Hog Farm RFA

[rhinoroars]

Hog Farm (T-C-L) RFA Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hog Farm (T-H-L)

[Osborne]

Another one of those edit-hoarding WP:ADMINSOCK (T-H-L)s that know all the rules from day 1.
How do they come up with these names? Is it a 14 year old?

a fantastic editor, who has very quickly become one of the best contributors

Well, no surprise there...

[Poetlister]

Nominated by Lee Vilenski (T-C-L), an admin and apparently "one of the 2,000 most active English Wikipedians of all time". Co-nominated by Eddie891 (T-C-L) who, with refreshing honesty, says on his user page "As an admin, I'm still learning the ropes, so please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page when I mess up".

[C&B]

Usual Boi admin wannabe. I do Note that SoWhy has Provided some opposable material-Regardless of HF's apologies, Etc., he was basically Fucking Up as recently As last May and potentially Driving away Productive New editors.

[Moneytrees]

Please stop calling people “Boi”. You’re far too old to be talking like that.

[C&B]

You're far too young to be listening.

Moderator's note: Apparently, the term "boi" is often used as a mild pejorative within the LGBT community, which might suggest that its use within the context of a Wikipedia RfA (barring self-identification as such by the candidate) would be inappropriate. Members are therefore requested to use the conventional spelling of the word "boy" unless circumstances clearly demand otherwise.

[Poetlister]

Usual Boi admin wannabe. I do Note that SoWhy has Provided some opposable material-Regardless of HF's apologies, Etc., he was basically Fucking Up as recently As last May and potentially Driving away Productive New editors.

SoWhy is now supporting him. So far it's 46/0/0, and given how few oppose votes there have been lately to most RfAs, I predict a very smooth ride.

[C&B]

How many times have you voted?

[Ming]

Ming is a little surprised that there isn't opposition based on his participation in the GNIS cleanup deletion-fest.

[Poetlister]

How many times have you voted?

He doesn't need my support. He's already at 76/0/0.

[C&B]

Moderator's note: Apparently, the term "boi" is often used as a mild pejorative within the LGBT community, which might suggest that its use within the context of a Wikipedia RfA (barring self-identification as such by the candidate) would be inappropriate. Members are therefore requested to use the conventional spelling of the word "boy" unless circumstances clearly demand otherwise.

Apologies for my Insensitivity. I will Address them by the Proper title.

Leslie: Dumbass.

Gablehauser: Dr Winkle, you will address Dr Cooper by his proper title.

Leslie: Dr Dumbass.

[Poetlister]

And there is an oppose.

Weak Oppose - You don't quite pass my criteria. Sorry. Foxnpichu (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Is this simply due to the length of tenure for the user, Foxnpichu? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I doubt that Hog Farm will lose much sleep over that.

[Midsize Jake]

Has anyone stopped to consider that this whole thing might just be an elaborate trolling effort? I mean, there's now going to be the potential for news-media coverage of a high-visibility "vandalism" attempt that will contain the sentence, "the account was quickly blocked by the Wikipedia Administrator Hog Farm."

Are there any other admins with names like that? I could see some embarrassment potential with "Audacity," "Bongwarrior," or "Magog the Ogre," and of course there's always some minor-confusion potential with "Cleared as filed," "Edit filter," "Hut 8.5," "Neutrality," or even "Y." But I don't believe there are currently any admins on the English Wikipedia with a name that would be quite as self-deprecatory as "Hog Farm," if decontextualized and/or used in something similar to the aforementioned sentence construction.

[Osborne]

Has anyone stopped to consider that this whole thing might just be an elaborate trolling effort? I mean, there's now going to be the potential for news-media coverage of a high-visibility "vandalism" attempt that will contain the sentence, "the account was quickly blocked by the Wikipedia Administrator Hog Farm."

Good point.

Are there any other admins with names like that? I could see some embarrassment potential with ...

There are. What I found in common with the owners of such names (not the ones you listed) is that they think and behave like a child, yet they are taken seriously within admin circles. What does that tell about admins...

[Poetlister]

I expect that these people with especially silly names start out as jokers, but become hooked and turn into serious editors (or, rather, game players since this is Wikipedia). They forget how silly their names are.

[lonza leggiera]

Has anyone stopped to consider that this whole thing might just be an elaborate trolling effort? I mean, there's now going to be the potential for news-media coverage of a high-visibility "vandalism" attempt that will contain the sentence, "the account was quickly blocked by the Wikipedia Administrator Hog Farm."

Are there any other admins with names like that? I could see some embarrassment potential with "Audacity," "Bongwarrior," or "Magog the Ogre," and of course there's always some minor-confusion potential with "Cleared as filed," "Edit filter," "Hut 8.5," "Neutrality," or even "Y." But I don't believe there are currently any admins on the English Wikipedia with a name that would be quite as self-deprecatory as "Hog Farm," if decontextualized and/or used in something similar to the aforementioned sentence construction.

Unfortunately there appears to be no hope that user Haemorrhoids (T-C-L) could ever become an admin.

[Ming]

Ming realizes that it is de rigeur to heap random calumnies on any RfA nomination, is there any real reason to think this fellow will be doing a bad job?

[Midsize Jake]

Ming realizes that it is de rigeur to heap random calumnies on any RfA nomination, is there any real reason to think this fellow will be doing a bad job?

On the contrary — if I'm right, he'll go out of his way to do a really good job, especially on high-visibility incidents, in order to increase the likelihood that someone from a reputable media outlet will publish a "Wikipedia Administrator Hog Farm" reference.

[Poetlister]

Unfortunately there appears to be no hope that user Haemorrhoids (T-C-L) could ever become an admin.

As he only ever made one edit, many years ago, that seems a safe bet. Can someone create a sock called "Painful haemorrhoids" and get it through RfA?

[Ming]

Unfortunately there appears to be no hope that user Haemorrhoids (T-C-L) could ever become an admin.

As he only ever made one edit, many years ago, that seems a safe bet. Can someone create a sock called "Painful haemorrhoids" and get it through RfA?

You would have better luck with "Gomers Piles".

[Poetlister]

Opposition grows, although at 121/3/0 he seems secure. I have sympathy with these oppose remarks.

Oppose. Sorry to spoil the party, but I take a stronger view than the questioner about the answers to question 8. Anyone who just a few months ago prioritised pushing to get their quota of speedy deletion nominations over the integrity of the encyclopedia should not become an admin. For the record I do not support Foxnpichu's oppose above, as it seems to be based on arbitrary numbers rather than trust. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose, reluctantly. Candidate meets my minimums and I was going to support with a comment that the zeal in deletions was apparently a miscommunication and a desire to meet established norms. But, what nagged at my mind, if the candidate was fully ready to be an administrator - they should have known that a quota of deletions would be anathema to most editors. Ifnord (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

[Ming]

Opposition grows, although at 121/3/0 he seems secure. I have sympathy with these oppose remarks.

Oppose. Sorry to spoil the party, but I take a stronger view than the questioner about the answers to question 8. Anyone who just a few months ago prioritised pushing to get their quota of speedy deletion nominations over the integrity of the encyclopedia should not become an admin. For the record I do not support Foxnpichu's oppose above, as it seems to be based on arbitrary numbers rather than trust. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose, reluctantly. Candidate meets my minimums and I was going to support with a comment that the zeal in deletions was apparently a miscommunication and a desire to meet established norms. But, what nagged at my mind, if the candidate was fully ready to be an administrator - they should have known that a quota of deletions would be anathema to most editors. Ifnord (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

If memory serves Ming, Bridger is one of those who has tried to stop the anti-GNIS crusade.

[Poetlister]

Definitely the anti-deletionists don't like him. But if the issue is whether to have an article on every place name or alleged place name in the world, I'm on his side.

Oppose: Too eager to remove valuable contributions from Wikipedia. Deletion is sometimes necessary (best example would be copyright violations), but admins should be builders, not breakers.  Mysterymanblue  17:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose per Phil Bridger. I'm troubled by the focus on quotas over notability. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

[Osborne]

Clearly, he cares only about the admin powers. Predictably we'll have a few threads a year from now about how he abused it. It's a textbook play.

[Trismic]

I voted oppose and I’m crafting another oppose vote atm. Waiting for the right time to drop it, hopefully prompt a pile on.

[Ritchie333]

I voted oppose and I’m crafting another oppose vote atm. Waiting for the right time to drop it, hopefully prompt a pile on.

Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.

[Poetlister]

I voted oppose and I’m crafting another oppose vote atm. Waiting for the right time to drop it, hopefully prompt a pile on.

It would be incredibly difficult to get enough of a pile-on to make any difference. Yes, there is some dissent (138/5/2), but not enough to worry him.

[C&B]

I voted oppose and I’m crafting another oppose vote atm. Waiting for the right time to drop it, hopefully prompt a pile on.

I do so Hope that you 'craft' a better Oppose than you have Already ('admins should be builders, not breakers'). While the Other Opposes are as Equally irrelevant: yours is A blatant Policy Misunderstanding. Admin tools are Not there for Content work, and demanding Inclusionism flies in the face of WP:INVOLVED.

Both your socks will be More laundered than the Pope's pocket Money

[C&B]

C'mon you lot, Own Up are you really going to Get Away with this?!

The Hubris is Great in this one, 10 edits, mostly to User Talk Space?

Mind you if In The Name of the God 'Good Faith' they Let the vote stand, Then frankly, they deserve Everything they get

[Wikiguy.DC]

I know nothing about this candidate, but shouldn't it be a bit concerning that he got 90 support votes before someone even bothered to give a half-assed oppose? I know RFA is seen as a gauntlet these days and new nominations are almost stagnant, but that doesn't mean voters should pass everyone with a pulse.

[Osborne]

I know nothing about this candidate, but shouldn't it be a bit concerning that he got 90 support votes before someone even bothered to give a half-assed oppose?

He's a professional. Even before he registered, he knew the secret recipe to become admin in the least amout of time (barely more than a year). One can wonder how many admin accounts he already has.

I know RFA is seen as a gauntlet these days and new nominations are almost stagnant, but that doesn't mean voters should pass everyone with a pulse.

Is it the fault of the voters to not see behind the facade? Not really. Some voters probably know what's going on, the rest only cares that he's a well-trained soldier. One that won't cause any trouble within the admin ranks.
WP:Wikipedia is an MMORPG (T-H-L)

[Ming]

Really, if one could get the Dramuh out of the picture, any reasonably competent writer/editor could be given admin tools within a year.

[Poetlister]

C'mon you lot, Own Up are you really going to Get Away with this?!

The Hubris is Great in this one, 10 edits, mostly to User Talk Space?

Mind you if In The Name of the God 'Good Faith' they Let the vote stand, Then frankly, they deserve Everything they get

This chap's very dubious. Only on the site a couple of days and already voting in an RfA? It should be struck out. Still, at 159/9/2 one vote either way makes no difference.

[Osborne]

This chap's very dubious. Only on the site a couple of days and already voting in an RfA? It should be struck out. Still, at 159/9/2 one vote either way makes no difference.

The vote doesn't matter. The chap should be checkusered, might reveal its sock-master.

[Poetlister]

This chap's very dubious. Only on the site a couple of days and already voting in an RfA? It should be struck out. Still, at 159/9/2 one vote either way makes no difference.

The vote doesn't matter. The chap should be checkusered, might reveal its sock-master.

Indeed. Where is Bbb23 (T-C-L) when you need him? (He hasn't disappeared; he does edit occasionally.) Still, as we all know, it's easy enough to circumvent a checkuser.

[Osborne]

Indeed. Where is Bbb23 (T-C-L) when you need him?

[Newyorkbrad]

RfA's are now automatically announced at the top of everyone's watchlist, which leads some new editors to find them much earlier than they otherwise might.

[Osborne]

RfA's are now automatically announced at the top of everyone's watchlist, which leads some new editors to find them much earlier than they otherwise might.

And we also assume that a brand new editor with 10 edits will have the necessary understanding of WP to review the candidate's 10,000 edits and he will do that at least superficially to be able to say in good conscience that "I don't see any problems."

Yeah, nah. Applying Occam's razor reveals this is an old editor in a new garb, but he does serve the admin clique, so let's give the benefit of doubt without limits. If necessary add the standard defense: edited as an IP for a long time...

[rhinoroars]

Does appear to love deletions only 5% Keep votes: 25 (5.1%)
link

[Osborne]

Does appear to love deletions only 5% Keep votes: 25 (5.1%)
link

There's a trend caused by human nature: new editors want to add to the encyclopedia, old editors want to clean up.

[Poetlister]

Does appear to love deletions only 5% Keep votes: 25 (5.1%)
link

As well as those 25 there is one speedy keep and ten merge (i.e. keep the material, just put it somewhere else). Still, yes, overwhelmingly he votes to delete. But maybe he was justified on most of those occasions. There is no shortage of articles on Wikipedia that should be deleted, and many of them have survived AfDs.

[C&B]

Where WO leads, The Floquenbeam does follow

[Poetlister]

The 100th support came from SandyGeorgia. I don't know if she carries as much clout as she used to. Is "I hope he will use the tools sparingly" actually an endorsement?

Support What has most impressed me about Hog Farm is not his extensive contributions to top quality articles, nor his willingness to help others, nor how quickly he learns, nor that he anticipates needs and fills in wherever needed. All of that is exemplary, but it is that he listens and adjusts positions as he hears and learns. I hope he will use the tools sparingly, and stay involved in content review processes, where his assistance has become invaluable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

[C&B]

The 100th support came from SandyGeorgia. I don't know if she carries as much clout as she used to.

I think Not, except in the MedRes and FA projects, And they're Pretty Niche.

Is "I hope he will use the tools sparingly" actually an endorsement?

Dammed with Faint Praise, what what!

[Osborne]

Where WO leads, The Floquenbeam does follow

I wish Bbb23 was still a CU.

Support of an abuser after admonished... noted.
I wish there were CUs besides Bbb. Oh, wait...

[C&B]

The silence, of Course, is deafening From others... someone said Something the Same in the last rfa, I think, and was immediately Crushed by the Anti-Fishermen

A hypocrisy, of course, And so Obvious. I suppose each Rfa is a kind of Schrodinger's cat Where Everything does start all over again and No rfa sets some Precedent for the next.

[C&B]

Where WO leads, The Floquenbeam does follow

I wish Bbb23 was still a CU.

Support of an abuser after admonished... noted.
I wish there were CUs besides Bbb. Oh, wait...

Why doesn't he go for CU Then?!

[C&B]

I voted oppose and I’m crafting another oppose vote atm. Waiting for the right time to drop it, hopefully prompt a pile on.

Well, As We approach close of play, there Have Indeed been two Dumbass such opposes... any sign of That pile on? Anyone?

Bueller? Bueller?

[Poetlister]

Where WO leads, The Floquenbeam does follow

I wish Bbb23 was still a CU.

Support of an abuser after admonished... noted.
I wish there were CUs besides Bbb. Oh, wait...

Why doesn't he go for CU Then?!

Hands up who wants Floquenbeam to be a CU. Anyone?

Still, yes, there are a few CUs around. It's a lot of work, but it needs to be done.

[C&B]

ST47 (T-C-L) has taken over From Bbb23 as the Maniacal Kalashnikova of checkuserehn. He is Brusque, but not actually a rude Ignorant fuck like the Other. (Yet, anyway: It looks like He only really came back to the CU bit after Bbb23 had been Emasculated, So there is, Doubtless, still time for Him to let the Power corrupt...)