ ----TALK 22:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Before voting I too would like to see an userpage. Bedivere (talk) 15:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The user page is the only page in the wikis where the user has full control and I would like to keep that control. Paraphrasing Fernando Pessoa, if I say nothing there, it's because I have nothing to say. So, the day I have to urge to express myself I will create my user page.
At the moment only two reasons where given as to why I should have one. One argues that users should know the languages that I speak and that I'm an admin. I agree with the argument and I think I'm fulfilling it. If someone wants to contact me, they will write me a message on my talk page where they will see the languages that I speak without the need to go to another page to gather that information. If I become an admin, I will make sure it is clear they are addressing an admin. I have to point out that Commons:Guide to adminship is not a policy, it is just a set recommendations and tutorials for new admins.
Regarding the second argument, I think users should be treated fairly regardless if they are admins or beginners. If someone acts in an uncivil manner, I will either warn them or open a report in the admin board.
I hope I answered your doubts on the topic and my answers helps you to take your decision. Günther Frager (talk) 21:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That you strictly refuse to follow the convention to create a user page with babel boxes and maybe some sentences at least about what you do on Commons does not convince me to support your candidature. GPSLeo (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the coment above. You are being too reluctant to create an user page and the explanation given by you does not sound convincing at all, sorry :( Fma12 (talk) 23:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
and honestly I would have supported had the user either responded here earlier or just redirected the user-page to their talk-page where people could find some necessary information. The above response doesn't convince me, sorry. Regards, Aafi (talk) 05:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would've supported, too, but this is a strange hill to die on. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, honestly, it isn't one of the most satisfactory responses and doesn't convince me at all. If it were my admin request, I would be actively replying to everyone and would try my best to convince as much as I could, but you were like, I don't care what anyone says, and you didn't bother to reply until someone opposed. No doubt your work is great, and I initially supported you, but a would-be admin is supposed to be listening to others and understanding their concerns. You were given multiple options, but you chose to make it controversial. As a future admin, you should have de-esclated this situation and convinced everyone. I don't understand what you mean by having full control of the userpage, because it does not make any sense at all. It's not like anyone would edit your userpage without your permission. Even if that's your concern, you can add an edit notice or transclude your userpage. At the end, a bit of advice for you: if multiple admins and experienced users are telling you to do something, you should listen to them instead of going around refusing it profusely only when it's for the best. Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 07:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about a compromise? Günther, you could change your signature to only point to your talk page, or create your userpage as a redirect to your talk page; that would eliminate the concerns about your signature having a red link and hopefully satisfy some of the opposes. It seems quite a trivial thing to fail over. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:41, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To be honest, I started this RfA because I was hoping to close more DRs that the number I was creating, neutralizing my impact on the backlog and I only started thinking about it after some admins pinged me. I was expecting the discussions here to be centered around it, but it turned, I'm my opinion, in a bikeshedding discussion on whether my link should be red or blue. I might try to change the vote of some people by making my link blue, but I won't be able to the change opinion of the people that find my behavior unfit to be an admin regardless of the color of my link. Günther Frager (talk) 13:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Günther Frager, in all honesty, I've already closed enough of your DRs to respect your judgment and take it into account if it's a yes/no, so you already have enough credibility in that respect. I voted for you despite your redlinked. I decided to remove my vote (I haven't opposed you) because you've deciding to take a stand about this, when it's such a minor issue that bothers so many people--i.e. their issues with trusting you outweigh the hill you're trying to die on. Bastique ☎ let's talk! 15:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Bastique. It's not your competence in DRs that concerns me, I just can't understand why you would take a stand on such a small issue when it's clearly of concern to some members of the community. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A RfA should be a debate, but there is no arguments going back and forth. The only time I tried to give an argument it was considered an escalation and qualified as nonsense. The only choice that I seem to have is to follow the consensus of creating user page, yet I see plenty of people being fine without me having one. If I'm not mistaken, your point of view is that I should ignore it to gain the privilege of being an admin. The problem is that I have a different perspective. Being an admin is not a goal for me, it is a tool to help better the community. Thus, I'm a bit more reluctant to accept arbitrarinesses. Günther Frager (talk) 21:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your red-linked userpage is part of the problem. The bigger part of it is that you tried to over-justify such a trivial thing with unconvincing reasons. That points out a big judgement problem that you fail to address. I was eager to support you but unfortunately I can't. Bedivere (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bedivere: before I wrote my argument you wrote Before voting I too would like to see an userpage. That doesn't sound you would have accepted any argument from my side. That is one of the motives why I called this RfA a bikeshedding discussion. Günther Frager (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Before voting" does not necessarily mean "before voting oppose". Bedivere (talk) 03:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bedivere: Of course that you would have voted something after I created a user page. The issue is that having a user page was a necessary condition for you to vote. By contraposition it is equivalent to state "if there is no user page, then there is no vote". Maybe you didn't mean that, but it is what you wrote. Günther Frager (talk) 04:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't get why is it so hard for you to create an informative user page. Your reluctance to it is concerning, more over your explanations justifying so. I'm fairly sure most if not all would've voted yes had you complied with such a simple request, that is to create an user page. Bedivere (talk) 04:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bedivere: by your change of topic, I hope you also agree that this RfA is a bikeshedding discussion. I have similar questions. I don't understand why people tell me my arguments are unconvincing and are unable to explain me why they find them unconvincing. I also don't understand why part of the community is willing do engage in a bikeshedding discussion and lose a potentially good admin. I think I'm reading too much Socrates :). Günther Frager (talk) 05:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In case you don't want to create the user page just because you like the red color username you can still create a userpage (that redirects to talkpage) and edit your signature in the parameters to keep the red color -- Giles Laurent (talk) 05:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't really get the sense out of it. It is apparent that most of the community members who have come around here believe that one should have a user page for convenience (and redirect towards a talk-page is compromise). I don't understand how this could be called arbitrariness. It's rather the other way round - not taking the community's idea of convenience into consideration, and believing they're the ones losing a "potential good admin". As someone already said, "I cannot trust him to act on behalf of the community, if he is not respecting what clearly seems community consensus", it resonates very much. A prospective admin, in my opinion, would not call what most of the community members ask for, as "arbitrariness". Well, I agree that this has taken a turn of a bikeshedding discussion, but we know what's the reason. Regards, Aafi (talk) 08:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You will not be able to ping people without a link to your user page though. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sjoerddebruin: I ping people without problems, and I receive notifications when people ping me. I will get into trouble only if I have a custom signature without a link to my user page or my talk page or my contributions page. The text [[User:Günther Frager]] is a link to my user page regardless of its status. For the technicalities see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Echo. Günther Frager (talk) 12:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HJ Mitchell: Appreciate your suggestion. This might have been a workable solution if proposed by the candidate timely in this request. IMHO, the discussion has moved beyond this. I would also like to know now how I trust him to act on behalf of the community, if he is not respecting what clearly seems community consensus here (see, Commons:Administrators, Administrators should also understand and follow Commons' policies, and where appropriate, respect community consensus., which is a policy, and not just a set of recommendations) --Schlurcher (talk) 12:56, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair enough. How a prospective admin responds when consensus is against them is important. It might not be too late to make a recovery. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
because the community is not "arbitrary", I believe it is never too late. Regards, Aafi (talk) 08:46, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/Requests/Günther_Frager&oldid=951676709"