Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Renata3 (3)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Renata3

Final (70/1/0) Ended 13:29, 2006-08-16 (UTC)

Renata3 (talk · contribs) – I am quite pleased to nominate Renata3 for adminship. She is been helping Wikipedia since July 2005 and has concentrated mainly in Lithuania and accountancy-related articles and has been the major contributor of two featured lists. To date she has raked more than 6000 edits across almost all namespaces.

Her community involvement is rich and varied. Her many edits in the Wikipedia namespace are spread across projects such as the Community bulletin board, which she helped to create and is now quite prominent in the Wikipedia:Community Portal. She revived the Motto of the Day process and has been involved in many AfD discussions. Renata3's work in Featured list candidates nominations is well respected and her high standards are the main source of headaches for many nominators. Finally, Renata3 recently helped in the creation of the already quite active WikiProject Lithuania.

Renata3's interaction with other users is polite and assertive. She is a cool-headed editor who has avoided getting involved in the constant edit wars surrounding Polish-Lithuanian topics, and has an excellent understanding of Wikipedia policy. I am quite confident she would stay out of unnecessary trouble and use her new tools responsibly and fairly.

And she is a very nice girl too. She would probably do your taxes if asked nicely... :-) -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 13:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. (except for the "do my taxes" part :P) Renata 13:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

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, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: First and foremost, images. As Jimbo indicates there are tons of problems with images and fair use abuse. You can call me a paranoid copyright freak, but I strongly believe copyright violations could bring the whole project down. They make Wikipedia vulnerable to lawsuits. The deletion button would help a lot. And there is a massive backlog there...

Of course, I would try many different things, like requested moves, copyright problems, closing AfD's or FLC's. I like calm and "behind the scenes" work, so I am looking for a mop and a bucket and not for a stick to whack vandals (I believe boyz are doing a fantastic work there).

Follow-up question from User:Dlohcierekim. As always, such questions are optional but help other users gauge the candidate's readiness for adminship. Could you give a brief overview of the Copyright situation and how we can gauge RfA candidates' abilities to deal with it? :) Dlohcierekim 14:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

A: Mess. How brief is that? ;) And it's not only fair use (thank God, someone is talking about it), but all the other categories too. My personal favorite is taging photos with {{PD-ineligible}}. There are hundreds and thousands of images tagged as PD or GFDL giving no reasons as to why. I have some serious doubts about xx-self tags. Not all users are so honest. And the biggest problem really is that no one is checking, say, GFDL image category. It is very, extremely, messy & painful job and I think user:OrphanBot is God-sent and user:Carnildo is a saint for taking on this duty.

What to do in regards to RfA's? Maybe stop emphasizing vandal-figting. No doubt, that is important and absolutely necessary, but that's not the only thing to be done around here.

P.S. I just did quick and dirty 5 random image test (click here) and all images were fair use images. Only one had a source... not to mention something so exotic as fair use rationale.... :((( Renata 17:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

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

A: My (very ugly) list of contributions is here. Among articles, I am most proud of Paper Clips Project and Lithuanian litas (my FA hopeful, but I got stuck because I cannot obtain info on pre-WWII litas history). Among lists (I regularly drive people nuts on WP:FLC), I am proud of List of cities in Lithuania. I have to featured lists (List of municipalities of Lithuania and Counties of Lithuania). In Wikipedia namespace, I hope to raise a new-born Wikipedia:WikiProject Lithuania. I also resurrected WP:MOTTO (and I hope User:Geo.plrd will take a good care of it). On commons, I am really proud of commons:Category:Lithuanian pronunciation. And it should grow really big. I set myself a goal that every Lithuania-related article would have such pronunciation.

Oh, and perkūnas article. User:Linuxbeak during his presentation in Wikimania used it as an example of "the worst" article that with time with the help of Wikipedia's procedures got much better. Not being too shy, I am chiefly responsible for making it better :)

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: Agh, a walk down the memory lane. I believe I did not engage in any really serious conflict. There was a clash with user:Talrias (who has unfortunately since left the project) about maintenance collaboration of the week appearing on the community portal. I made a personal comment about him. I believe that was the only such instance in my wiki life, and that was like ages ago. Then there was a serious dispute on moving Partitions of Poland to Partitions of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Since then I generally stay clear of hopeless conflicts (like naming monarch who is now at Jogaila or was Antanas Baranauskas a Pole or a Lithuanian? How about Laurynas Gucevičius?) Many users cause me stress, sometimes on FLC (I remember this one really drove me nuts), sometimes on places like List of sovereign states or by moving pages having diacritics in titles just because there are no redirects from same name without diacritics. Whatever the case, I never make any personal comments. If I argue, I argue about points and facts.

Additional question from Grafikm_fr

Hello :) You mention that you want to do some image cleanup on Wikipedia, and that, according to you, "there are tons of problems with images and fair use abuse". What is your stance regarding pictures falling under the {{PD-USSR}} template (Pre-1973 Soviet images). I saw that you supported User:Lupo's researches and his actions aimed at deprecating the {{PD-USSR}} template here. If you get the mop, what kind of stance one can expect from you? Thanks in advance, Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 15:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

A: Ha, that one. At this point there is no basis to delete the images. No side can definitely prove any claims and the template is subject to much ambiguity. Any further discussion or research or clarification is very much welcome. In the mean time, users should be advised to use any other tags whenever possible. Depreciating a controversial image tag is not such a bad idea, "better safe than sorry." And just a note, "depreciating" is not the same as "deleting." Renata 16:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Additional question from — Ambuj Saxena (talk).

Q.: Suppose you land up on an image page that is tagged as fair use image. You see that the only link to that page is a user sandbox page. On visiting the page you find that it is used in what looks like an article under construction. How would you deal with it? What will be your course of action if the page was created one day back? One month back? What will be your course of action if you don't even agree that the image falls under the fair use criterion. Addendum: What is your take on usage of Foxtrot wikipedia.jpg in various non-article pages, especially on User:AndrewDavis? Note: See page content and history. Of course you may go ahead with any action if you see fit.

A: Oh, Godness, what did I do to you to deserve this? :) First of all, I am no copyright expert. Everything I know about copyrights come from Wikipedia. I just take copyrights more seriously than others. That being said...

There are three ways to deal with FU image in user sandbox: a) delete it from the page right away and tag the image as orphan; b) delink the image so it does not show up on the page (link image like this: image:example.png and not like this: ) or comment it out (using <!-- -->) and inform the user; c) leave the image alone for the time being and notify the user about the issue. I would not go with a) because WP:CSD#Images/Media rule 5 (Unused unfree copyrighted images) gives consideration for upcoming articles. Depending on how long ago the sandbox was created, I would go with either b) (for inactive pages created a long time ago) or c) (for pages created just a day or two ago). Whatever the case, I would inform the user and monitor any further actions.

I have delinked Foxtrot wikipedia.jpg from Talk:Main Page/Archive 36, Talk:Warthog, and Talk:Rabies. I deleted the image from User:JRM/Evaluations of Wikipedia because of two reasons: it was created a year ago with no edits since then; the page does not actually talk about the comic strip and there is no nice way to delink the image. I informed the user on my actions.

I do not really know what to do with 2 FPC subpages (1 & 2). Most likely it needs to be delinked.

User:AndrewDavis is a whole another issue. Provided he really is what he claims to be (the author of the image) he has a right to display his work. Since he has been inactive since May, I would recommend delinking the image. Delinking does not remove the image entirely and protects WP from any legal claims. Better safe than sorry.

And of course, the image needs fair use rationale for Wikipedia in popular culture and FoxTrot articles. Renata 14:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• See Renata3's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool.
• See Renata3's edit history with Interiot's Tool2:

Username                Renata3
Total edits             6247
Distinct pages edited   4049
Average edits/page      1.543
First edit              06:27, 5 July 2005
        
(main)          2990
Talk            281
User            134
User talk       933
Image           167
MediaWiki talk  2
Template        153
Template talk   24
Help            1
Help talk       2
Category        160
Category talk   3
Wikipedia       1196
Wikipedia talk  135
Portal          57
Portal talk     9

• Oh, I almost forgot. I rejected my two previous nominations (1st & 2nd) mostly because I asked user:Durin all the way back in January to evaluate me and nominate if he finds I am fit. However, he excused himself from this duty only in June citing personal troubles and lack of time. Renata 13:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator, without hesitation. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 13:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Support I don't think I can see a single flaw in this user. As with most candidates, I've never had direct contact with her; with that said, Renata looks like an excellent user who has done great work to improve WP, and I'm confident she'll do a great job with the admin tools. -- Kicking222 13:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Support Seems good AdamBiswanger1 14:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
4. Support. My interactions with her have always been positive. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Support without question. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 14:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Support I got about 1/2 the way through a thorough review of her in anticipating nominating her myself a few months back. I ran out of time to complete it. What I found was stellar. Long, long overdue. --Durin 14:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Support per User:Dlohcierekim#Standards. :) Dlohcierekim 14:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Support - good luck on the image backlog :) -- Tawker 14:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
9. Support. Nothing but positive experience with Renata3. She's been a big help on the Community Portal. Surely, she would make a fine admin. --Aude (talk contribs) 14:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
10. I MOST CERTAINLY WILL NOT SUPPORT SOMEONE WHO WILL BE ABUSIVE! SO THAT MEANS... Support! --Gray Porpoise 14:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
11. Support Rama's arrow 15:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
12. Preposterous fellow ex-Soviet accountant in NYC Support - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
13. Support, will make a great admin. Kirill Lokshin 16:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
14. Support, everything's in order here. Good answers. Themindset 16:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
15. Support. Excellent nomination, this nominee certainly could use the tools and will use them well. Agent 86 17:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
16. Support no big deal and seems like a good user based on her answers and a brief look at her edits and talk page. It's always nice to see a candidate willing to work on copyvio problems hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 17:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
17. Support, without a doubt. (One edit conflict). Thistheman 17:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
18. Solid record. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
19. Sure. Kusma (討論) 18:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
20. Support the new beginning M.K. 18:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
21. {{RfA cliché}} Even though Renata stole my userpage idea. ;) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 18:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
22. Support per lovely article work and responsability. —Xyrael _{/ 18:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)}
23. Support - excellent contributor. Kalani ^[talk] 18:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
24. Support Good work on FLC. Oldelpaso 18:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
25. Support yes, yes, yes, Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 19:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
26. Merovingian - Talk 19:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
27. Support per above. Michael 20:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
28. Support —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-08-09 20:51Z
29. Support per all of above. Newyorkbrad 21:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
30. Support - a reasonable editor whom I had the pleasure to work with in the past, a perfect candidate for 'mop'n'bucket' superpowers :)( -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
31. Support. Another good solid user. Deb 21:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
32. Support Although your claim to fame First Article is tagged for a clean-up! hehe Stubbleboy 22:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
33. Support I see no problems here. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 22:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
34. Support. Experienced, dedicated editor. Zaxem 23:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
35. Strong support looks good to me.--Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 01:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
36. Support good hardworking editor, cool when the editing went hot abakharev 03:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
37. Support - looks good to me. —Khoikhoi 03:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
38. Support Yanksox 04:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
39. Support. - Mailer Diablo 05:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
40. Support Looks good! -- Samir धर्म 05:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
41. Support, solid editor, great work with Lithuania topics. --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 05:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
42. Support, good article writer, great editor. And a proficient nitpicker :) //Halibutt 06:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
43. Support Excellent editor - enjoy the mop! Baseball,Baby! ^{balls•strikes} 12:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
44. Support per nom, brilliant editor. RandyWang (^{chat me up}/_{fix me up}) 12:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
45. Support for her dedication to Lithuanian topics. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 15:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
46. Support. For work relating to Lithuania. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 16:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
47. Third time's the charm for Renata3? I talked with her a bit at Wikimania; she meets all of my in-person qualifications for being a good administrator. Plus, she's cute :-P Cyde Weys 17:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
48. Support. G.He 20:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
49. Support Always had great interactions with Renata, I trust the new tools won't be abused. KOS | talk 22:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
50. Oppose, too many portal edits (support). —freak(talk) 02:39, Aug. 11, 2006 (UTC)

    What does that have to do with being an admin? =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

    Well, if you create a Portal you are bound to have many edits on that namespace, don't you think? -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 09:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

51. Support =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
52. Support So I was looking at this RfA cause I thought it was 50/20 and was trying to figure out why... then I realized I just can't read. Anyway... -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 11:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
53. Support - I keep seeing you around, and assumed the cliché. Good luck with the AdminPowers^TM! Regards, —Celestianpower ^háblame 11:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
54. Support very nice, this user is ready to be an administrator. Wikipediarules2221 17:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
55. Happy to change to support. -- Миборовский 17:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
56. Support. DarthVader 00:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
57. Support I think she'll be a great adition to the admin team. Thε Halo ^Θ 11:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
58. Support.  Grue  18:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
59. Support - why not? --Ixfd64 21:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
60. Pile-on Support - glad to see someone willing to work on copyrights --T-rex 02:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
61. Support An excellent Admin candidate. -Royalguard11^Talk 03:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
62. Support. Don't see any issues here. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
63. Support impressed by contributions - giving admin tools will benefit the articles Aquilina 23:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
64. Support: seems like a great editor. Thumbelina 01:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
65. Support, this editor will contribute greatly, give her the tools. -- Deville (Talk) 01:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
66. Support. Good contributor and seems to work well with others. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
67. Support and thanks for your many fine contributions regarding Lithuania. Valentinian ^(talk) 10:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
68. Support!. Renata is a very dedicated editor, and a pleasure to deal with.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
69. Support--SylwiaS | talk 19:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

    Support 65.147.85.24 00:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

70. Strong Support - strong commitment to quality writing. Blnguyen | rant-line 04:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
71. Support per Cyde Weys. --Irpen 07:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak Oppose Possible inexperience in image rules --Masssiveego 18:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

   Can you provide some diffs to back this up? Doing a quick random ten image edits check [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] I don't find anything in error. --Durin 19:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

   User has responded on my talk page. They aren't happy with some image copyright incidents found at User_talk:Renata3/archive5#Image:Cam_Gordon.jpg.--Andeh 05:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I will support if I receive verbal assurance from RFA hopeful that she (seriously? :D) will eventually improve Lithuanian litas (or Paper Clips Project, or something else) to FA standard. ;) -- Миборовский 01:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

   Silly me hoped that my 2 FL would cover the 1 FA rule... :) I know that I need to write a featured article and I have been angry with myself. But there are just so many missing or substuby articles crying out loud for attention that it would not just to concentrate only on one FAC. Besides living in NYC I have a problem obtaining sources on Lithuania. But enough of lame excuses. I solemnly promise to do my very best (my dream is to feature Lithuania itself). Renata 11:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

   Supported. Some 1FA proponents include portals and lists, some don't. ;) -- Миборовский 17:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

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.