Wikisource:Administrators/Archives/Tannertsf

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive collecting requests for restricted access by Tannertsf. See current discussion or the archives index.

Tannertsf[edit]

2011-05 nomination (unsuccessful)[edit]

Tannertsf (talkcontribs) • enWS activityGlobal

I am nominating myself for an administrator position because I feel I have been a great contributor to Wikisource on many different books and projects. I feel that I could use some of the admin tools for the purpose of bettering Wikisource and I would not use them overbearingly. I am on Wikisource for, on average, around 3-5 hours each day.

Question, are you asking for admin rights because it will allow you to better Wikisource or your classroom? RE:Wikisource:Scriptorium#revert_help & Wikisource:Administrators'_noticeboard#Advice_please:_Wiping_Outlines_of_European_History, if your experiment at Index:Outlines of European History.djvu works out well you might be able to answer both, but currently it would seem you might have conflicts. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

In a way, both. - Tannertsf (talk) 00:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Support: I believe he should be given these tools because 1) he is a teacher and could use these tools to better his "education", and 2) he has shown a wide range of activity throughout this site that seems good. - Mackenziemrk (talk) 15:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Question Mackenziemrk are you voting for Tannertsf because of off wikisource actives, or because you have been watching his activities here on Wikisource and you think he meets or exceeds the needs and excpecations in Wikisource:Adminship? JeepdaySock (talk) 16:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I am voting for him because of mostly his activities on Wikisource. - Mackenziemrk (talk) 17:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Discusion[edit]

  • Comment we generally don't award adminship to provide support for off wiki activities. For instance we would not give w:Bill Gates adminship in order to make w:Microsoft a better company. I am not likely to support Tannertsf for admin in an effort to improve his classroom activities. I would support for the benefit of Wikisource, though currently it looks like the primary benefit would be for classroom with the chance of some residual benefit to Wikisource (or not). Tannertsf seems like a great editor who has helped on several works, and hopefully will continue to do so. There is a project w:Wikipedia:Campus Ambassadors that works to create a bridge between schools and Wikipedia. JeepdaySock (talk) 16:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Archive comment - self withdrawal of nomination [1]

2011-07 nomination (unsuccessful)[edit]

The following discussion is closed: I'm closing this nomination as unsuccessful. No consensus emerged to grant Tannertsf sysop tools and discussion has halted --BirgitteSB 15:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Tannertsf (talkcontribs) • enWS activityGlobal

I think that User:Tannertsf should be an Administrator here, so I am nominating him. He has helped we with learning Wikisource, and his edits are impressive. I know that I haven't been on here long, but I see that he is good and could use the tools of an admin well. - Lucyrocks=) (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Support - From what I've seen, Tannertsf is dedicated, hardworking, polite, and knows the system. - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Provisional Support (I have some questions) - First, I have interacted with Tannertsf in the past and s/he does indeed seem dedicated and hardworking. Most of Tannertsf's edits are in Page space (65%) and, following a random sampling, it appears to be good work. A quick and dirty calculation indicates about 300 edits per month (since joining in September 2010). Tannertsf has made some requests in Scriptorium as a teacher regarding selected Index pages; it is reasonable that administrator abilities may be useful in similar circumstances.

    Now the questions:-

    1. SUL isn't showing any edits on Wikipedia, which seems unusual. Is this true? Do you have any other identity on Wikimedia?
    2. I have deleted proofread pages in the past at your request. If you had the power to delete pages yourself, how would you handle this?

    - AdamBMorgan (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

    AdamBMorgan: To answer your questions, I used to have an old account on here (4-5 years ago). I "fell off the map" and in 2010 made a Wikipedia account under this name, where I edited on various articles, but they were very small fix-ups on errors. I found my way back to Wikisource during my researching to find a text from Roman History ... and I've been hooked since. No other accounts except at Commons (for uploading some of my projects (djvu's) and pics for them). If I had that power to delete pages, I would use it only if something I did went very wrong. - Tannertsf (talk) 21:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
    When you say "made a Wikipedia account under this name" (my emphasis) due you mean "Tannertsf"? I ask because w:Special:Contributions/Tannertsf shows no contributions at all. I don't mean anything by this, everything I've ever seen from you appears to be entirely in good faith, I'm just a little paranoid after a previous time I voted. (I'm OK with your assurance regarding deletions.) - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
    To answer this question, I can honestly say I'm not really sure what I did in the September-November timeframe last year. Personal family things were going on, so I don't remember exactly what I did. I did record some edits on Wikipedia, but it might of been my cousin's "explorations" on it. Essentially, I have not done anything on Wikipedia since last year, because as soon as I found Wikisource I was hooked onto it. I know it sounds bad, but Wikipedia was never a big hit with me, as I wanted to edit and proofread books, not articles.- Tannertsf (talk) 12:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
    Scratch that! I just looked and saw that it wasn't Wikipedia, but Wikibooks, that I used first. Sorry for all the troubles regarding Wikipedia. I was on Wikibooks for 1-2 months and Wikisource thereafter. - Tannertsf (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
    Maybe this was you? - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
    Yes. This is the one where my cousin "explored". - Tannertsf (talk) 13:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
    Cool. That's everything. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Not Yet, 2 months ago a self nomination for admin was withdrawn. Now a new contributor has nominated Tannertsf for admin without discussing it on the users talk page I get unpleasant thoughts of meat puppetry considering the implications. JeepdaySock (talk) 11:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I'm looking at some of Lucyrocks edits. First edit was like on the day of Tannertsf self-nom a couple months ago. And these edits show knowledge of Page: space validation, which typically isn't what most new editors dive right into, but of course there are plenty of exceptions. They also supported Tannertsf's first nom here, which is sort of odd that they even got right into admin nom stuff in like 2 days. Also, Lucyrocks has only edited at en.ws, here, and has never used a talk page, here. I hope there is an explanation for this. - Theornamentalist (talk) 16:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

The explanation is that she is my good family friend, that's all. She is a big fan of the internet and was a former user on Distributed Proofreading, which explains the validation issue. I did not know of her plan to nominate me at all - honestly. No "meat puppetry" at all with this. - Tannertsf (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

  • I'm going to go with Not yet as well. Much better to be nominated by an established Wikisourceror than a good family friend. Angr 18:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Not yet — On review of his edits since he withdrew his nomination a couple of months back, I don't see that Tannertsf is working in areas that require the tools. We are working closely together on proofreading/validating some works and as a result I'm dogging his edits quite intensly at present. If, through this, I see activity for which the admin tools would prove useful I will offer to nominate him at that point.

    I note that he has not accepted the nomination, and as a result this discussion may be moot. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I do accept the nomination and, Beeswaxcandle - I know my edits aren't great, but just tell me if you have big problems on that, okay? I try to do my best and enjoy this, not see it as "work". - Tannertsf (talk) 09:49, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I've said nothing here about the quality of your editing. By "dogging his edits" I mean that at present I'm seeing your footprints in enWS. This is only because I need to know what you've proofread so that I can validate it. If there was a quality issue I would have raised it with you in the same way as I raised the {{hws}} issue. I'm referring to the points in Wikisource:Adminship#Becoming an administrator. I don't see you working in the various areas that would make the tools useful to you. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Sorry I jumped on that ... didn't know what it meant. - Tannertsf (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)