Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Dpmuk#Answers to StephenBuxton's optional question

1. A tory liar
2. : This is not a valid R3 as it has been around for two years and R3 requires it to have been recently created. I would however delete as a G10. Although this title is strictly true as he was a member of the Conservative, or Tory, party and he has been found guilty of perjury, hence a liar, I still see several problems with this redirect. I think my biggest problem with it is that it implies we are somehow making a judgement call that he is the most important "tory liar" and in doing so we violate NPOV as we have no evidence for that. There is also the problem that a redirect like this does not provide a balanced, NPOV as it is quite possible someone will find and follow the redirect and not actually read the article and so make the connection between tory liar and Archer without any context or opposing views. I would check what links here to make sure the redirect hadn't been used but other than that, as the user is already blocked, there would be little follow up.
3. Deben High School
4. : Not a valid A7 as schools are specifically excluded from A7 and even without that, given the precedence AfD, just being a high school is a sign of possible (indeed probable) notability. The first thing I'd probably do is a google search to try to find out more about the school, mainly where it is and what name the school itself uses so that I could attempt to see if we already have an article on the school under a slightly different name. If I found such a page I'd redirect and leave the user a note. If not and I'd found out where the school was I'd wikilink the relevant text and keep the page watchlisted for a bit as it had only recently been edited and they might expand it. If that had not been done after a day or so I would consider redirecting to the town / school district or somewhere similar if such an article mentioned the school as in it's current state the article provides no more information. If on the other hand I had not been able to identify the school they were referring to I'd drop the user a note and keep my eye on the article with an eye to A1ing it if nothing was added to it in a reasonable amount of time.
5. Malcom Hardee
6. : Definite G10 in my opinion. Even in the unlikely event that he really did "ram a firework up his butt and set fire to it and run around naked" the way it's been worded makes it an attack. It would also be a valid A7 so even without that sentence I would still delete (I can expand on what I'd do in this case if required). I'd look at the user's other contributions and if there were none or the others were clearly good faith I'd explain to the user a bit more why it was unacceptable - it's clearly not appropriate to me but this may be less obvious to some, e.g. a teenager. If there were more attack like or otherwise problematic edits in their history then a block would be in order.
7. New article
8. : I don't think this is vandalism as I'd assume good faith and assume they were either testing or were not aware how Wikipedia worked. As such I'd delete under A3 (G2 is also valid). I'd then drop the user that created the page a note saying the I didn't find the edit vandalism, let them know that their free to remove stuff from their talk page and give them a welcome message. I'd then let the tagger know that I personally didn't find the edit vandalism and explain why.
9. Wizzy Wig the Clown
10. : Definitely not an A7 in my opinion. The claims to having appeared on television etc are enough signs of possible notability to get above the A7 bar. I'd do a search myself and see if I could find any references if not I'd tag as a BLPPROD and if I could I'd add a reference or two and add a stub tag. I'd drop the creator a message about possible conflict of interest and leave the tagger a message as to why I didn't find it an A7.
11. Athur the Great
12. : Well I'd delete as an A7. As the user appears to be a child and they've revealed personal information I'd also inform over sight. I'd then probably post a message at ANI asking someone to post a message to the user as I'll admit this isn't a situation I've come across and so would be unsure how to write such a message. In most cases if I were unsure how to follow through I'd leave it to another admin in the first place but in this instance, given the circumstances, it's more important it was dealt with quickly.
13. Sudar Barash
14. : I'd pass on dealing with this one as there is some information there that could be signs of notability (the nine digits comment and the size of the showroom) but I don't know enough on the topic to know if these are run of the mill figures or highly impressive. As such I'd probably leave the whole issue for another admin to deal with so the user was dealing with fewer people but I do note that there are user name and conflict of interest concerns as well.

Dpmuk (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2012 (UTC)