Review of Steven Zhang edit
This is an editor review for admin. Please do not modify it.
Steven Zhang (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
Stats edit
- First edit: February 2008
- Total SUL edits: 35,302
- Article contribs: 31.44%
- Project space: 18.72%
- User rights: accountcreator, autoreviewer, filemover, ipblock-exempt, rollbacker
- Summaries: 100%
- Block log: Confusing, answer below.
Recommendations edit
Some of these are just observations, things that might get noticed and you might have to explain at RfA, not necessarily critical but they might stand out a bit and need explaining as a candidate.
- CSD
- PROD
- AFD
- NAC AFD
- Copyright
- Sanctions (via [1])
- Monthly contribs
- Admin area experience
- Articles created
- User talk
- Automated edits
- Talk archive
- Misc.
Summaries, userboxes, signature
- Personal
Questions edit
- 1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
- A Pretty much everything I can, as mentioned in my previous RFA.
- 2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
- A: I'm most happy with the work I've done with Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes. I feel that the processes are very important and over the last eighteen months a lot has changed with the processes that have made them more effective and efficient. Apart from that, my general maintenance activities are small but substantial contributions to the wiki. I am not a big content creator but I feel my other areas of work make up for it.
- 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: As someone that tends to resolve the disputes of others, I rarely get into conflict. I found the person that I mentored, GoodDay (talk · contribs), to be a challenging but learning experience. I tried a lot with him to improve his behaviour with others, but it was not successful and in the end I had to request ArbCom deal with his actions, eventually this resulted in him being site banned. I am learning that there is only so much I can do to influence the behaviour of others, but when I get stressed or in a dispute I use the techniques that I advise others to use when I am resolving a dispute.
- 4. What have you learned or done different since your last RfA?
- A: Since my last RFA, I have focused on my reform efforts with Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes. I was a WMF Fellow for eight months (summary of my work can be found at WP:DRIP. I also wrote another DYK, Daniel Fitzgibbon and have continued with my NACs and other quasi-admin duties. I've also been doing OTRS work.
- 5. Briefly explain your confusing block log.
- A. The first block was done on April Fools Day, where the administrator came into IRC and said "I want to block someone for April Fools". I responded with something along the lines of "If you block me I will have you desysopped." Hence the block. The other blocks relate to my being banned in 2008.
Questions and Answers edit
- I'm a little worried at the slow pace over the last 6 months [2], which I'm pretty sure will come up. Normally, anything under 200 a month, or at least 100 a month is looked at a little skeptical. It draws the "they aren't going to use them anyway" votes. One or two months wouldn't bother me, but you have a pretty good dry spell going on and asking for the tools. How would you address those concerns?
- The "I will get you desysoped" is a bit thin. Were you joking, and he was joking around, or was this a real argument? You need more clarity there, while still keeping it short. Assuming it was improper or a joke (has to be one of those) then you really only have one block to explain, which is best if I do that in the nom statement. I would want links to the Arb case, so I could read that whole affair. I can't really diffuse a potential problem until I understand it. Likely, I would have to do so head on "he did something dumb, but that was years ago and he admitted it then and now" kind of thing. Berean Hunter had a previous block and was voted in 160-0, so it is all in how it is presented, up front and 100 percent honest. But right now, the scarce edits has me more concerned.
- The first block was all in good fun, and a joke. Nothing to worry about. The second block, there was no arb case. I explained it all at my last RFA, and still exists in a disclosure which has links and explains everything. You can find it all here. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 04:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Then I would say "The block was part of the joke, no offense was taken by anyone" or similar. Right now, it is kind of vague. I can't tell if he acted improperly, or you did, etc. Better to make it very clear, so there is no need to ask questions about it later into the RfA. If they are going to ask questions, you don't want it to be about blocks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I haven't forgotten the review, btw, but the metrics are pretty much not an issue here, the questions are all based on the past. Personally, I would have no problem nominating you as I think you are clearly a WP:NETPOS to the encyclopedia as an admin. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ / Join WER 13:31, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
- Then I would say "The block was part of the joke, no offense was taken by anyone" or similar. Right now, it is kind of vague. I can't tell if he acted improperly, or you did, etc. Better to make it very clear, so there is no need to ask questions about it later into the RfA. If they are going to ask questions, you don't want it to be about blocks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)