Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Cyphoidbomb 2

Edit stats

Edit stats from here:

Cyphoidbomb •  en-two.iwiki.icu

Block log · Global user contributions · Global Account Manager · SUL Info · Pageviews in userspace · 
General statistics [hide]    
User ID:	8363265
User groups:	autoreviewer, reviewer, rollbacker, user, autoconfirmed
First edit:	Nov 21, 2008, 2:14 AM
Latest edit:	Jul 19, 2015, 4:07 PM
Live edits:	44,416
Deleted edits:	1,138
Total edits:  	45,554
Edits in the past 24 hours:	86
Edits in the past 7 days:	635
Edits in the past 30 days:	2,727
Edits in the past 365 days:	25,819
Ø number of edits per day:	18.7

Live edits:
Unique pages edited:	10,413
Pages created:	1,584
Pages moved:	46
Ø edits per page:	4.3
Ø change per page (bytes):	extended
Files uploaded:	1
Files uploaded (Commons):	0
(Semi-)automated edits:	14,391
Reverted edits:	267
Edits with summary:	44,241
Number of minor edits (tagged):	4,078
Number of edits (<20 bytes):	extended
Number of edits (>1000 bytes):	extended
Actions:
Thank:	869 x
Approve:	287 x
Patrol:	706 x
Admin actions
Block:	0 x
Protect:	0 x
Delete:	0 x
Import:	0 x
过错:
(Re)blocked:	0 x
Longest block: –
Current block: –
SUL editcounter
(approximate):	latest
► enwiki 	45,468 	+53 minutes
commonswiki 	50 	+16 days
simplewiki 	26 	> 30 days
wikidatawiki 	9 	> 30 days
mediawikiwiki 	3 	> 30 days
frwiki 	3 	> 30 days
enwikinews 	1 	> 30 days
metawiki 	1 	> 30 days
enwikiquote 	1 	> 30 days
40 others	0	+29 days
Total edits	45,562

bla bla
Namespace Totals [hide]
	일반 문서 	29,890 	67.3%
	Talk 	2,453 	5.5%
	User 	176 	0.4%
	User talk 	7,620 	17.2%
	Wikipedia 	3,079 	6.9%
	Wikipedia talk 	796 	1.8%
	File 	1 	0%
	MediaWiki talk 	15 	0%
	Template 	181 	0.4%
	Template talk 	149 	0.3%
	Help 	1 	0%
	Category 	14 	0%
	Category talk 	11 	0%
	Portal 	2 	0%
	Draft 	21 	0%
	Draft talk 	7 	0%
	
Year counts [hide]
2008 	1	
2010 	121	
2011 	488	
2012 	1,005	
2013 	7,145	
2014 	19,100	
2015 	16,556	

Time card [hide]
Timecard
Latest edit (global) - Edits in the past 30 days, max. 10 / Wiki [hide]
Date  ↓ 	Wiki  ↓ 	Links  ↓ 	Page title  ↓ 	Comment  ↓
2015-07-19, 16:07 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Sunbow Entertainment 	Filled in 2 bare reference(s) with [[:en:WP:REFILL|reFill...
2015-07-19, 16:07 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Sunbow Entertainment 	/* Company overview */ +ref, but still need refs.
2015-07-19, 16:02 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Drishyam 	Undid revision 672129372 by [[Special:Contributions/115.2...
2015-07-19, 16:01 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Little Einsteins 	Undid revision 672128569 by [[Special:Contributions/RDLX1...
2015-07-19, 15:58 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Back to School with Franklin 	Filled in 1 bare reference(s) with [[:en:WP:REFILL|reFill...
2015-07-19, 15:57 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Back to School with Franklin 	Article has been unsourced since 2008. Ta-da, it has a ne...
2015-07-19, 15:54 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Back to School with Franklin 	Reverted 1 edit by [[Special:Contributions/2601:283:4201:...
2015-07-19, 15:49 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	Erik Per Sullivan 	Reverted 1 edit by [[Special:Contributions/104.58.94.161|...
2015-07-19, 15:47 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	:7aum Arivu 	+reflist to prevent reference bleedover
2015-07-19, 15:47 	enwiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	:7aum Arivu 	/* "Declared a hit" */ new section
2015-07-02, 18:20 	commonswiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	:Poet and Journalist Jeton Kelmendi.jpg 	([[Help:RenameLink|Script]]): Requesting renaming this fi...
2015-06-19, 23:31 	dewiki 	( diff · log · top ) 	:DieSuperNudel/Ninjago 	Reverted 2 edits by [[Special:Contributions/2600:100B:B01...

Month counts [hide]
2008-11 	1	
2010-05 	15	
2010-06 	35	
2010-07 	23	
2010-08 	13	
2010-09 	5	
2010-10 	6	
2010-11 	2	
2010-12 	22	
2011-01 	18	
2011-02 	23	
2011-03 	83	
2011-04 	78	
2011-05 	35	
2011-06 	30	
2011-07 	57	
2011-08 	40	
2011-09 	40	
2011-10 	27	
2011-11 	14	
2011-12 	43	
2012-01 	23	
2012-02 	5	
2012-03 	24	
2012-04 	82	
2012-05 	54	
2012-06 	65	
2012-07 	57	
2012-08 	64	
2012-09 	71	
2012-10 	212	
2012-11 	190	
2012-12 	158	
2013-01 	319	
2013-02 	225	
2013-03 	346	
2013-04 	582	
2013-05 	532	
2013-06 	445	
2013-07 	972	
2013-08 	775	
2013-09 	734	
2013-10 	1,076	
2013-11 	414	
2013-12 	725	
2014-01 	1,378	
2014-02 	1,727	
2014-03 	2,391	
2014-04 	779	
2014-05 	1,122	
2014-06 	1,381	
2014-07 	1,849	
2014-08 	1,503	
2014-09 	1,585	
2014-10 	1,583	
2014-11 	1,907	
2014-12 	1,895	
2015-01 	2,790	
2015-02 	1,622	
2015-03 	2,349	
2015-04 	2,756	
2015-05 	2,713	
2015-06 	2,646	
2015-07 	1,680	

Top edited pages [hide]
일반 문서
335 	The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge Out of Water 	log · page history · topedits
319 	Fanboy & Chum Chum 	log · page history · topedits
243 	List of Fanboy & Chum Chum episodes 	log · page history · topedits
242 	Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) 	log · page history · topedits
214 	List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon 	log · page history · topedits
186 	List of Bollywood films of 2015 	log · page history · topedits
175 	The Amazing World of Gumball 	log · page history · topedits
167 	SpongeBob SquarePants (season 9) 	log · page history · topedits
158 	List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) episodes 	log · page history · topedits
143 	List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) characters 	log · page history · topedits
140 	List of T.U.F.F. Puppy episodes 	log · page history · topedits
129 	List of Regular Show characters 	log · page history · topedits
127 	The Fairly OddParents (season 9) 	log · page history · topedits
125 	Oggy and the Cockroaches 	log · page history · topedits
123 	The Fairly OddParents 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
Talk
44 	Talk:SpongeBob SquarePants 	log · page history · topedits
41 	Talk:PK (film) 	log · page history · topedits
35 	Talk:Drishyam 	log · page history · topedits
31 	Talk:Anita Sarkeesian 	log · page history · topedits
31 	Talk:Mad Max: Fury Road 	log · page history · topedits
31 	Talk:Jurassic World 	log · page history · topedits
31 	Talk:List of Bollywood films of 2014 	log · page history · topedits
27 	Talk:American Dad! 	log · page history · topedits
26 	Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) 	log · page history · topedits
25 	Talk:Balochistan, Pakistan 	log · page history · topedits
25 	Talk:Wonder Pets 	log · page history · topedits
24 	Talk:The Big Bang Theory 	log · page history · topedits
24 	Talk:List of Cyberchase episodes 	log · page history · topedits
22 	Talk:Kip McKean 	log · page history · topedits
22 	Talk:List of programs broadcast by Toonami 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
User
43 	User:Cyphoidbomb/Vietnam Disney Vandal 	log · page history · topedits
26 	User:Cyphoidbomb/Marhc Vandal 	log · page history · topedits
20 	User:Cyphoidbomb 	log · page history · topedits
16 	User:Cyphoidbomb/common.js 	log · page history · topedits
4 	User:JonathanmJones/sandbox 	log · page history · topedits
4 	User:MartinoGameMaster 	log · page history · topedits
3 	User:Hammersoft 	log · page history · topedits
3 	User:Cyphoidbomb/twinkleoptions.js 	log · page history · topedits
3 	User:ChipmunkRaccoon 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:Robot19332/sandbox 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:SummerPhD 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:Nellie14 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:Nicky Haugh/sandbox 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:Shazbaz12/N'everland (Web-Series) draft 	log · page history · topedits
2 	User:Cyphoidbomb/vector.js 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
User talk
637 	User talk:Cyphoidbomb 	log · page history · topedits
154 	User talk:AussieLegend 	log · page history · topedits
51 	User talk:Ponyo 	log · page history · topedits
47 	User talk:Koala15 	log · page history · topedits
42 	User talk:Smalljim 	log · page history · topedits
41 	User talk:Geraldo Perez 	log · page history · topedits
31 	User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom 	log · page history · topedits
30 	User talk:Materialscientist 	log · page history · topedits
30 	User talk:Hammersoft 	log · page history · topedits
29 	User talk:HJ Mitchell 	log · page history · topedits
26 	User talk:Peace is contagious 	log · page history · topedits
23 	User talk:Rtkat3 	log · page history · topedits
22 	User talk:Mark Arsten 	log · page history · topedits
22 	User talk:SummerPhD 	log · page history · topedits
18 	User talk:Mrschimpf 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
Wikipedia
691 	Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism 	log · page history · topedits
535 	Wikipedia:Help desk 	log · page history · topedits
393 	Wikipedia:Requests for page protection 	log · page history · topedits
277 	Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 	log · page history · topedits
52 	Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HoshiNoKaabii2000 	log · page history · topedits
48 	Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cyphoidbomb 	log · page history · topedits
37 	Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention 	log · page history · topedits
36 	Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KuhnstylePro 	log · page history · topedits
35 	Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language 	log · page history · topedits
32 	Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/FAQ 	log · page history · topedits
32 	Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabriella~four.3-6 	log · page history · topedits
29 	Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rodolfootoya12 	log · page history · topedits
27 	Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring 	log · page history · topedits
23 	Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) 	log · page history · topedits
22 	Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brightify 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
Wikipedia talk
246 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television 	log · page history · topedits
90 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film 	log · page history · topedits
88 	Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Television 	log · page history · topedits
32 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force 	log · page history · topedits
21 	Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Subtle Vandalism Taskforce 	log · page history · topedits
21 	Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser 	log · page history · topedits
16 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disney 	log · page history · topedits
16 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam 	log · page history · topedits
16 	Wikipedia talk:Twinkle 	log · page history · topedits
15 	Wikipedia talk:Spoiler 	log · page history · topedits
14 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies 	log · page history · topedits
13 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga 	log · page history · topedits
13 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music 	log · page history · topedits
12 	Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard 	log · page history · topedits
11 	Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
File
1 	File:University of Michigan basketball player James Mandler.jpg 	log · page history · topedits
MediaWiki talk
13 	MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist 	log · page history · topedits
2 	MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist 	log · page history · topedits
Template
21 	Template:Nick Jr. 	log · page history · topedits
13 	Template:Nickelodeon original series and Nicktoons 	log · page history · topedits
13 	Template:Disney Junior 	log · page history · topedits
10 	Template:Cartoon Network 	log · page history · topedits
9 	Template:Nicktoons 	log · page history · topedits
9 	Template:Nickelodeon Movies 	log · page history · topedits
8 	Template:Infobox television/doc 	log · page history · topedits
7 	Template:Beauty and the Beast 	log · page history · topedits
7 	Template:Disney Channel Original Series 	log · page history · topedits
7 	Template:Cartoon Network programming 	log · page history · topedits
6 	Template:Tarzan 	log · page history · topedits
5 	Template:Comedy Central programming 	log · page history · topedits
5 	Template:Disneyland 	log · page history · topedits
5 	Template:Tom and Jerry 	log · page history · topedits
3 	Template:DuckTales 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
Template talk
94 	Template talk:Infobox television 	log · page history · topedits
14 	Template talk:Infobox film 	log · page history · topedits
11 	Template talk:Infobox television channel 	log · page history · topedits
7 	Template talk:Infobox person 	log · page history · topedits
5 	Template talk:Autobiography 	log · page history · topedits
4 	Template talk:Infobox character 	log · page history · topedits
3 	Template talk:Sockpuppet 	log · page history · topedits
2 	Template talk:Comedy Central programming 	log · page history · topedits
2 	Template talk:User humility 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:Disney Junior 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:Infobox television episode 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:The Amazing World of Gumball 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:Quote 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:Infobox given name 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Template talk:Nickelodeon original series and Nicktoons 	log · page history · topedits
-More-
Help
1 	Help:Dealing with coordinated vandalism 	log · page history · topedits
Category
1 	Category:Recess (TV series) 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of WangsDaringsFun 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Cartoon Network original programs 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:SpongeBob SquarePants 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Fictional Shaolin kung fu practitioners 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Ben 10 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Fictional shaolin kung fu practitioners 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Mad TV seasons 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Television series created by Dan Schneider 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Companies that have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Lists of Disney Channel shows' episodes 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category:Animal rights media 	log · page history · topedits
Category talk
5 	Category talk:Cartoon Network original programs 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:Hip hop television 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:Fictional Shaolin kung fu practitioners 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:Fictional shaolin kung fu practitioners 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:LGBT-related animation 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:Wikipedians looking for help 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Category talk:Shapeshifting in fiction 	log · page history · topedits
Portal
1 	Portal:Music/DateOfBirth/August 8 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Portal:The Simpsons/Selected episode/23 	log · page history · topedits
Draft
5 	Draft:Brianne Siddall 	log · page history · topedits
3 	Draft:Alejandro Gortazar 	log · page history · topedits
2 	Draft:Broome County Almshouse House 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Tiro Tyro Diepo 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:John David Cheever 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Franklin Russell Millin, Jr. 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Bell's Asthma Medicine 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:St. Patrick's Girls' High School, Karachi 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Wilmot Gibbes DeSaussure 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Pagoda Avalokitesvara 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Amando Clemente 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Raquel Amparo 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Theodorus Henricus Franciscus Klompé 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft:Jason Adelman 	log · page history · topedits
Draft talk
4 	Draft talk:Brianne Siddall 	log · page history · topedits
2 	Draft talk:HealthUnlocked 	log · page history · topedits
1 	Draft talk:Raquel Amparo 	log · page history · topedits


(Semi-)automated edits (approximate) [hide]
11,807 	Twinkle
2,584 	AutoWikiBrowser
0 	NPWatcher
0 	Igloo
0 	HotCat
0 	FurMe
0 	WPCleaner
0 	Popups
0 	Articles For Creation tool
0 	Huggle
0 	STiki

Thoughts

His AfD numbers seem good, albeit a bit on the side of delete. Not sure if that's an issue. He does SPI, which is good, very good, and needed. I see people waiting for others to !vote. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:09, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I would probably ask that people interested in my AfD stats please scrutinize after March 2014, after my first RFA failed. I was criticized for poor AfD instincts and I believe I have remedied that. I feel pretty good about my performance since then. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:44, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll investigate the record. Personally, I don't think that having more !keep than !delete votes (or vice versa) is particularly germane to one's suitability for adminship unless they frequently rely on misinterpreting policy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:06, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I think that less than 50 votes in AfD in 16 months is not much participation. The record seems to be good, though, on first sight. Kraxler (talk) 13:38, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Where is the AfD information you're talking about? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: here. via AfD stats (linked to from my User page, if anyone's interested...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:22, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@IJBall: This is the second time I've needed to ask for this. I need to update one of my sandboxes and have links to all of these tools. Thank you for this. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:02, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

In every RfA there is a box labelled "RfA/RfB tool box" (between the sections "Discussion" and "Support") which has a button "AfD votes". Just hit the button, and the AfD stats appear (if the tool is working). Kraxler (talk) 02:33, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, though no Requested move stats analysis tool, unfortunately. I recently asked about that, but it sounds like it's not going to happen unless some other coder takes up the challenge... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination stats

Is there an easy way to access speedy deletion stats other than manually looking through the user's edits, if the user does not have a CSD log (which Cyphoidbomb does not)? Scottywong's edit summary search tool appears to not be working, and that was my solution to quickly look for speedy deletion nominations. Inks.LWC (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes you can see from their user talk page contributions. Twinkle adds a usertalk warning for speedy deletion nominations, and they are frequently added manually as well. Also, declined speedy deletion nominations still show up in the contributions - and sometimes in explanations from the declining admins on the nominator's talk page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think I've done too many speedy deletes since my first RfA. Kinda wanted to take a more conservative approach to deletes per community suggestion. Most CSDs I've done in the last year probably relate to WP:REVERTBAN situations. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I was hoping for something a little more automated than searching through the pages of contributions, although searching through 2,500 user talk contributionss is a bit more manageable than the 11,000+ article contributionss (nice catch... I hadn't thought about the fact that user talk contributions would be significantly less than article contributions). Not ideal, but I got a good enough picture of what I was looking for. Inks.LWC (talk) 23:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Discussion moved from oppose section

The content below was moved here from the oppose section of the RfA page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

1. Oppose, Cyphoidbomb has only created 4 articles total, none above start class. GregJackP Boomer! 06:02, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   But mainspace edits shows 67.3% out of 29,874 total. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:17, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   Understood. I'm not asking for a Prolific Article Creator of the Year award, I'm asking for tools to make the work I do easier for myself and for my peers who need more admins familiar with television and film issues and with related vandalism. I've helped protect countless GA and FA articles. Someone has to take care of the babies while new ones are being created. It's entirely a labor distribution issue. I donate the better part of a dozen hours each day to this project and dismissing my candidacy based on an arbitrary metric doesn't seem entirely reasonable. It's like me criticizing an article creator for not really helping to suppress vandalism. Everybody has a different path here. These are volunteer positions. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:34, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I'm sorry, but I generally do not support candidates for admin who have not created at least one GA level content and I prefer candidates have experience in FA content. I'm sure that you are a great guy, donate a lot of time to the project, and do a lot of good. But the project is about content creation and way too many admins don't have a background in content creation. There are a substantial number of Arbs who have created fewer than 25 articles. I think that hurts the project, and I won't support giving a non-content creator the mop. It doesn't have to be a lot of creation experience, but there has to be some. GregJackP Boomer! 07:08, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   It hurts the project more giving content-creators the mop and having them perform various tasks that do not result in them creating content. I would argue that giving prolific content-creators the mop hinders the project more than anything, as they are no longer devoting their time to creating content. See this. Ж ^{(Cncmaster) T/C/AVA/RfA-C} 08:02, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I don't see how lack of content creation is a reason for opposing promotion since that is something any editor can do and isn't really a skill needed to be an admin. That an editor hasn't created GA content doesn't mean he won't be a good admin. We should be looking at all of the skills needed and if an editor possesses a suitable range, then he should pass. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I disagree that content creation . . . is something any editor can do, that has not been my experience. See Kudpung's statement below. A person who would patrol content should be able to create it. Second, Cyphoidbomb made the effort to fix his AfD problem after the last RfA, but didn't do much to fix the content creation problem that was also noted by many editors. That, in my view, shows what he thinks about content creation. Finally, if you don't see how content creation is connected to being an admin, that's fine—don't use it as part of your criteria—but don't tell me I can't use it as part of my criteria. GregJackP Boomer! 14:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I want to echo that I think this is a terrible reason to oppose an admin candidate. While many carry the opinion that article creation is important for an admin I think it is like requiring a janitor to know how to run the company, it really has nothing to do with the job at hand. We need people to do routine maintenance and any skills they have editing articles needs to be kept very separate from their admin job. Chillum 14:33, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   Then don't use it as part of your criteria. I think that it is critically important. GregJackP Boomer! 14:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I have no intention in using it as part of my criteria. I was remarking on your criteria. You are also welcome to comment on my opinions. Chillum 16:37, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   It is not a good idea for non-pilots to supervise pilots, which is why the head of the Air Force is a pilot (who likely doesn't fly much any more). It is not a good idea for a non-police officer to supervise police, which is why Chiefs started as regular officers (but don't make many arrests as Chief). It is not a good idea for judges to be non-lawyers. It is not a good idea for a principal, headmaster, or school superintendent to have never taught. I can go on and on with examples. If you are going to supervise Wikipedia and its content creators, you need to have created content. GregJackP Boomer! 17:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   We are not supervisors or police. We are janitors. Policy specifically limits our authority to the policies and consensus set by the community. A lot of aircraft mechanics don't fly planes. Chillum 17:19, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   How many normal, non-admin editors have been on ArbCom? GregJackP Boomer! 18:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   No idea. Why don't you help me understand your point. Chillum 21:13, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   None. Every Arb member has been an admin. Admins are the ones that run WP. The statement about "no big deal" and "janitors" is BS. Admins can pretty much do what they want to do, without much repercussions, and I want admins who think like content creators, or at least remember what it was like. So I oppose those who have not taken articles to GA/FA. It's part of what I look for. But cheer up, I'm almost always on the losing side of an RfA. GregJackP Boomer! 03:34, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

   No wonder we disagree, you believe a bunch of stuff that simply is not true. If I could do what I want to do without much repercussions this would be a different website. Chillum 03:39, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

   Although I understand what you're saying, Greg, and I know I won't be able to sway you, some of your examples involve very specialized fields that have death as actual consequences. You don't have to be a restaranteur to work the french fry bucket. Your teacher analogy is off. A closer parallel to my situation would be that you believe a teacher, in order to instruct children on how to read and write, must have written at least N books themselves. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:27, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I disagree, but there is nothing wrong with people disagreeing on issues. I want to state that my opposition is not a comment on you personally, I just believe that content creation is that important to the project. GregJackP Boomer! 18:21, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   I generally do not support candidates for admin who have not created at least one GA - I've vacillated on this issue myself, but this formulation of it is remarkable. You expect candidates to have created at least one article that is now GA-level? Not "merely" developed an existing article from a stub to GA? That would seem to encourage development of low-priority topics over those with more reader interest or perceived importance. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

   No, I'm good with someone else creating it and then they take it to GA or FA. It doesn't even still have to be GA/FA, just so long as they have done it. Created was probably the wrong language to use. GregJackP Boomer! 03:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

   Is anyone opposed to hatting most of this conversation? Or moving it to talk? It takes up a lot of space and basically says the same thing, that some don't agree with my reasoning. GregJackP Boomer! 04:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

   See WP:NOTENOUGH and Wikipedia:Articlecountitis. Opposing someone just because none of his/her articles are GA/FA, while ignoring the rest of the edits by the candidate, is unhelpful. It is a common mistake by opposers of RfA's. --TL22 (talk) 13:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

   @ToonLucas22:, thank you for your input. I'm so glad that commented. It is not the number of GA/FA articles, it is the fact that he hasn't done any, as in absolutely no idea of what the process involves. On top of that, he makes a copy-paste move of a copyvio? That's not the action of an experienced content creator, and it cannot be the action of an admin. GregJackP Boomer! 15:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

• Nobody is expecting a janitor to weave a Persian carpet or lay polished Norwegian pine, but janitors should at least know what a clean floor should look like. And if they don't, it casts doubts on their ability to keep the peanut gallery out of the bike sheds.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Please explain

I'm trying to figure out the background behind this WordGirl copyvio controversy. I want to cast my !vote in this RfA, but it's a massive time sink to wade through all the lengthy discussion in the oppose section. I'm beginning to gather that some content was pasted from another Wikipedia article, but I'm very confused about what exactly was copied. How could plots of episodes from a previous season be copied into an article about a later season? After all, the plots of episodes from different seasons have different plots. --Biblioworm 01:31, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

From what I've gathered while lurking here, it seems Cyphoidbomb went to create a new season page. He copied and pasted the introductory stuff at the beginning of the list article from the previous season, which was apparently a copyvio of a page on the internet. As a result Cyphoidbomb unknowingly created a COPYVIO by copying out parts of COPYVIO.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 01:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It appears, from this edit, that he copied season content from another article (season 6 content), and removed an incorrect season (season 7). However, he also added season 5 and 6 content to the article and others, which is a blatant word-for-word copyvio from this source, which is where he appears to have directly obtained it from, in violation of copyright policy. Spaghetti07205 (talk) 01:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

My understanding is that the pages for various seasons were poorly organized, including some in which episodes from more than one season were listed on incorrect pages. Cyphoidbomb cleaned up the episode guides by cut-and-pasting material here and there so that each season was on its own page. In the process, Cyphoidbomb moved copyvio material which had already been submitted by other contributors. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

This is messy (in part because once the copyvios were spotted, the edits needed to clearly understand this had to be deleted/suppressed). Simple starting point: the WordGirl articles were screwed up, and the contents of the season articles didn't line up properly with the actual seasons. Cyphoidbomb tried to straighten them out, by cutting up the existing articles and moving misplaced content into the appropriate articles. So far, so good. But he didn't follows the licensing requirements properly (the license we use on Wikipedia requires that content be properly attributed, which becomes a problem when text is moved from one article to another, and thereby separated from its original editing history). That's very complicated' it's easy for an editor to mess up the first time they try to do it; and it's not the issue that's provoking all the opposition. A bigger problem is that Cyphoidbomb didn't recognize that at least one huge block of text was a copyright violation, originally added by another editor. And it was a really obvious one, of a kind which should have been spotted immediately by an editor as familiar with the subject area as Cyphoidbomb is. I've cleaned up a batch of similar problems; it's time-consuming and tedious as hell, but it needs to be done. For me, Cyphoidbomb's reaction is the biggest problem. Rather than acknowledging that he made a bad mistake, and directly taking responsibility for it, his reaction has been Hey, I didn't do it on purpose, lighten up and leave my RFA alone. Ironically, if he'd immediately owned up to screwing up rather than trying to minimize it and explain it away, much of the opposition wouldn't be there. But he didn't shoulder responsibility as he should have, and several of his followup comments make it pretty clear he doesn't understand or accept that. And that indicates, to a significant number of users, that he's not yet ready for admin responsibilities. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 02:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

That's not exactly what happened – basically, AFAICT, this blew up during a time when Cyphoidbomb wasn't even online, and a substantial portion of the voter base when into a frenzy about it, and switched votes, before Cyphoidbomb even had a chance to explain. Then AussieLegend tried to come to Cyphoidbomb's defense in his absence, which gave even more voters an excuse to "go to 'No'". Bottom line: This whole experience just reinforces my perception that it isn't worth it for most people to go through an RfA – we've had three RfA's like this in the last month... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Who were the other 2? I probably already know the answer to this, but only for one of them.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:31, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

You... ...and Rich Farmbrough. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think my RfA was that bad. It was certainly unique in that it probably set the record high on the number of questions asked. Funny enough I have more people willing to nominate me for the next RfA, including an opposer. :D But I did get useful advice from most of the opposers. All in all, I didn't feel bad in the least bit going out of that RfA, and will happily put myself through the process again.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Biblioworm. The matter is, from my perspective, irritatingly simple, and yet irritatingly irritating, because of the undue drama it has caused. So thank you for requesting a clear explanation. The List of WordGirl episodes articles were a mess. Somehow the kids got confused or something, and they started jumbling up seasons. Let me try to break this down.

In this version of the Season 3 episode list you can see episodes bearing episode codes in the range of 301-413. The 400-413 episodes belong in Season 4. (Please see this reference as it establishes a pattern.)

In this version of the Season 4 episode list we clearly see episode codes in the 501-613 range. These episodes belong in S5 and S6 articles.

In this version of the Season 5 episode list we clearly see episode codes in the 701-813 range. These episodes belong in S7 and S8 articles. These articles didn't exist, so I had to create them.

My only goals in my edit flurry circa July 9, 2015, was to get the data matched up to the right articles. That was an ugly mess and needed to be fixed to provide a articles of bare minimum utility. So I took data from S3, and moved it to S4, then took the extra data in S4 and moved it to S5 and S6, then took the data from S6 and created and propagated S7 and S8. My primary concern was the data, because I deal with a tremendous amount of subtle vandalism. Vandalizing numbers is extremely popular as is tweaking show titles and episodes orders. (Examples available upon request.) I double checked the air dates and the titles and the episode numbers and the ordering, because these are the most common points of vandalism I experience. The copyvios weren't on my radar, because they only represent about 1% of the problem content I deal with. I revert when I see them in my watchlist and they contain rhetorical questions, exclamations and such, but I wasn't specifically checking for them in this run, only trying to get the data into the right articles.

In my efforts to get these trains back on the tracks, I made two mistakes: I forgot to attribute the source of the content in my copy/paste edit summary (I have since remedied that) and I did not check to see if the prose content contained any copyright violations. The Season 7 article was deleted for containing inadvertent copyright violations. I have since recreated the article from scratch minus the violations without urging, so the 'doesn't shoulder responsibility' claim is bunk. I have also properly attributed this article.

People on the oppose side have gotten the copyvio thing under their skin and have accused me of never reading WP:COPYVIO. Within the following collapse are 14 examples from my last 1000 edits that indicate I have a strong understanding of copyright concerns. There is also an example of me asking learned editors at the Help Desk for assistance when I needed an education. The suggestion that I have no or limited knowledge of copyvio issues is a perception that is easily corrected.

Thanks for the query! Sorry for the boldface. Hope this helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanations. After reviewing all the comments and diffs provided, I have arrived at the conclusion that this copyvio issue was an unfortunate oversight by Cyphoid which is being blown far beyond appropriate proportions. I will not oppose due to this alone, but I of course still need to do my standard checks on the remainder of his contributions. --Biblioworm 20:38, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Post-closure comment

I forgot to check back here before it closed. Yes, I would have reversed my oppose, based on the counter-argument someone provided.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  18:36, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

SMcCandlish, it will be noted in the official record that you were on the correct side of history. :) Thanks for your open-mindedness. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:01, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Heh. More a matter of "this turned out to be illustrative of why one should pay attention to RfAs one has weighed in on and not just walk away." I usually do remember to come back, and it's not fair to object and then not listen to rationales against the objection. I'm opinionated and forthright in expressing my views, but I try to be a model of reason around here, and reason requires weighing not ignoring evidence.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  19:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)