Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Sebmol
This is an archive of community discussion related to the nomination for full custodianship of User:Sebmol.
I've been a temporary custodian since the beginning of Wikiversity and bureaucrat as of October 9. I joined mostly to get things started and help in any technical and other fashion I can. I'm mostly active on German Wikipedia but have contributed some to other projects as well. My technical experience comes mostly from tinkering with a MediaWiki installation at home, maintaining a MediaWiki-turned-Bug tracking system at my workplace and writing a few bots for some mindless tasks like archiving talk pages and renaming categories.
As a custodian, I see it as a primary duty to serve Wikiversity participants. I want to help them accomplish what they strive for while also keeping an eye on the goal and purpose of Wikiversity. I firmly believe that projects like Wikiversity live from the quality of content its participants produce and the community that builds around it. Out of that respect for our ambitious yet still small community, I want to ask for your support of my custodianship and bureaucratship at this time. -- sebmol ? 20:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Nomination for Bureaucrat
[edit source]- For reference, here's the original nomination for bureaucrat.
Fantastic new contributor to Wikiversity. Full support. Cormaggio 17:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- I accept the nomination. About myself, I'm most active on German Wikipedia with about 9,100 edits, about a quarter of which in Wikipedia namespace. I started originally on English Wikipedia about two years ago but moved over to the German in March, where I'm also a mediator. I'm a software developer by profession, one of my tasks was writing extensions for the Mediawiki software to turn it into a bug tracking system. As a result, I have a lot of experience with the internal workings of the software.
- To me, a bureaucrat, like a custodian and really every user, has to have the goals of the project and the development of the community as the highest priority. He's a servant of the project who should decide based on consensus and what is best for the project.
- The most important goal for us right now is to create and maintain high quality content. To make that happen, our second most important goal has to be building a community of Wikiversity enthusiasts that can carry the content, attract more users, and further develop the project. We have a host of sister projects whose experience with community building we can use for Wikiversity, both the good and the bad. So, let's use that experience to do things right and well. -- sebmol ? 14:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit source]- I figured that Sebmol was already a full custodian (he was my mentor, as a matter of fact), but he of course has my full support as a great contributor and custodian.--digital_me 23:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- In the beginning, a number of users were made custodians just to get things started (especially to import pages from Wikibooks and Meta). Naturally, there was no community decision at the time since there was no community. We're basically now making up for that. sebmol ? 19:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm confused. Is this a for custodianship or bureaucratship? --HappyCamper 03:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- Obviously. This is just a confirmation process. guillom 17:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for all of your contributions to the project, sebmol. I hate to think what the past two months would have been like without sebmol's contributions to the project. I support the idea that the Wikiversity community should formally confirm sebmol as a custodian. Wikiversity does not have much need for bureaucrat action, but I think Wikiversity should have more than one bureaucrat and sebmol is an obvious choice so that Wikiversity can get started on a long future of taking full advantage of sebmol's talents. --JWSchmidt 23:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- At the moment, I'm very cautious about supporting bureaucratships - hear me out please, but if you have the time, also read into the subtle nuances I am using. From my native Wiki, there is a tremendous amount of Unspoken WikiPolitics surrounding bureaucratships, and at times, it can be very suffocating to witness and deal with. For the record, I don't want to see Wikiversity inherit this negativity. To address this (being just another regular contributor here), the best way is to be less uptight about the post. In a sense, there are two types of trustworthy bureaucrats - the first, is the WikiGnome type. This, we are generally familiar with, so I will not elaborate too much. The second, is the more public type - human, and gracious when dealing with malfeasance, and with an excellent sense of how to engage the community positively. The special bureaucratic bit is in some sense symbolic of a special sort of competence, and - if used properly - can work wonders when perceived authority is needed in the community. I wonder privately at times, how do smart thinking and community subservience work hand in hand? On another note, a new bureaucrat should be healthy for the community - bureaucratic functions should also be enjoyable for the account holder. I think this can help keep the poor soap operas dry. Taken all together, perhaps a cursory and minority idea, and admittingly, a fluid one - Sebmol, I trust that if promoted, you will make very wise use the post, and for that matter this applies to any such future candidates. So, with this writeup - full support - and may this help bring out the best there is on Wikiversity! :-) --HappyCamper 00:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- "He's a servant of the project who should decide based on consensus and what is best for the project." <-- I think that as long as Wikiversity functionaries have this attitude, it is hard for them to go far wrong. The community might go in one direction and a conflict arise between the views of a custodian or a bureaucrat and community consensus. Maybe sebmol can describe what he would do if he found his own views in conflict with community consensus. A side question for HappyCamper..... "when perceived authority is needed in the community".....can you provide a specific example of such a situation? --JWSchmidt 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think as a custodian or bureaucrat or really any position of responsibility, one has to be able to separate one's private from one's professional position. This gets complicated by the fact that others don't necessarily see the distinction, i.e. they will see what one says either as a view of TPTB or as a view of a "regular user". At least, that's what has happened a lot on Wikipedia, both German and English. The best way to counter that is in my opinion not to take sides in conflicts but offer to mediate when necessary and appropriate. From my experience as a mediator on German Wikipedia, I've seen that many conflicts wouldn't even arise if all parties involved actually listened to the others and assumed their perspectives for a second. That's the capacity in which I'm willing to work in at Wikiversity as well if needed and wanted. sebmol ? 09:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- "He's a servant of the project who should decide based on consensus and what is best for the project." <-- I think that as long as Wikiversity functionaries have this attitude, it is hard for them to go far wrong. The community might go in one direction and a conflict arise between the views of a custodian or a bureaucrat and community consensus. Maybe sebmol can describe what he would do if he found his own views in conflict with community consensus. A side question for HappyCamper..... "when perceived authority is needed in the community".....can you provide a specific example of such a situation? --JWSchmidt 02:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- At the moment, I'm very cautious about supporting bureaucratships - hear me out please, but if you have the time, also read into the subtle nuances I am using. From my native Wiki, there is a tremendous amount of Unspoken WikiPolitics surrounding bureaucratships, and at times, it can be very suffocating to witness and deal with. For the record, I don't want to see Wikiversity inherit this negativity. To address this (being just another regular contributor here), the best way is to be less uptight about the post. In a sense, there are two types of trustworthy bureaucrats - the first, is the WikiGnome type. This, we are generally familiar with, so I will not elaborate too much. The second, is the more public type - human, and gracious when dealing with malfeasance, and with an excellent sense of how to engage the community positively. The special bureaucratic bit is in some sense symbolic of a special sort of competence, and - if used properly - can work wonders when perceived authority is needed in the community. I wonder privately at times, how do smart thinking and community subservience work hand in hand? On another note, a new bureaucrat should be healthy for the community - bureaucratic functions should also be enjoyable for the account holder. I think this can help keep the poor soap operas dry. Taken all together, perhaps a cursory and minority idea, and admittingly, a fluid one - Sebmol, I trust that if promoted, you will make very wise use the post, and for that matter this applies to any such future candidates. So, with this writeup - full support - and may this help bring out the best there is on Wikiversity! :-) --HappyCamper 00:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think Wikiversity will benefit immensely from Sebmol's bureaucratship. He has both the technical competence and the interpersonal skills to warrant the post, as well as a proven deep commitment to the project. Once again, my full support. Cormaggio 16:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Closing comments
[edit source]Sebmol was made an "acting custodian" at the launch of Wikiversity (15 August 2006). Cormaggio made Sebmol an "acting bureaucrat" on 9 October 2006. The custodianship and bureaucratship of Sebmol was open for community discussion from October 10 to October 15. All community comments supported full custodianship and bureaucratship for Sebmol. Sebmol became a community-approved custodian and bureaucrat on 16 October 2006. The full community discussion is at Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Sebmol. --JWSchmidt 13:51, 16