User:Wikihermit/Talkpagedesign
|
Beginnings - May 31 2007 124kb |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 12 hours may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
FYI
Talk page archive duplicates deleted. On a completely different subject, I'm puzzled by your oppose on DrKiernan's RfA. Candidates deserve more than Oppose or even Oppose per above and I'm not sure you've put much thought into the whole thing. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 02:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'll take a quick glance at it. ~ Wikihermit 02:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a second look. It sure looks as though the RfA will indeed fail but it is failing for absurd reasons. I just get really ticked when I see frivolous opposition on RfA not only because it's unfair to the candidate but because in the long run it perpetuates the worst of RfA and the perception that you can only pass RfA if you know exactly what to say. The only plus I see is that at least some editors are calling out the most absurd opposes (as you did with Mr. "self noms are crap"). Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 03:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. For RfAs anymore you have to be some sort of "wiki-demi-god" and know how to sway people to your side. A good admin doesn't have be a good...err...typer. ~ Wikihermit 03:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a second look. It sure looks as though the RfA will indeed fail but it is failing for absurd reasons. I just get really ticked when I see frivolous opposition on RfA not only because it's unfair to the candidate but because in the long run it perpetuates the worst of RfA and the perception that you can only pass RfA if you know exactly what to say. The only plus I see is that at least some editors are calling out the most absurd opposes (as you did with Mr. "self noms are crap"). Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 03:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I indented your struck oppose, so as not to appear as a double vote.
With regard to this comment: One frequently mentioned notion is that "adminship is no big deal" (per Jimbo) and thus the default is to support the request unless there are reasons not to. I.e., by supporting you are essentially marking your agreement with the nomination. Opposes in contrast contradict the nomination and opposers should present some outline of their reasoning which leads them to not support a candidate. —AldeBaer 03:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just as an example: You will know what I mean when someone first opposes "per Wikihermit" because you recognised and provided good reasons not to support. —AldeBaer 08:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
RE
Been very busy for the last few days. I will likely put some time aside on Friday morning through early afternoon to work on WP:X and my hobby article, Azusa Street Revival. Thanks for the message. Talk to you again soon. Nswinton\talk 03:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Start class article!?! That has to be a GA article. I'd put a request in at WP:GA. ~ Wikihermit 03:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)