Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Panyd

Username: Panyd
User groups: rollbacker
First edit: Oct 13, 2007 01:16:43
Unique articles edited: 1,737
Average edits per page: 1.68
Total edits (including deleted): 2,916
Deleted edits: 79
Live edits: 2,837
Namespace totals
Article	1248	43.99%
Talk	932	32.85%
User	24	0.85%
User talk	250	8.81%
Wikipedia	296	10.43%
File	87	3.07%
Graph
Month counts
2007/10	2	
2007/11	0	
2007/12	0	
2008/01	0	
2008/02	0	
2008/03	0	
2008/04	0	
2008/05	0	
2008/06	0	
2008/07	0	
2008/08	0	
2008/09	0	
2008/10	0	
2008/11	274	
2008/12	11	
2009/01	94	
2009/02	2	
2009/03	0	
2009/04	22	
2009/05	41	
2009/06	575	
2009/07	254	
2009/08	128	
2009/09	578	
2009/10	387	
2009/11	222	
2009/12	81	
2010/01	166	
Logs
Pages patrolled: 2
Files uploaded: 17
Top edited articles
Article

    * 7 - Aldo_Muzzarelli
    * 7 - Palos_Verdes_Cross_Country
    * 7 - MTV_Cribs
    * 6 - Abdelwahed_El-Sayed
    * 5 - Naberius
    * 5 - Demura_Fumio
    * 4 - Victor_Milner
    * 4 - Édouard_Stern
    * 4 - Betcris
    * 3 - Love_Somebody_(1947_song)


Talk

    * 3 - Cursed_(TV_series)
    * 2 - 24_Hour_Quiz
    * 2 - Betcris
    * 2 - Kissaki_Kai_Karate
    * 2 - 199_Park_Lane
    * 2 - List_of_Tea_Party_protests
    * 2 - Gadget_and_the_Gadgetinis
    * 2 - Adam_Ginsberg
    * 2 - Wild_C.A.T.s_(TV_series)
    * 1 - Barney_and_the_Backyard_Gang


User

    * 7 - Panyd
    * 5 - Panyd/Astrotheology
    * 3 - Panyd/Testing
    * 2 - Panyd/monobook.js
    * 2 - Panyd/Results
    * 2 - Panyd/Lexis
    * 1 - Panyd/Editcounter
    * 1 - Panyd/Box:LexisNexis
    * 1 - Panyd/Astrotheology_old


User talk

    * 7 - DGG
    * 5 - Panyd
    * 4 - Draperd
    * 3 - Alastairward
    * 2 - Gold_banana101
    * 2 - 70.241.162.137
    * 2 - 198.208.16.221
    * 2 - Doomspeed44
    * 2 - 218.215.1.241
    * 2 - 99.246.250.144


Wikipedia

    * 6 - Articles_for_deletion/Palos_Verdes_Cross_Country
    * 5 - Articles_for_deletion/Valéry_Grancher
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/MarHedge
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/KUSW
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/Cedric_Aubry
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/Edouard_Stern
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/List_of_schedules_for_drugs_...
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/The_Pen_&_Quill
    * 4 - Requests_for_adminship/Panyd
    * 4 - Articles_for_deletion/List_of_bow_tie_wearers_(4th...


File

    * 3 - Lexis_Search.jpg
    * 2 - Ruslan_Sirota.jpg
    * 2 - Montenegrinsoldier.jpg
    * 2 - Tom_Hayhurst_7658.jpg
    * 2 - Tempura_Soba.jpg
    * 2 - Sean_Penn.jpg
    * 2 - Shorteh.jpg
    * 2 - Poe38.jpg
    * 1 - Jarnailandfamily.jpg
    * 1 - PromoPic3.jpg

Question 15

15. Would you agree to an immediate checkuser to verify the whereabouts of yourself and Chase Me over the last few months? I find that there is evidence--the "laptop" incident, implying you're at SLC now when you're not, similarities in typing including the way you use dashes--that suggests you and Chase Me are the same person. If this isn't the case, I offer my sincere apologies, but in my opinion this should be investigated immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keepscases (talk • contribs)

A: Yes of course if the checkusers are ok with it. I've been in the UK since the 18th of December so you'll want to check from before then as well. We can post a picture if you'd like! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved discussion to the talk page.smithers - talk 00:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go for it! For the record, I am guessing you're not the same person (SLC is in fact on break, and I haven't yet caught you using any British spelling), but this is probably something you want to be sure to address. Keepscases (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And, you can't answer the checkuser for Chase Me-does he agree to it? I remain concerned about both editors, even if a CU indicates they are not the same person. A mistaken laptop use by the nominator using the candidate's laptop by accident in an RfA? When the nominator is an administrator? That's too much. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 22:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did find the candidate using "adverts". Americans don't say that. Keepscases (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She also uses the British spelling of "behaviour." --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 22:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a British father and an American mother. I lived in the UK for 20 years, hence my eclectic mix of UK and US spelling. I took my (US) GED because my (UK) A levels weren't good enough, and got into Sarah Lawrence with a lovely essay about The Master and Margarita. I met Chase Me at a Centre Parks in Nottingham around 8 years ago and we've been friends ever since. It's a very complicated but happy story about a girl who isn't very good at coursework. I can provide more details if necessary but I'd much rather do it by email - this is getting very personal at present, I'm sure you understand. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need the personal information, either by e-mail or here. However, this RfA is raising concerns that weren't there when it started, particularly with the answers all seeming to be off, and needing clarification. It was a cute story at first, two wikipedia editors like each other, but then when the nominating administrator mistakenly uses the candidate's laptop, the candidate is on about being at a major "US" university, and the nominator is on about being "Royal Navy," and nothing seems to add up to be what it is at first glance, it does raise issues. I don't think that personal information about you or Chase is going to solve anything. I am concerned about this nomination and about Chase being an administrator. Is there some non-personal way to alleviate my concerns? --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 22:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shut it down with an early withdrawal, is my advice. I have very strong doubts, as well. Would like to leave it at that, unless this drags on.Bali ultimate (talk) 22:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with the checkuser in principle, and I can verify Panyd's story; but I'm not sure that the CUs would agree to a CU - it can't be used to "prove innocence", as far as I'm aware. That said, I'm OK with one. It should show that we occasionally edit in NY, occasionally in Missourri, occasionally in Wolverhampton and occasionally in Coventry - sometimes at different times, sometimes at the same time. I would hope that my standing and reputation as an administrator and editor would be enough for you folks to trust me! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this post-PastorTheo world? No chance. Keepscases (talk) 22:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is someone you can talk to if you can't do a CheckUser and that would be User:Cary Bass, who knows about us, as individuals and as people who know each other. They might be a little busy though. Otherwise I'm happy with a check user. Really, anything I can provide to show evidence is absolutely fine. I would rather not withdraw at this time although if this gets too bogged down then I might have to in order to clear it up. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's going to matter. He says he mentored you when you first started, but your first edit was a monobook edit,[1] and you don't seem to have needed much mentoring, moving quickly to adding free use rational to uploaded album covers,[2] starting by editing from his list of articles,[3] moving quickly onto named references and detailed editing of Egyptian footbalers.[4] I think that something detailed should have been said upfront with this nomination rather than waiting for evidence to come out and then explaining and dendying. Something is rotten here. (A User:John254 sockpuppet first, edit, by the way, seems to be to edit the monobook first.) --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 23:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course her first edit was a monobook edit - I was mentoring her, and showed her addons as a way to make learning easier. We knew each other before she started editing; and have been open about it. I mentioned that I mentored by phone and email, which is why there's no trace of it on Wikipedia. Churchfitters are a band we both very much like, and therefore one of the first she edited; followed by fixing random stubs and redlinks. We're both big supporters of copyleft, but Panyd knows more about it, hence why she does permissions on OTRS and I handle quality. You're being overly paranoid here; there is nothing that you've asked that hasn't had a perfectly good explanation. I didn't explain it beforehand because the fact that I'm friends with Panyd has 'absolutely no bearing on nominating her, and, quite frankly, my personal life is my own. If you have accusations and evidence of sockpuppetry, then by all means open an RFC or ArbCom case against me, because I am approaching pone of the few times in my adminship where my good faith is being tested. I appreciate you're concerned, and I will alleviate your concern however you would like me to. Panyd has become an excellent editor since she started, and I don't see why my one mistake should sink her nomination for adminship. Both of us are good editors - what exactly have either of us done wrong? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 23:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"the fact that I'm friends with Panyd has absolutely no bearing on nominating her." Oh, dear.Bali ultimate (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then let's straighten this out into one story. You've known each other for a long time (8 years), and you mentored her by "phone and e-mail" on getting started editing Wikipedia, and you got on the phone, or sent an e-mail, instructing her that the first edit she should make to all of wikipedia is to her monobook? But it was a month before she begrudgingly created a user page?[5] The more the two of you say, the less credible I'm finding the entire thing, and the more concern about you as an administrator, man with many accounts (yes, "s"[6]. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 00:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why would he want two sysop accounts? Seems like a lot of effort just to have a "backup". That's why I was inclined to believe that they are indeed two different people. Closely associated people, but still separate. Gigs (talk) 02:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why anyone would want one, so I haven't asked your greater question. Why do certain people make up repeated sock accounts and come and edit wikipedia, I don't know. I haven't gotten to the point where I'm assuming he is trying to get two sysops accounts. What I've gotten to is there is something seriously wrong with this RfA, and the more questions that come up, and the more answers, the worse it seems. --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me. 04:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Gigs... it would be one thing if Chase Me was a known trouble maker... while I don't always agree with him, I don't think there has ever been problems with him. Seems like a lot of effort to get a second, unnecessary admin account.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)EDIT: I was reminded of some ANI issues shortly after he became an admin, but *I* am unaware of any recent issues.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 19:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stirring up a lot of unnecessary fuss for nothing. If you have concerns that Chase me and Panyd are anything but two people, feel free to ask Cary. I'm sure a confirmation by him would be enough to satisfy all your concerns. —Dark 06:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]