Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Number 57

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DLand (talk | contribs) at 23:27, 10 September 2007 (→‎Discussion: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Number 57

Voice your opinion (talk page) (5/0/0); Scheduled to end 18:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Number 57 (talk · contribs) - Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you Number 57. Number 57 is in his 11th month of active editing and has amassed almost twelve thousand edits. He's written a lot of Israeli stuff and populated many electoral templates, which is an extra-thankless task. He's got a graduate degree and is an intelligent, well-mannered, and non-conflict-seeking person. I see one stinky edit war at {{Irish elections}} back in May. He has no blocks.

Having seen quality work from this user, and in the hopes that he will continue to do quality work with administrative tools, I invite you to support Number 57's candidacy for sysoppery. -- Y not? 17:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I accept. Number 57 18:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: Having got burned on a CSD a few months ago (albeit following some misadvice from an admin!), I decided to brush up on deletion policy. I therefore expect to contribute to clearing the CSD backlog, as well as dealing with expired prods and closing AfDs and RMs. As I keep an eye on a lot of Middle East-related articles, I will also be able to lock articles which are developing into edit wars (although obviously not ones I am involved in).
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: In terms of articles, I guess my most satisfying contributions were completing the Israeli elections series, and making sure there is an article on every party to sit in the Knesset. As Y mentions above, the majority of the elections template series is my work.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Shamefully I have once received a 3RR warning, though I believe I remained civil, and that it was a genuine attempt to try and enforce the discussion's outcome (or lack of it) against someone who could be described as a disruptive editor. Otherwise I tend to stick to talk pages and try and solve disputes in a more civilised manner (see an annoyingly circular discussion at Talk:FIFA 08#Ulster Banner beside FAI league as a recent example) and am not too stubborn to change my mind on issues if people present good evidence to the contrary.

Question from User:rspeer

4. As you may see from WT:RFA, I am concerned about the growing problem of edit count inflation. Be honest: what techniques do you use to accumulate such a large number of edits? Would you do anything differently if you were not running for adminship? What kinds of edits do you make that require stopping to think about things? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 20:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A: I don't think I have done anything to inflate my edit count - it is not something I boast about. I believe most of my edits are constructive and not minor; at the moment I am going through Category:Former Members of the Knesset and adding Template:MKs and expanding them (see my edits to Naomi Blumenthal earlier today). I wouldn't do anything different if I were not running for adminship, particularly as I was only offered a nomination just over week ago (and had not requested one)! Number 57 20:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Number 57 before commenting.

Discussion

Support

  1. Nom -- Y not? 19:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Weak Support The 3RR warning is the only concern I have. Good editor count. But there is something tell me to go netural. For now, Support. PatPolitics rule! 19:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support The 3RR was back in May. A review of the current talk page shows only positives. He meets my standards by a long shot. Could not find a reason to oppose. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 19:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - Good contributions, and having Y as a Sherpa says a good deal considering his (too) high of standards. --David Shankbone 21:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support because of the Oppose !vote. We need more admins willing to stand up to our nationalist factions. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    What exactly do you mean by that? It seems to me like a poor rationale for supporting an RfA.--DLandTALK 23:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Wow, I wouldn't want this editor to go through RfA #58... —AldeBaer 22:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose I have seen very positive contributions from this user, but it would be unwise to give admin powers to someone who has, on multiple very recent occasions, made controversial and disruptive mass edits without seeking consensus. One example: Moving several Israeli holiday articles to their respective English translations - without asking for feedback at all. This action generated immediate outrage from editors of those pages, and they were promptly moved back.(Yom Yerushalayim, Yom Ha'atzmaut, Yom Hazikaron)
    Another example: Removing about 40 articles from Category:Religious cities, towns and villages in Israel and placing them in Category:Religious Israeli settlements - without any discussion - just the edit summary "rm cat - not in Israel". (one of the many diffs:Alon Shevut)
    And one more thing - it's ok for an admin or editor to have a POV - we all do. However, it's not ok for one's POV to fuel inappropriate disruptive edits like this one to Gordon Brown.--DLandTALK 19:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see any harm in any of these. WP:BE BOLD. The Gordon Brown edit was not inappropriate either. Maybe it's not what I would have done, but it's certainly within the realm of the legitimate. -- Y not? 19:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Number_57&oldid=157035295"