Commons:Administrators/Requests/Steven Walling

 Support = 7;  Oppose = 1;  Neutral = 4 - Unsuccessful Result.

Minimum 8 required votes were not gained in two weeks. I think will be good idea if candidate will reapply to adminship after some period of time after increasing activity in areas which may be noticed by other (new files patrolling, deletion requests, help desk, etc.) --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Steven Walling

Vote

Steven Walling (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 22:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I wish to self-nominate for adminship on Commons. Since joining up in 2007, I have uploaded over 850 freely-licensed images and have over 2,300 edits. Most of my editing has been related to categories (by themselves and in files), cleaning them up, requesting moves, et cetera. I'm also an OTRS team member, though I have not yet worked on Commons-related issues. Occasionally I have found it might be useful to have the tools to help out with this sort of thing. I am not intimate with deletion protocols, but I expect to be doing very little of that work unless we get really desperate for an extra hand. Though mostly I am a gnome on Commons, I have noticed some important work I could help with, like the fact that MediaWiki:Uploadtext needs updating to say we have over six million files. Also, not that it really matters, but I'm an admin on my home wiki (English Wikipedia) and have a great deal of experience with MediaWiki outside Wikimedia projects, so I'm unlikely to make any dangerous mistakes with the tools. Steven Walling 22:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Votes

•  Support Commons could use more admins, and this user would be a great addition. Killiondude (talk) 23:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Yup. A fantastic, clueful and diligent user. Should do well. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support MBisanz ^talk 03:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support. Why not? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Yes Will be a good addition to the team. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Despite candidate's intention to do very little deletion work, demonstrated knowledge of copyright fundamentals is an important aspect to Commons administration. Lack of deleted contributions or deletion discussions preclude assessment of candidate's knowledge. Uploading images from Flickr does not demonstrate sufficent meaningful knowledge, as observing a proper CC license is trivial. An upload that required more detailed consideration, File:Yang cheng fu single whip application 2 75.jpg, for example, has absolutely inadequate PD support (term appears to have been calculated using publication date, not date of author death), to say nothing of entirely inadequate sourcing. Эlcobbola _talk 15:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: I would just like to point out that I uploaded the image you refer to in August of 2007, after having only signed up for Commons in May. Steven Walling 01:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Useful contributions over time I guess for which thanks. However there is zero contributions to Commons talk: namespace and effectively the same in Commons:. No one is obliged to contribute there to be an admin but the lack of it may suggest a lack of real understanding of the kind of issues an admin has to deal with here.  Neutral - let's make it easier, maybe someone will actually close it then , I guess I have no real concerns --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral I'm not convinced the candidate has a good enough understanding of copyright rules, so I'm not comfortable with him handling deletions. On the other hand, there does seem to be a backlog of category moves, so an extra hand there would be useful. If this nom is unsuccessful, I would support a request for Flickr trusted user status, which is good for Wikignoming. Pruneau^talk 11:11, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Not visiting Commons: and Commons talk: too much is probably actually a good thing. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral I keep waiting for more votes to persuade me one way or another, but.. I guess other don't know either. I feel like maybe he should wait a bit (given the issues raised by others), but for no strong reason in particular, so I won't oppose. BTW, the closure is a little overdue (understandably, but can a crat announce an extension if that's what we're doing). Rocket000 (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• It's almost a week overdue, actually... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

•  Neutral If he wants to help with category renames, I think it's an advantage if he is an administrator. If there was more prior activity, I might support. For this, it's not crucial to participate in media deletion debates. Afterall, there are administrators that were promoted primarily based on their participation in media deletion debates and we later find them doing controversial category renames. -- User:Docu at 11:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• You mention that you had been "requesting moves" of categories. Can you provide a sample for this? -- User:Docu at 04:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • A current proposed move is up at Category:People with chicken. Steven Walling 06:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
    • Can you list a few you did before 06:45? -- User:Docu at 06:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
      • I added the proposal to that category on January 30th, look at the history. Steven Walling 07:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
        • I just saw the date on the template (2010-02-10) and checked when you edited on that day. Anyways, are there any others? -- User:Docu at 08:45, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
          • I can't remember the last time I did another proposal, to be perfectly honest. But if you want to me to explain the proper procedure for moving categories, I'd be happy to! Steven Walling 19:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
            • It might be good to read up on that before adminship. -- User:Docu at 22:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
• I think will be good idea to have local user page. At least please add Commons:Babel. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree that Babel is a good idea for communication purposes I've added the Babel template ([1]), but I don't see why what I have on my user page has anything to do with being trustworthy as an admin. Clearly I made the decision to do a soft redirect with some logic in mind. You convinced me. ;) See: [2] Steven Walling 19:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• Please enable Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary in Special:Preferences. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  •  Done Steven Walling 20:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
• I think will be good idea if candidate will participate more in community matters and user interactions. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Like I said, I'm a gnome on Commons. I'd just like to help by extending that gnoming to the odd sysop task too. Steven Walling 20:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

• The above conversation kind of stalled this rfa, now didn't it? I think if people have concerns, they should voice them here rather than let this "slip" by with something like 5 support votes. That's my opinion at least. Killiondude (talk) 06:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I think just 4 are required. -- User:Docu at 22:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

•  Question I also have concerns with some of your older uploads, such as File:DYJ Commencement of Taiji.jpg and File:Yang-single.jpg. I realize you uploaded them a long time ago. In retrospect, could you tell us what you would change if you wanted to upload these files today? Pruneau^talk 13:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I think it's pretty obvious (now) that the big problem with them is that they claim public domain but lack any actual sourcing past where I found them on the Web. They need attribution to the original copyright holder and publication where they first appeared to prove they're in the public domain. If there's no author provided, then it's pretty hard to verify that the life of the author plus 70 years has expired. Steven Walling 19:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
•  Question As an administrator you would have access to the roll-back function. Do you think Commons:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback applies to administrators? -- User:Docu at 11:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Not only does it apply, but the rollback guideline goes double for admins as far as I'm concerned. Rollback shouldn't be used on good faith edits, and part of adminship is being willing to thoroughly explain the actions you take with the tools. Steven Walling 17:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)