Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Good Olfactory

Good Olfactory

Voice your opinion (talk page) (28/0/1); Scheduled to end 12:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Good Olfactory (talk · contribs) - User:Good Olfactory is someone that, by his numbers, may look like a relatively new, script using user who doesn’t do much else. I can assure you that this is not the case. I first noticed him while clearing WP:CFD backlogs and found him to be very, very well spoken. I almost asked him to be an admin with under 4 months of experience, finding him to be ready then, but I decided to let him continue to edit so I could see what he was made of. He has certainly not disappointed.

His overall wiki-experience dates back to 2005 (as an admin in some wikis), so don’t let the first edit date fool you, he knows what needs to be done on here. His edit count is quite immense for his time being here, a result of his strenuous work with Categories. Man, is he great with categories. We ‘’need’’ plenty of help at CFD now ever since non-admins couldn’t help at WP:CFD/W, and he will be an asset there. He is also very well-spoken. The first time I talked with him about adminship, I was very impressed with his demeanor and responses to my questions. He made me feel that he would be a great candidate for the adminship position before I even checked through his contribs. Those barnstars on his page don’t lie, he’s a user who knows why he’s on Wikipedia, and who knows how to be a great user.

I already know what opposes may come for this user based on how his edits appear on the surface, so let me counterattack them now: You say he mostly uses scripts, I say how else are you to keep the category system intact? It takes time for the bots to get to them, and a human eye going through making sure all categories are logical and necessary is a huge plus. You say he doesn’t participate in other xfds besides cfd, and that’s a load of crap. A quick search shows plenty of AFDs he’s discussed. And I do mean discussed, he clearly states why he feels the way he does in each WP:AFD. Plus, his CFD work is amazing, and that’s where I presume he’ll continue to spend a nice amount of his time. You say he’s inexperienced, I point you to the start of the above paragraph. You say he hasn’t contributed through article writing, I also call that crap. While article writing’s not the strongest thing he does for the encyclopedia, he does do a good job of it when he does write an article. Mormonism and evolution is a quite nice article he’s written, and he fixed up the list of Brigham Young’s wives quite nicely here. (now its own article). He also does a huge amount of work on Master Mahan, both on the article front and discussion front. In other words, most of the typical opposes that may apply to this user on the surface quite simply do not apply at all. Other articles he's helped to improve are: Chris Heimerdinger here and at the talk page, Thomas S. Monson [1], Mary Rogers (murderer), and many others.

This is a great user who will be an asset as an admin. I give you my word that this user will not disappoint you with the tools of an administrator. The more I look through his contributions the more impressed I become. The sooner he’s an admin, the better for Wikipedia. (This is my second-longest nomination out of 45, that should tell you how highly I think of this candidate.) Wizardman 02:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, with thanks to Wizardman for his enthusiastic nomination. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: As suggested by Wizardman, I would be very interested in helping out at WP:CFD; quite often there does seem to be a shortage of admin work being done there, and it's not uncommon for there to be a bit of a backlog. At this point, my intent is that this will be the primary area of admin work I will take part in, though I will probably do some WP:AFD work too. Being the kind of person who gets perverse satisfaction from clearing backlogs of any kind, I'd also like to help out at WP:AB CAT:AB. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I've been heavily involved in categorization, and I suppose the work I've done that I'm most fond of is getting the subcategories of Category:People by religion sorted out. When I started on it, it was a bit of a mess (e.g., there seemed to be a huge amount of confusion and inconsistency in the scheme as to whether a category like Category:Greek Orthodox Christians applied to someone who was a member of the Greek Orthodox Church or a person of Greek nationality who was also an Orthodox Christian. The solution was to have categories for both.). It took a fair bit of time and effort to get everything squared away (Category:Hindus especially stands out in my mind as having been a bit of a nightmare). Because of the nature of the work, I can't provide a "before and after" diff to demonstrate what changes I made, but I would still have to say that cleaning up these categories has been my "best" contribution. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

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: Of course; I think it's probably difficult to be involved in WP without encountering some difficulties along these lines. In the case of a dispute over editing, the talk page (either the article's or the user's) is always my first stop. I'd have to say that 99% of the time for me, the problem has been resolved with discussion there. Often, the root of the dispute is a fairly benign misunderstanding by the other party (or by me) that comes out in the discussion; seeing this happen again and again always reminds me of the underlying wisdom of WP:AGF, because I really do believe that most editors do what they do with a good faith intention to make WP better. In the perhaps 1% of cases I've encountered where a simple discussion doesn't resolve the issue, I usually like to suggest to the other party that we seek input from other editors; most users agree to this and it usually has the result of forming a multi-user consensus, which is often the best way to diffuse a dispute between two editors. (I've been involved in a very small number of disputes where I honestly did not know what my next response should have been to an editor's behavior. In one case, I simply walked away from the dispute for a period of time to give myself some time to reflect on what to do; when I returned I found that "passions had cooled" and the editor was quite conciliatory towards me. In another, I sought out some advice at WP:WQA.) In all cases, I've found that a civil and kind word to the other party usually results in a resolution much faster than an edit war or other harsher tactics would. These methods have worked well for me and I would continue to use them in the future. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Optional question from xenocidic

4. As an administrator, you will most likely have to deal with some fairly troublesome users. You'll come across some extremely vulgar language and often come under attack for your actions. And you will sometimes be tasked with considering unblock requests from the users you block. Please review the very NSFW scenario outlined at User:Xenocidic/RFAQ and describe how you would respond.

A: Since it was me who imposed the block, it should not be me who is assessing the appeal of the block, so the short answer is I do nothing, apart from waiting for another admin to assess the appeal/contact me about it. In WP:GAB, it says that "[b]y custom, the blocking administrator does not make a decision on your unblock request"; as with any decision involving a judgment call, it would be inherently unfair for me to be the judge of an appeal of one of my own decisions. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 12:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

4b. Follow up: Another admin declines the unblock request, stating While you have indeed made a couple of good edits, you have not stopped vandalising. Do you agree with their assessment?

A: Yes, I would have no problem agreeing with and supporting that decision. Although the one-week block would probably be longer than I would impose on an IP in this situation, a one-week block is not the end of the world for any user. After the block expires, they will have a chance to prove that they have truly changed their ways. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 13:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Optional Question from NuclearWarfare

5. May we please have the account names of your former accounts?

A. I've had no former accounts on WP; the previous wiki experience referred to was on non-WP wikis. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 14:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

General comments

• See Good Olfactory's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

• Links for Good Olfactory: Good Olfactory (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Good Olfactory before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Per the beautifully written nomination. Naerii 12:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
2. Support I trust Wizardman, and that is one of the best nomination statements I've seen. Good luck, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
3. Support Excellent candidate, nicely written nomination. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 12:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
4. Support. The work with categories is outstanding. Rudget (logs) 13:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
5. Support - Wants to work at CFD. Fresh. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 13:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
6. Support - somewhat weakly because I'd like to see the candidate willing to offer {{2nd chance}}'s, but the existence of this template is something I learned on the job myself, so I can't fault him for not giving me exactly the answer I was looking for. On the assumption that he'll take this into account, I trust he'll be a net positive especially in his intended areas of focus. –xeno (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC) Actually, changing to just regular 'ole support because he got the bonus points for knowing not to decline an unblock request from his own block. –xeno (talk) 13:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
7. Support. Cannot see anything at all to worry me here. nancy ^(talk) 13:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
8. Support Always calm, thoughtful, thorough & ready to be pursuaded to change his mind at CFD. Will be an excellent admin. Johnbod (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
9. Support without reservation** - I've been favorably impressed by Good Olfactory ever since he first started taking part in the proceedings at CFD back in early March of this year. What first caught my attention was the fact that he immediately adopted use of a CFD-notification template that User:Black Falcon and I had developed for notifying the creators of Categories that a CFD has been opened. Considering that the CFD guidelines don't currently require such notification, and that many editors don't do so voluntarily, his use of the template -- especially as a fairly new Wikipedian -- said to me, "Here's a guy who respects his fellow editors, and really values fairness and transparency."
   Wizardman has already noted GO's prodigious industriousness -- and no, that isn't hyperbole. :) What's more important, as far as I'm concerned, is that he has consistently demonstrated through his participation in numerous CFD discussions that he has the temperament and good judgement that are the bedrock qualities of a first-rate admin. Oh, and one other thing: he has a good sense of humor, and doesn't take himself tooooo seriously. (I still crack up from time to time when I think of one particular self-deprecating comment he made at the very end of a rather boisterous CFD.) In closing, my only regret is that (as a non-admin) I wasn't able to write the nomination myself. Cgingold (talk) 14:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
   **Actually, I do have one very slight reservation: We may (to some extent) lose his participation in CFD discussions. That would be a real shame. Cgingold (talk) 14:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
10. Two tickets for "The Dark Knight," please. Oh, wrong queue. Seriously...Support for a fine candidate. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
11. Strong support. Well-reasoned additions to CFD discussions, and as Cgingold said, very helpful to other users with the use of the cfd notification template. Will make an excellent admin. --Kbdank71 15:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
12. Support. Wizardman has found another good one. Excellent candidate, no hesitation on my part. Keeper ǀ 76 15:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
13. Support - yes! weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 15:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
14. Support Anyone who can contribute so regularly and so productively to what can sometimes be a contentious topic (all things LDS) can handle the tools. Protonk (talk) 15:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
15. Support. After taking a look through his contribs and stats, I'd have to agree, excellent candidate. Good communication skills, experienced, knowledgeable, works at the oft-overlooked CFD. Useight (talk) 16:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
16. Support - Who wouldn't be impressed by his category work? :) I would have liked to see a tad more article writing experience (everything else only serves to support article writing, so yes, experience there is important!) but the candidate seems to have a good grasp on guidelines and policies and has worked on some controversial material. I think he'll do some good things with the mop. The nominating statement helped win me over, too. Okiefromokla ^questions? 16:19, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
17. Support per Okiefromokla, loving the category work. Good luck, --Cameron* 16:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
18. Support I am a bit late, so I have to say "as per nom/above" even though it should not count as a valid support criteria, so let me say: I looked through the contributions and I agree we need someone to care for Cats and CFDs. So he will be a great asset to the project and I could not find a single negative contribution to cast doubt on this assessment. Also, I liked the answers to the questions, he sounds like a sensible guy. So#Why 16:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
19. I wouldn't normally bother with this pile-on support at this stage, but I just want to comment on an excellent answer to Q3. Olaf Davis | Talk 16:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
20. Strong support per excellent nomination, equally excellent response to Q3, and the fact that the unique nature of this user's focus (i.e., religious categorization) makes this user a clear asset to the project. Cosmic Latte (talk) 16:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
21. Support. Synergy 16:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
22. Support — Lots of clue. Good luck, —Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 17:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC).
23. I strongly support this candidacy. Unfortunately, I don't have anything new and clever to add to what the Wizardman, Kbdank71, Cgingold and Johnbod have already said. Could definitely use the extra buttons to help the project. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
24. Support. Although I'm unsure what assistance Olfactory is planning to provide at WP:AB (Wikipedia:Autobiography). Axl (talk) 18:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC) Oops; I meant CAT:AB (administrative backlog), of course. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
25. Support, seems pretty sane, good work on categories. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
26. Support. Good luck at WP:CFD. Malinaccier (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
27. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 19:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
28. Sane people always welcome at CFD; sane people with the mop even more so. 'Bout time! Bencherlite^Talk 20:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
29. I think everone has witnessed Good Olfactory's excellent contributions to categories etc. Oh, and what an interesting username! --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 20:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
30. Strong support as nom. (Very impressive that I leave for only a little while and it's at 30 already.) Wizardman 20:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
31. Support Looks like a good user, great nom statement by a trustworthy user. Good luck helping over at CSD. Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 21:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs with city names in the title, i.e. use of WP:UNENCYC, but good argument at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Lance de Masi. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 20:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)