Wikinews:Requests for permissions/Administrator/David Shankbone

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

Candidate withdrew request for adminship.

David Shankbone edit

Believe it or not, our star interviewer isn't an admin yet. I think he's earned enough respect and trust to fix that problem. David's done a lot of great work for us, and clearly know's our policies well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dodge Story (talk • contribs) 04:41, 25 October 2007‎

Candidate: Do you accept?

Questions edit

What is the meaning of life? Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 04:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To learn the balance between risk-taking and stability so that life is neither too boring nor too chaotic. Also, 42. --David Shankbone 13:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whew! For a second there I thought you weren't going to get the joke. (Although it should be mentioned that 42 is the Answer to life the universe and everything, not just life). Bawolff ☺☻

I live to give, and answer, 110%. --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will you be an admin open to recall?

Sure. --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is your greatest flaw with regards to adminship?

I'm sensitive. --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What makes for a good admin on Wikinews?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha - to not be sensitive? --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you feel about possibly having the most questions asked of you out of all the adminship requests (that i remember)

I don't mind questions (@#&*@$^*&@$#@!!) --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you feel that your experience as an interviewer has helped prepared you for these questions? Is it different asking the questions and being asked them? Bawolff ☺☻ 22:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My interviewees often turn my interviews around on me and I answer their questions honestly, which I hope makes for more honest exchanges. I just don't often include those aspects of the interviews -- be glad! I might not have been put forth for admin-ship! --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joke questions for you just to add a few more - dont take these (or me!!) seriously

Will you hang out with us more on IRC??

What's IRC? :-) --David Shankbone 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And per the IRC - !q Is this a question? --MarkTalk to me 22:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you make of Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone/Proposed_decision?

I think it was funny. I was the one who asked for the Arb, knowing I pursued Ted Frank too diligently, but also knowing that being taken to task for that was not nearly as important as exposing him. If there was absolutely nothing wrong with what he was doing, then it would have taken an ArbCom to show me that. Instead, I was proven right. My main problem going into the ArbCom was that, after a year on Wikipedia, I never had cause to figure out the seemingly endless forums for resolving various strains of disputes (COI, Admin Noticeboard, Water Pump, RfC, et. al.) That and my frequent use of Ted Frank's name (mainly right after he changed his User name from TedFrank to THF) were seen as my problems. There are things I could have done better, but in the end, I felt vindicated. --David Shankbone 05:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Votes edit

Template:Support/th as nom. Thunderhead - (talk - email - contributions) 04:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jacques Divol 06:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Supporty™ —FellowWiki Newsie 16:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I crossed out my vote because what's the point of a person becoming admin after saying that "Wikinews is not fun" and "I simply don’t find the community on here enjoyable." David, if you really don't want to become admin withdraw this admin request. —FellowWiki Newsie 22:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support About time. JoshuaZ 17:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)> Changing to neutral now due to SVTCobra's concerns. JoshuaZ 16:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course :) A fantastic interviewer who will be fantastic as an admin. *Matt/TheFearow | ^userpage|^contribs 20:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I think "hey man! Dalai Lama!", mail David and he's pretty much already lined up an interview with his U.S. representative. So... David as an admin? He's demonstrated a good understanding of our policies, he works within them and isn't one of those people who tests their bounds. So... I'd trust him with the buttons. We don't set the bar too high on Wikinews, there are a number of issues that constrain what you can do if you are not an admin so we have a high user/admin ratio. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 20:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Vote struck due to high drama surrounding threat to leave project. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 19:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, David had done a fantastic job around here recently and I'm sure he will use the mop and bucket with great consideration and good effect. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
obvious support Bawolff ☺☻ 22:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~ Wikihermit 02:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jcart1534 18:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a no-brainer! --TUFKAAP 22:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Not to be a contrarian, but I would like to see David spend some more time here before gaining Adminship. There are still policies and practices with which David should become more familiar. For instance, today he published an article that was still up for DR [1]. And recently, David uploaded an image from a competing news outlet, claiming fair-use WN:DR#Image:Ashton_Bonds.jpg. Don't get me wrong, the interviews are fantastic and I have complimented him on them. David also seems earnest in his pursuits. I just would like to see him spend some more time here before gaining Adminship. --SVTCobra 21:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The article was published because he found it worthwhile; there was no need for there to have been a deletion request on it in the first place. --Jigsaw (Talk) 14:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain irid t i e 22:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - whats IRC??..hehe..good all-round editor..--Comet styles 13:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I appreciate the work David has done here and I'm disappointed that it seems he is going to take a Wikibreak as he is becoming disgruntled with Wikinews but I'm not happy with him branding JoshuaZ's decision to change his vote to neutral in response to the concerns outlined by SVTCobra as "jumping on the bandwagon".[2] David should respect that people might not unnecessarily agree with him or support this RfA. His attitude towards this issue makes me oppose this RfA and I suggest those who have already voted should reconsider their position in response to his recent comments. Adambro 16:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - David does not seem like the kind of person who wants Admin privileges, let alone be trusted with them. While I appreciate the work he has put into the site, I do not believe admin privileges are fitting at this time. --Skenmy^{(t•c•w•i)} 18:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've been reading your interviews! Great work! I'm even jealous :) - Jurock ^(reply) 18:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The New Zealand incident from the main page is a bit fresh in my mind, and at this point adding a temperamental administrator is something I don't think Wikinews needs. TheCustomOfLife 18:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of the Admin's page or the talk page of the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.