GreenMeansGo

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (76/0/0); Scheduled to end 01:00, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination

GreenMeansGo (talk · contribs) – There have been a few people who have offered to nominate me over the last little while, and I'll let them self-identify if they want to. But I guess I kindof feel like my record should maybe stand or fall on its own two feet. I'm fine with being an admin and I'm fine just being a regular editor, but I think I can probably help out with some things that need helping with, so here I am. I mostly just want to be useful however I can be useful.

To get it out of the way, I had a name change last year. The beginning and end of it is that my wife asked me to and I said yes. I'm not trying to hide anything and I'm fine with people linking to diffs of my old username. I've identified to the WMF twice, so it's not like it's a secret or anything. I registered my first account in 2008 and abandoned it mostly because I found not much of a community and no real reason to not edit anonymously. I've never edited for pay, although I've been propositioned and have declined. GMGtalk 23:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: What would give me the most personal satisfaction is being able to help folks without needing to bother anyone else. I'm no stranger to the "I can't see your deleted article, but here is some generic advice..." or the "This will need a histmerge/deleted make-way-for-move redirect/etc and so we'll need to find someone to do it..." type discussions. I'm also no stranger to shamelessly bothering others to do uncontroversial button pushing that I could probably well do myself. I do try to commit a certain amount of time on project maintenance tasks, because it needs to be done. I'm probably fine answering reports at WP:AIV, WP:PERM requests for autopatrolled, requests for WP:AfC access, going through most WP:CSD noms, and answering requests for revision deletion for WP:COPYVIO and egregious WP:BLP violations. I'm more involved with Commons as far as images go, but I could probably well do the most uncontroversial of file deletions, like non-free-reduce WP:F5s. But I realize I don't know everything and never will, and would like to think I'm fairly prompt at seeking input from, or deferring to others when I start to get outside my circle of competence.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I'm pretty proud of this picture and this picture, both of which have stories if anyone's interested. I'm proud of being part of both the discussion that changed the orientation of the Teahouse, and the discussion that moved the actual Teahouse over the landing page, both of which I believe were changes that benefited new editors. I'm proud of helping to make WP:NOTLAB into a blue link, because I think it's helpful. I've gotten content on the front page a few times, but mostly I just whittle away in the background. Most of my work is in late 19th Century US history (e.g., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7), parks (e.g., 1 2 3 4 5) and then just randomness (e.g., 1, 2).
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: I mostly mediate conflicts where I'm a third party. If a dispute becomes protracted I like to think I have a pretty low bar for disengaging and just going to work on something else, because that something else is usually more productive than arguing over any one thing in particular. Time is limited and pretty much everything is a cost benefit analysis. Overall, I'm fine with losing disputes, when I could be working productively somewhere else instead, rather than prolonging a losing or even a winning battle. I'm pretty much just here to help write the encyclopedia my daughter will read.

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

Additional question from Cryptic
4. Carlisle Homes and Urban Produce, LLC, as discussed here - if you'd had the appropriate buttons, would you have deleted either or both of these directly, rather than just tagging them db-g11 as you did? Would you have handled them any differently had you stumbled across them in NPP/Special:Randompage/CAT:CSD-after-someone-else-tagged-them/whatever, rather than having seen them identified as probable TOU violations?
A: No, I think Dloh had the right of it. Bish is an experienced admin, and clearly thought they should have gone PROD rather than going G11. I disagreed, but the best option was to nominate and let someone pick them out of the queue in a vacuum and decide like they would with any article. Had I been the one to pull them out of the queue in a vacuum, I would have deleted them as obvious advertisements, which is why I nominated them for the same. GMGtalk 10:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Isaacl
5. Given your proposal to initiate community-based bans on using administrative privileges, as an administrator, do you plan to take a role in closing these types of ban discussions and enforcing any resulting bans?
A: As the person who kindof originated the idea AFAIK, no I would not close such a discussion were it to come up. Doing so would be almost be akin to promoting my own idea. Although I would be fine proposing it if the situation arose. If we actually had such a case where an admin was sufficiently out of line with community norms to warrant consensus for admin probation, and yet ArbCom was unwilling to act in any meaningful way, it would be a very important precedent setting scenario, and highly likely to come up for review at ArbCom one way or the other. In such a case, even the appearance of impropriety could be detrimental in a fundamental way. GMGtalk 11:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Javert2113
6. Could you please give an example of how you would use a promotional username soft-block as compared to a promotional username hard-block? Thank you.
A: I would defer to the advice of TonyBallioni that I read at some point, which was to avoid soft blocks prior to them having edited anything, and instead issue hard blocks after they've confirmed that they have a promotional user name, and they're editing only for the purpose of promotion. I'm not a fan of paid editing, and that's not an artifact of any type of high-minded idealism, but simply because it wastes an inordinate amount of community time. Half our article are stubs, and if possible, that's where we should be working, rather than cleaning up unnecessary messes from marketers. GMGtalk 11:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from John Cline
7. Please tell me about this RfC greeting, and the follow on comments. I initially felt it was a bit out of character, for my having seen you in many discussions as a pure wordsmith. Perhaps it is wordsmanship at its best? Tell me how it describes you as well, in collaborative terms? Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 06:43, 28 April 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]
A: I think the metaphor I eventually landed on on my talk page is probably a good one. This is a community garden. We have places for people who like to pick weeds. We have places for people who like to grow vegetables. We have places for people who just want to nerd out and get really in depth testing the pH of the soil. But if you find yourself spending most of your time expressing an opinion on the hue of the tomatoes, and you look down and there's no dirt under your fingernails, then you need to find the closest hoe or spade and get digging. The digging is what means my daughter won't need a 20 year old World Book missing three volumes like I had, because she has access to the most valuable resource for free knowledge in the history of our species. That's...the metric I judge basically everything by. GMGtalk 11:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Chris troutman
8. One editor supporting your candidacy admires your aplomb dealing with me in your first GA review (which was successful) in late 2016. You went on to have two more successful GA noms so I'm curious what, if anything, you learned from what they call "an unnecessarily adversarial GA review". Chris Troutman (talk) 09:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A: Hey Chris. Actually, in retrospect, I really appreciate your adversarial approach. I don't think civility means that everyone has to agree on everything. In fact I think it's really important to have spirited disagreement, so long as it is focused on improving the encyclopedia. The primary reason I nominated articles for GA and FA wasn't to get the bling, but to learn what writing a GA or an FA looks like. I think my nominations did a pretty good job at that and improved my writing tremendously. I haven't looked twice at an ISBN 10 since my FA to be sure, and there were a lot of things I had never considered, like consistency in using |author= vs |last= |first=, that now I do without even thinking about. And so I think it was all a good use of my time. GMGtalk 11:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from Hhhhhkohhhhh
9. Will you deal with or handle some SPI cases? Why or why not?
A: Well...I'm only barely involved with SPI as it is. I don't see myself ever applying for something like CU, because I pretty much lack the technical expertise to probably use it effectively. My single biggest shortcoming as an editor is probably far and away that I'm basically technologically inept. I only got a smartphone a few years ago to be honest, and using wiki markup is basically the most technically advanced thing I know how to do. I didn't even transclude my own RfA, and instead asked on IRC for someone else to do it, because I was pretty sure I would screw it up somehow. But that's just not my strength. There's a reason my graduate work was in community based social work, and it's because I gravitate more toward team building and coalition forming. That's a lot of why I like Wikipedia. GMGtalk 12:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Additional question from xaosflux
10. Regarding your statement, I registered my first account in 2008 and abandoned it, when (e.g. in what year) did you abandon use of that account? — xaosflux Talk 18:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Support
  1. Support Great editor, good contribution history. Helps out at the Teahouse. I think they'd do very well with sysop permissions. Vermont (talk) 01:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support I'll do more research, but I think I've suggested that this candidate run before nope I was wrong about that, but I still have a positive impression of GMG. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 01:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  3. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. From my interactions with him, I can tell that GMG seems like the type of person who is good both on the back-end and the front-end sides of Wikipedia. Not only does he have a generally positive demeanor, he is also a solid content contributor. epicgenius (talk) 01:22, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. I have two reasons for supporting. The first is that I relate to the comment about producing something that this candidate's daughter will read, even though I don't have a daughter myself. The second is that I like the way he dealt with an unnecessarily adversarial GA review of Scranton general strike. Eric Corbett 01:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. More editors like this please Dr. Vogel (talk) 01:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. I haven't crossed paths with GMG in the past too often, but it seems I've been seeing him more and more lately, and he's always a voice of good reason. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 01:50, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support This is overdue. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support No reason not too. Smallbones(smalltalk) 02:02, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support I thought of asking him several times, but I saw the "not a broom" topicon and thought he didn't want to be one. I've seen the candidate do helpful and useful edits ever since I was here. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. This is not why exactly but I'll link it anyhow because of the good sense it displays. --JBL (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support – This is a qualified candidate. Mz7 (talk) 02:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  14. HELL YEAH HELL YEAH! Great user, very nice, very competent, and very intelligent.💵Money💵emoji💵Talk 02:23, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - WP:NETPOS.Nova Crystallis (Talk) 02:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Apt for the job. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Cabayi (talk) 03:40, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. Your calm demeanour and patience at FAC and other places have impressed me, writing a featured article clearly shows that you have the requisite policy knowledge, and you work at the Teahouse, where admin tools might occasionally be useful. Even if you only perform simple tasks that you would previously have asked someone else to do, that still frees up that someone else and means you can give a confused editor a more immediate answer. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Why not? Double sharp (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Strong support All the good reasons are already taken. Seen 'm around.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support, definitely. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support: a positive presence on the project. Thank you for volunteering. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. Great candidate. KingAndGod 05:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support - So here's the thing. At least in part due to the username change, I get GMG confused with 2-4 other people I associate with ANI thread ubiquity these days. From my perspective, that's not a great starting point (I have mixed feelings about RfA candidates with a strong inclination to jump into noticeboard drama). So I came here thinking I would put myself in the neutral camp, expressing a couple concerns and promising to dig deeper before actually supporting/opposing. Instead, I've just spent more time than I think I've ever spent on an RfA vote, going through past interactions and other threads/comments/contributions from the past couple years. Here's what I found: I did find some comments that added more heat than light and a few instances of perhaps being too keen to sanction for my tastes. Not enough to have any lingering concern, however (hence not linking), because I saw much much more of the positive variety of collaboration/commentary/contributions, such that I am convinced GMG would be an asset to the project as an admin. Extra long comment to go along with my support vote to justify the time I've just spent researching. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 05:31, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support been meaning to ask them why they haven't run yet for some time; of course. Would be a great admin. The greatest. Believe me. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support. I have not crossed pathed often with GMG, but have seen them a fair bit recently (come to think of it). Either way, my interactions with them have never caused me any concern and they strike me as a fine candidate. I agree with above sentiment that this is long overdue and that all the good "support"'s are taken . Good luck GMG! --TheSandDoctor Talk 06:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support I literally thought that they already were one. No concerns. Tazerdadog (talk) 06:28, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support. Even handed and the sort of guy we want to meddle in disputes.Icewhiz (talk) 06:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support It's a mop, and it's about time this user started doing more mopping power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Good answers. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Definite net positive. Despite deletionist leanings at AFD, he takes reasoned positions and can be persuaded to withdraw/change vote with sufficient evidence. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 07:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  32. At blooming last. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 07:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Jianhui67 T★C 08:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Would be a good admin I think. scope_creep (talk) 08:24, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support Trusted editor. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. Ha, I'd been meaning to suggest User:GreenMeansGo should run for admin for a few weeks, but kept not quite getting round to it. GreenMeansGo seems very good at handling problems in a calm manner, clearly has the experience and understanding for admin, and I'd be very happy to see this RfA succeed. Oh, and I like the confidence behind a self-nomination too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:10, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support -- Euryalus (talk) 09:37, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Obviously. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:40, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support I was surprised that GMG didn't already have the mop. He clearly understands why we're all here, incorporates that belief into everything that he does, and acts with integrity at all times. In my view, GMG with a mop will only benefit the encyclopedia. OhKayeSierra (talk) 09:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support - bastion of the Teahouse, has earned the mop. Stormy clouds (talk) 10:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support Zarasophos (talk) 10:38, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support Yeah, competent editor. talk to !dave 10:39, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support – Based on past actions, I'm confident that they can handle the mop. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 11:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Clear net positive. GMG is a very helpful editor. Solid content creation, well-versed in policies and guidelines, calm demeanor on noticeboards, loads of experience with new users at TeaHouse... and most importantly, understands the purpose of this project! I see no reason why he shouldn't be given the extra buttons! Jiten talk contribs 11:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support: I don't see any issues at all to not support it. KGirl (Wanna chat?) 11:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. By all means. Yintan  12:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support I admire the way this editor deals with promotional content, and its contributors, so if the admin toolset would enhance that I'm happy to support. Poltair (talk) 12:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support, no issues--Ymblanter (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  49. support seems solid for the job--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support I have always found GreenMeansGo to be reliable and helpful, just the sort of qualities we need in an administrator. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support Seems like one of the good ones. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support Excellent answer to my question, fraught with peril. He provided a fair answer to why he self-nom'd. AfD stats are good. He would be the proud owner of a four award had he taken Baltimore railroad strike of 1877 to DYK. I think GMG is ready for the big time. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:48, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. Clearly the kind of level-headed editor who we can trust with a few additional buttons. — sparklism hey! 12:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support +1 -- ferret (talk) 13:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Definitely --Jetstreamer Talk 13:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  56. —Kusma (t·c) 13:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  57. What took you so long? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support Thankfully, now he'll stop pestering me. In your own words GMG, now "go be an admin and do admin things." L0URDES 13:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    ​Thankfully there are plenty of us still willing to bug you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:50, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    --TheSandDoctor Talk 14:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support But, avoid history merges for awhile. They are pretty simple to do, but tedious to fix if you mess up.--v/r - TP 14:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support; no issues. Jc86035 (talk) 14:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support great answers to the general questions. Humility is an excellent trait to have as an administrator. Royalbroil 14:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support Helps out confuses newbies at the Teashouse, helps prevent promotional guff at NPP, has a good grasp of policy, has GA and FA experience... I could go on. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:02, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Steel1943 (talk) 15:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  64. I had intended on sitting this one out, but will support following the answers to questions 7, 8, and 9. I think GMG is a great candidate who has the right cut of his jib. I have had a few concerns about civility — the last thing we need is yet another rude sysop — but the answers are enough to allay my hesitation. GMG clearly has the absolute best intentions; the daughter thing may seem a little schmaltzy, but it's the perfect view of the project and I couldn't agree more (there should be an essay, something about planting trees). Besides, we could use a bit more humor and humility around here. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support GMG would make for an excellent admin. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Support --Alaa :)..! 15:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support GMG is very helpful as a Teahouse host, where I know him best. He is an all around good editor who knows our policies and guidelines, and is properly focused on improving the encyclopedia. The family mentions are humanizing and I appreciate them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:34, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support:Nice contributor. - Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 16:36, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support Solid contribution record, good answers above, and I find no reason to oppose. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support Sensible, helpful. Vexations (talk) 17:06, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support yes please! ansh666 17:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  72. (edit conflict) Support I was one of those GMG asked to vet him and after I did, I was one of those who offered to nominate him. I respect his decision to self-nom though. Like another admin I nominated, TonyBallioni, GMG and I disagree philosophically at times but he is also one of those users who does not let philosophical differences stand in the way of collaboration and who, like Tony, respects and follows policies even when he disagrees with them. When vetting, I noticed a couple of mistakes in deletion related areas but GMG has offered good explanations and, more importantly, demonstrated that he understands that and/or why they were mistakes. That was in January. Since then, I have seen nothing that would indicate that he has reverted to "his old ways", so I'm happy to offer my support. Regards SoWhy 17:18, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support - Green most definitely means go, which I'll now do; being glad that I came. And gladdest that GMG came to offer us such a fine gift. I am thankful indeed.--John Cline (talk) 17:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support - excellent candidate, and I'm always very happy to see a self-nomination. Thanks for volunteering. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 17:53, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support Good level-headed editor. Natureium (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Strong support I can't remember if I said it on-wiki or off, but I remarked not too long ago that GMG could self-nom and pass with a landslide, and lo and behold here we are. He has the project's best interests at heart and is committed to clearing out backlogs (particularly at NPP). He has common sense in spades, is good at defusing tricky situations in spades, and has a comprehensive understanding of policy. Give him the damn mop and bucket already. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:23, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose


Neutral
General comments
I believe the comment above was originally left under neutral and then moved down here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


More