Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Legoktm

Legoktm

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (21/1/1); Scheduled to end 03:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination

Legoktm (talk · contribs) – As someone who has been on the site far too long, it takes quite a bit to impress me when it comes to a user I have not seen yet. Legoktm has managed to do precisely that, as he seems to have been everywhere on the site in recent months.

If you want qualifications, he's got them. He runs User:Legobot, which does a wide range of tasks. He contributes at the village pump and at WP:AFC. He's done anti-vandalism work and has contributed to OTRS. He has also worked on articles at times as well, so he isn't ignoring the main part of the encyclopedia. I've even seen him helping out with copyright issues at times.

Lego's a guy who is willing to contribute anywhere. More importantly, however, he's a courteous user who actually tries to help out others best he can. He's not someone who's going to misuse the tools, and if anything will go out of his way to make sure the tools are being used well. Wizardman 02:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you for the nomination, I accept. Legoktm (talk) 03:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

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: I can help out in areas like CSD (leaning more to the G's), AIV, blocking VOAs/LTAs, fulfilling {{editprotected}} requests (in the Template and MediaWiki namespaces), deleting/undeleting things for OTRS tickets, and generally whenever a user needs help requiring the admin toolset.

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

A: As far as articles go, I’m rather proud of my work on Half-pipe skiing and getting it on DYK, which was just a random article I found while new page patrolling. I’m also proud of the various tasks User:Legobot handles, making things easier for other Wikipedians. I've written a few MediaWiki patches to try and improve it from the backend as well.

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: Conflicts? Not really. I’ve had disagreements with users before, but as far as I know it’s always been worked out through discussion.

General comments

• Links for Legoktm: Legoktm (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Edit summary usage for Legoktm can be found here.
• Edit statistics are on the talk page. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 04:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

---

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

Discussion

Support

1. Any day. He's very good to work with and I believe this is a perfect fit for him.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:26, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
2. Definitely clueful, understands policy, and also holds sysop/crat on Wikidata and is familiar with the tools. --Rschen7754 03:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
3. Support as nom. Wizardman 03:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
4. --Closedmouth (talk) 03:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
5. Support — The candidate has a wide range of experience, having worked with anti-vandalism, deletion, technical stuff (bots, Village Pump, edit filter, etc.), content editing, and more. Legoktm definitely has clue and, from what I have seen personally, helps other users whenever he can. And as a bonus, he has experience from Wikidata as a sysop and 'crat. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 04:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
6. Legoktm does an impressive amount of work in an impressive number of places. —Emufarmers^(T/C) 04:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
7. Support — Looks good to me. Webclient101^talk 04:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
8. Support Anonymouse stated it very well and it would be an overall net positive for the project. — -dainomite   05:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
9. Support. mabdul 05:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
10. Support I'm pretty sure I told you to try an RfA the other day, didn't I? MJ94 (talk) 05:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
11. Support despite not being able to find me a picture of a vintage Lego tire, still an all around excellent user. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 05:26, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
12. Support I've seen enough of this editor to consider Legoktm sufficiently trustworthy and clueful. This is reinforced by their role on Wikidata. Best wishes. Jschnur (talk) 05:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
13. Support — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
14. Support per nom. INeverCry 07:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
15. Strongest possible support — I've only ever had good interactions with him. This is long overdue. Legoktm is eminently qualified for the role. Kurtis ^(talk) 08:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
16. Support. Tolly4bolly 08:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
17. Support. Phenomenal work with Legobot, and a very impressive CSD log. The candidate would be very useful to have around helping with CSD and protected edit requests. His content contributions may be a bit on the thin side, but giving him the tools would certainly be a net benefit to Wikipedia. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
18. Support as a fellow Wikidata bureaucrat.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
19. Weak support. Seems sensible and constructive, but should improve some of the articles to DYK--C--B status. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
20. Support About time.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 11:38, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
21. Support Awesome guy. You should have been a sysop lot of time ago. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 11:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Weak Oppose'. only 32% of the edits are in article space, and mostly of his created articles are stubs. -NavotenoAngelo (talk) 08:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

User is a confirmed sockpuppet. Vote struck.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Angelo1345 for reference. --Rschen7754 08:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

1. Oppose - Given their terrible track record at AfD [1] (when confronted with an article the community would retain, they more often than not argue for it's deletion), I have to infer they simply don't have the understanding of the purpose and practices of Wikipedia necessary to process deletion requests; yet the first task they mention taking on is CSD; that would undoubtably go very poorly. WilyD 08:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

   This is a very weak reason to oppose. In my opinion he has a firm grasp of the concept of consensus and processes (like CSD and AfD), and this record is definitely not of any concern. This inference is short-sighted in my opinion because firstly, the statistics don't directly correlate with his actual judgement, and secondly, there is little correlation between AfD statistics and CSD.--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:01, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

   That's a totally ridiculous assertion. Someone who obviously doesn't understand what should and shouldn't be deleted shouldn't be processing CSD requests, even if they can read a discussion and determine concensus. They're planning to work as an admin on something a) they clearly don't understand, and b) where nobody else will be paying attention to what they're doing. That's a recipe for disaster. WilyD 09:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

   What "terrible track record"? Out of the 49 votes at AfD where he favoured deletion (that's including "speedy delete" and "redirect"), his vote matched the end result 38 times (roughly a 78% accuracy rate). His overall record at AfD is 75%, which I personally consider to be positive.

   If we're assessing Legoktm's current policy knowledge, we need to examine the more recent evidence. Just under half of his AfD votes were from February 2009 or earlier, so to get a sense of his present understanding of deletion, we'll have to look at his participation within the past year. In that time, he has made five votes which explicitly did not match the end result: one was parsed as "transwiki", but that was contingent upon WikiBooks accepting it and otherwise would be counted as "speedy delete"; another, he nominated but subsequently withdrew; and finally here, he initially favoured deletion after mistaking the article for a copyright violation, but later realized that it was actually the source that had borrowed content from Wikipedia rather than vice versa. The other two were Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HKAGE and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1953–54 FA Cup Qualifying Rounds, the former having been speedily deleted multiple times before recreation, and the latter running contrary to our policy on indiscriminate collections of information (as a disclaimer, I would have voted "keep" at both AfDs had I participated in them).

   Finally, how would his interpretation of GNG impact his ability to handle speedy deletion requests? As a general rule, CSD is for blatantly obvious cases; if there is any doubt, the article in question gets sent to AfD (or is otherwise slapped with a PROD tag). I'm not sure how someone's voting record reflects on their ability to handle speedy deletion. Kurtis ^(talk) 12:01, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I'm sitting on the fence for now. He's a very weak content contributor - only 32% of the edits are in article space. He created 74 articles, all before 2009, and all of the ones I looked at were the stubbiest of stubs, with inline citations rare (at least, as he left them). His proudest achievement, Half-pipe skiing, barely makes the length requirement for DYK. This will certainly be a test for whether an admin has to be a content contributor! However, he does seem qualified for doing the tasks he wants to do. For example, he has made lots of CSD nominations, most of them successful. He looks likely to continue a pattern of helping behind the scenes. If no one turns up any serious problems, I will probably end up supporting him. RockMagnetist (talk) 05:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

   I think your analysis is correct for the most part. I'm not a very good writer, so I'd much rather spend time doing something I'm good at (and that would benefit the project much more), like finding sources, writing some code for a bot task, fixing a template, etc. Legoktm (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)