Barkeep49 RFA

[Jans Hammer]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Barkeep49 (T-H-L)

22 in the Support column already

[Poetlister]

Nominated by MelanieN (T-C-L) and Premeditated Chaos (T-C-L). MelanieN is a good solid non-controversial admin. Premeditated Chaos might be controversial in some quarters, but can scarcely be regarded as one of the worst admins. It's currently running at 23/0/0 although the summary at the top says 7/0/0.

[Pudeo]

Their Xtools edit count is pretty curious, almost full inactivity from August 2005 to December 2009. Then new inactivity period from April 2010 to March 2018.

[C&B]

Opposing on the grounds that they have only been active for 17 months would be legitimate. Do we expect anyone to do so!

[Kumioko]

Barkeep has all the qualities that are sought in an admin these days.

They have had an account for years; they aren't very active; they're not likely to rock the boat or do anything to attempt to improve or change the culture or the community; they're likely to blindly vote yes along with fellow admins; they probably won't use the tolls much other than to assist other admins and maintain the culture of admin domination on the project; they won't likely standup to editor abuse by admins. So they should pass in a landslide and will be given the recipe for the koolaid.

[10920]

Opposing on the grounds that they have only been active for 17 months would be legitimate. Do we expect anyone to do so!

RfA is obviously broken if there are no opposes just based on that. It's been about 170 months since Barkeep has registered. Roughly 24 of the 170 months (about 14%) the user has been active, making 40+ edits. The vast majority of the months had no edits at all.

No one passes an RfA for edits 10+ years ago so the entire basis is the editing from April 2018 to now. That's 17 months.
I'm sure if I nitpick I could find other issues as well.

As I post, it's 42/0/0.

The latest "Support - On the reputation of the nom. SlightSmile 17:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)"


That is really shaky. "The nominator has a good reputation so I'll blindly support whatever they put forward", although I suppose it's better than the multiple blank "support" votes.

[Kumioko]

Yeah I always found those a bit silly as well. I always found it rather hypocritical that they would discount opposes if they didn't feel the oppose was justified, but they allow supports like this.

[Beeblebrox]

Look at it the other way: in those 17 months he's created a few hundred new articles and managed to bring 20 articles to GA status. That's fairly impressive. People often bitch that a lot of admins don't understand content editing, well this guy certainly does.

He was asked about this and I think his answer is reasonable enough, he started out just killing time at work but now is actually doing it as a hobby, not just a distraction.

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

[Kumioko]

Look at it the other way: in those 17 months he's created a few hundred new articles and managed to bring 20 articles to GA status. That's fairly impressive. People often bitch that a lot of admins don't understand content editing, well this guy certainly does.

He was asked about this and I think his answer is reasonable enough, he started out just killing time at work but now is actually doing it as a hobby, not just a distraction.

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

So if he is doing all that content creation he doesn't need the admin tools anyway right? Isn't that the argument, that they don't really need them because they aren't doing admin stuff?

I never really had a problem with Lourdes myself, we always got along ok but I do agree that she isn't really helping her case any. If anything, those kinds of arguments are going to garner support for barkeep.

[10920]

One annoying habit of Barkeep's is the redirect issue. I saw him once arguing for one of his redirects to be protected. The redirect had no value in the first place.

[10920]

I see Barkeep decided to involve himself with the Fred Bauder issue after only a few months of active editing.

He has since inserted himself into other Requests for Arbitration. I don't know if Bauder was his first or he had already been a regular there at that point.

[C&B]

Look at it the other way: in those 17 months he's created a few hundred new articles and managed to bring 20 articles to GA status. That's fairly impressive. People often bitch that a lot of admins don't understand content editing, well this guy certainly does.

He was asked about this and I think his answer is reasonable enough, he started out just killing time at work but now is actually doing it as a hobby, not just a distraction.

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

Lourdes does verge on the useless as an admin: I swear that much of the time she is deliberate.

[Kumioko]

Look at it the other way: in those 17 months he's created a few hundred new articles and managed to bring 20 articles to GA status. That's fairly impressive. People often bitch that a lot of admins don't understand content editing, well this guy certainly does.

He was asked about this and I think his answer is reasonable enough, he started out just killing time at work but now is actually doing it as a hobby, not just a distraction.

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

Lourdes does verge on the useless as an admin: I swear that much of the time she is deliberate.

I'll be honest, the more I look into this character the more I am reminded of Ironholds. This person might put out some good conduct, but if they get the tools it's going to introduce drama to the project and give us here something more to discuss.

[Poetlister]

Their Xtools edit count is pretty curious, almost full inactivity from August 2005 to December 2009. Then new inactivity period from April 2010 to March 2018.

We don't know the personal circumstances. There may well be a simple explanation.

[Jeff Hawke]

There may well be a simple explanation.

Using one of their other accounts?

[Poetlister]

I see Barkeep decided to involve himself with the Fred Bauder issue after only a few months of active editing.

He has since inserted himself into other Requests for Arbitration. I don't know if Bauder was his first or he had already been a regular there at that point.

So he's interested in what goes on behind the scenes. That's surely no bad thing for an admin candidate. Or are you suggesting that he was so well informed that he must have had another account? I think that if Bauder was the first involvement, he could well have had enough experience by then.

However, Jeff Hawke's suggestion is not implausible.

[10920]

There may well be a simple explanation.

Using one of their other accounts?

Occam's razor would say yes.

[10920]

I see Barkeep decided to involve himself with the Fred Bauder issue after only a few months of active editing.

He has since inserted himself into other Requests for Arbitration. I don't know if Bauder was his first or he had already been a regular there at that point.

So he's interested in what goes on behind the scenes. That's surely no bad thing for an admin candidate. Or are you suggesting that he was so well informed that he must have had another account? I think that if Bauder was the first involvement, he could well have had enough experience by then.

However, Jeff Hawke's suggestion is not implausible.

Involving yourself in Requests for Arbitration that have nothing to do with you is not a good sign. If it were NYB, who had been a long-standing arbitrator, that would be one thing. This is from a relative newbie.

I checked his contributions and it seems the Fred Bauder case was his first.


Bring back Kurt Weber. These unopposed RfAs just won't do.

[Poetlister]

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

Lourdes can't have it in for him very strongly. Lourdes asked a pointed question, yes, but did not make an oppose vote or even a neutral one. To date, there is no oppose.

[ZettaComposer]

We just got Andrew D’s token username question. Just need a pointless oppose over lack of activity, even more pointless debate over the oppose and a concentrated effort to get it removed because god forbid an RFA gets a single oppose, a message on the talkpage of the opposer from Kudpung recommending a reading of his RFA essay, and we can call it a day!

[Eric Corbett]

We just got Andrew D’s token username question. Just need a pointless oppose over lack of activity, even more pointless debate over the oppose and a concentrated effort to get it removed because god forbid an RFA gets a single oppose, a message on the talkpage of the opposer from Kudpung recommending a reading of his RFA essay, and we can call it a day!

That sounds about right.

[Jans Hammer]

We just got Andrew D’s token username question. Just need a pointless oppose over lack of activity, even more pointless debate over the oppose and a concentrated effort to get it removed because god forbid an RFA gets a single oppose, a message on the talkpage of the opposer from Kudpung recommending a reading of his RFA essay, and we can call it a day!

He has noticeably cut back on "anti Admin" brigade accusations since last year. I reckon he's lining up for ACE2019. Not sure what platform - could hardy be civility since he accuses almost everyone who passes even mild negative comment about him as a PA.

[MrErnie]

Wyatt2049 (T-C-L) earned himself a CU block after daring to ask a question. This seems to be a perfect example of a fishing CU. His unblock appeal is great:

I got blocked for doing vandalism while not logged in. I promise to never do it again, and I beg for 1 chance. I am asking for forgiveness. Please let me have 1 chance. I solemnly swear that I, Wyatt2049, will never do vandalism again ever.

L235 Okay. I will not lie. Please trust me. Give me one chance please. I spent an hour crying over it. I have disobayed God by lying. Please give me one more chance. With regards, Wyatt2049

[C&B]

Now that's an appeal to higher authority.

[Poetlister]

There are now three opposes. AlexEng (T-C-L) argues "that the candidate does not have any particular need for the tools in order to continue doing the good work that they already do on the project". Nihlus (T-C-L) notes that Barkeep49 doesn't seem very interested in admin work. Ejgreen77 (T-C-L) is worried that Barkeep49 might support deleting articles that Ejgreen77 wants to keep.

Still, at 109/3/1, it looks like a sure thing.

[Jans Hammer]

There are now three opposes. AlexEng (T-C-L) argues "that the candidate does not have any particular need for the tools in order to continue doing the good work that they already do on the project". Nihlus (T-C-L) notes that Barkeep49 doesn't seem very interested in admin work. Ejgreen77 (T-C-L) is worried that Barkeep49 might support deleting articles that Ejgreen77 wants to keep.

Still, at 109/3/1, it looks like a sure thing.

Looks like it. Baring a revelation that he is an Eric sock

[Alex Shih]

Wyatt2049 (T-C-L) earned himself a CU block after daring to ask a question. This seems to be a perfect example of a fishing CU. His unblock appeal is great:

I got blocked for doing vandalism while not logged in. I promise to never do it again, and I beg for 1 chance. I am asking for forgiveness. Please let me have 1 chance. I solemnly swear that I, Wyatt2049, will never do vandalism again ever.

L235 Okay. I will not lie. Please trust me. Give me one chance please. I spent an hour crying over it. I have disobayed God by lying. Please give me one more chance. With regards, Wyatt2049

Right? While Wyatt2049 is obviously a dumb kid at school and should be and remain blocked, they weren't even abusing multiple accounts, just doing logged out vandalism at school. When you see an account with low edit count at a page that usually requires experience, it doesn't matter whether or not it's RfA, CU will run a check with the sole reasoning of "suspect socking/returning nuisance?". These kind of checks are far closer to the very definition of "fishing" and happens on regular basis.

[Kumioko]

There are now three opposes. AlexEng (T-C-L) argues "that the candidate does not have any particular need for the tools in order to continue doing the good work that they already do on the project". Nihlus (T-C-L) notes that Barkeep49 doesn't seem very interested in admin work. Ejgreen77 (T-C-L) is worried that Barkeep49 might support deleting articles that Ejgreen77 wants to keep.

Still, at 109/3/1, it looks like a sure thing.

Looks like it. Baring a revelation that he is an Eric sock

Someone could accuse him of being one of my socks, he'll get 20 opposes just from the allegation alone.

[Beeblebrox]

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

For the record, now that he has passed, Lourdes liked his answer and ended up supporting. Total blowout 233/5

[Eric Corbett]

There are now three opposes. AlexEng (T-C-L) argues "that the candidate does not have any particular need for the tools in order to continue doing the good work that they already do on the project". Nihlus (T-C-L) notes that Barkeep49 doesn't seem very interested in admin work. Ejgreen77 (T-C-L) is worried that Barkeep49 might support deleting articles that Ejgreen77 wants to keep.

Still, at 109/3/1, it looks like a sure thing.

Looks like it. Baring a revelation that he is an Eric sock

I suppose you meant "barring", but now I'm an admin who can stop me?

[eagle]

There are now three opposes. AlexEng (T-C-L) argues "that the candidate does not have any particular need for the tools in order to continue doing the good work that they already do on the project". Nihlus (T-C-L) notes that Barkeep49 doesn't seem very interested in admin work. Ejgreen77 (T-C-L) is worried that Barkeep49 might support deleting articles that Ejgreen77 wants to keep.

Still, at 109/3/1, it looks like a sure thing.

Looks like it. Baring a revelation that he is an Eric sock

I suppose you meant "barring", but now I'm an admin who can stop me?

Obviously, Maria and Laura.

[Poetlister]

But oh noes, Lourdes has is in for hm! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =913991220 for redirecting hopeless articles to appropriate targets. It amuses me to imagine her thinking this is a smoking gun that will tank this RFA.

For the record, now that he has passed, Lourdes liked his answer and ended up supporting. Total blowout 233/5

That's very impressive. Apart from the special case of Floquenbeam, it's the most supports since Enterprisey in January.

[tarantino]

English professor Kate Ozment, who teaches Early English Feminism, was inspired to write a book because Barkeep49 (who she doesn't name, but refers to him as a "misguided banana hammock") put Hroswitha Club (T-H-L) up for deletion three years ago.

https://twitter.com/GrubStreetWomen/sta ... 9777912837

[Smiley]

[Smiley]

The article as it first appeared was brief and the sourcing weak.

It appears that Nora Lockshin (T-C-L) wrote the article in her talkpage, and then somehow turned her whole talkpage into an article?

During the AfD, sources were provided that show Hroswitha (T-H-L) is a notable club. But Wikipedians are sticklers for the rules, and they are caught in an eternal dichotomy. By traditional standards there shouldn't be an article on the club because there don't appear to be any reliable secondary sources dealing directly with the subject. In this case, the Wikipedians have had to cobble together documents from across the internet to write the history, which is something Wikipedia does very well at times, but it is essentially Original Research and Synthesis, both of which are outlawed.

This happens quite a lot.

[Kraken]

Seems a bit odd this was the only topic on the entire forum with Barkeep49 in the name.

He's attained quite the influence as far as I can see. Certainly the most visible ArbCom member, their de facto Chair I would say. He seems to always have his finger on the pulse, and he pokes it in many pies. He might even be the only prominent Wikipedian looking for proactive solutions to the many crises facing Wikipedia right now, rather than just chipping in or worse, griping.

He doesn't come close to NewYorkBrad in terms of longevity. But he perhaps now demands the same respect? A leader. It's never seemed to work, this idea Wikipedia can exist without a leader. The theory is sound. But it assumes too much of the puny humans, many of whom are only Wikipedia editors for the most shallow of reasons, if they're being honest.

[Vigilant]

Now you've stooped to necro-posting two year old threads to try to get some screen time?

Dude.

Have some self-respect.

[greenday61892]

Literally what was even the point of necro'ing this thread if not for attention lol

[Midsize Jake]

Literally what was even the point of necro'ing this thread if not for attention lol

I think he's trying to say that Mr. Barkeep49 (T-C-L) has achieved a level of influence in just 5-6 years (since becoming an Admin) that Mr. Newyorkbrad took roughly a decade to achieve, and with arguably less "fanfare," which includes the fact that there's been relatively little attention paid to him by us here at Wikipediocracy. Is it because he seems like a nice guy, or is.... dare I say it... well-behaved?

Not like Newyorkbrad, obviously, who is a total "bad boy" as evidenced by the existence of his super-taboo Wikipediocracy account.

However, we might also note that Mr. Barkeep's first contribs date all the way back to 2005, so he's actually been on WP almost a year longer than NYB — except that as noted earlier in this thread, Mr. Barkeep had an 8-year inactivity period from 2010 to 2018, which Mr. NYB didn't have.

So maybe the real question is, what was he doing during that 8-year period? Who did he work for? Was he somehow involved in the Comet Ping Pong Pizza conspiracy? Is he, in fact, Q? Was he building sex-slave farms on Mars? We simply don't know.

[C&B]

Idle curiosity speaks... were there any desysops for cause late 2017, early 2018 by any chance?

[Kraken]

Focusing on the bad boys, while paying little heed to who seems to wield significant power on Wikipedia, is perhaps where Wikipediocracy has been going wrong all these years.

Nihonjoe was a good boy after all. Little noticed. I'm dying to know how he came to the attention of Eddy Landwher. If nobody wants to spill the WO:BEANS, the depressing reality might well just be that it was dumb luck. A chance discovery while someone was looking for something else entirely.

[Midsize Jake]

Nihonjoe was a good boy after all. Little noticed. I'm dying to know how he came to the attention of Eddy Landwher. If nobody wants to spill the WO:BEANS, the depressing reality might well just be that it was dumb luck. A chance discovery while someone was looking for something else entirely.

"Eddy Landwehr" is a pseudonym (obviously?) for someone who, like yourself, has been on the periphery of WP a long time, and I can say with some assurance that this actually has more to do with Nicholas Alahverdian and his own LDS Church connections than "dumb luck." That is, unless we're saying our involvement with the Alahverdian case was dumb luck (I don't think it was, but I guess the argument could be made that only a limited number of people had dealt with Alahverdian on Wikipedia, and at least one of them was known to Mr. "Landwehr" or was, in fact, Mr. Landwehr himself).

For good or ill, the LDS Church has been manipulating Wikipedia for many, many years. They're very subtle, and also very, very polite about it, but the fact remains that the Mormons' version of their own history has always been very much at odds with everyone else's version, and they go to great lengths to insist that their version gets as much exposure as possible. Eventually, someone connected to Wikipedia — and most likely, someone not on Wikipedia — was going to speak up about it, despite all that subtlety and politeness.

[Vigilant]

Nihonjoe was a good boy after all. Little noticed. I'm dying to know how he came to the attention of Eddy Landwher. If nobody wants to spill the WO:BEANS, the depressing reality might well just be that it was dumb luck. A chance discovery while someone was looking for something else entirely.

"Eddy Landwehr" is a pseudonym (obviously?) for someone who, like yourself, has been on the periphery of WP a long time, and I can say with some assurance that this actually has more to do with Nicholas Alahverdian and his own LDS Church connections than "dumb luck." That is, unless we're saying our involvement with the Alahverdian case was dumb luck (I don't think it was, but I guess the argument could be made that only a limited number of people had dealt with Alahverdian on Wikipedia, and at least one of them was known to Mr. "Landwehr" or was, in fact, Mr. Landwehr himself).

For good or ill, the LDS Church has been manipulating Wikipedia for many, many years. They're very subtle, and also very, very polite about it, but the fact remains that the Mormons' version of their own history has always been very much at odds with everyone else's version, and they go to great lengths to insist that their version gets as much exposure as possible. Eventually, someone connected to Wikipedia — and most likely, someone not on Wikipedia — was going to speak up about it, despite all that subtlety and politeness.

Reminds me of Jeff Merkey tangling with the LDS mafia on Mountain_Meadows_Massacre (T-H-L).

[Jester]

Idle curiosity speaks... were there any desysops for cause late 2017, early 2018 by any chance?

Cursorily looking at Wikipedia:Former administrators/chronological/2018 (T-H-L), I see Salvidrim! (T-C-L), Arthur Rubin (T-C-L), and Magioladitis (T-C-L). None of them look anything like Barkeep to me.

Edited for formatting reasons

[redbaron]

Idle curiosity speaks... were there any desysops for cause late 2017, early 2018 by any chance?

Cursorily looking at Wikipedia:Former administrators/chronological/2018 (T-H-L), I see User:Salvidrim! (T-C-L), User:Arthur Rubin (T-C-L), and Magioladitis (T-C-L). None of them look anything like Barkeep to me.

They are all still active anyway... though Arthur Rubin is indefinitely banned from article space of all places

[Disgruntled haddock]

Barkeep has such a distinctive and consistent communication style (and I like that about him) that I don't think he matches any obvious former admins. He strikes me as one of the good ones, even if his ArbCom is "one step forward, two steps back" pretty frequently.