Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hut 8.5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Hut 8.5

[edit]

Final (64/0/0); Originally scheduled to end 16:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC). Nomination successful. --Deskana (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hut 8.5 (talk · contribs) - A very helpful user, who has spend over 1 year on wiki, and has over 11,000 edits! Always polite and rarely makes mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris 1991 (talk • contribs)

Co-nom by Maxim
I haven't interacted directly with Hut 8.5 much, but I've always been thinking of offering to nominate him. I notice, very often, Hut 8.5 at WP:AIV. He always correctly reverts, warns, and reports problematic users to AIV. (Reverts: [1], [2], [3]; Warnings: [4], [5], [6]; Reports to AIV: [7], [8], [9]) Hut 8.5 also makes very solid arguments in XfDs. ([10]. [11], [12]) As a vandalism reporter, I highly trust Hut 8.5. I usually block when I see his report, and I don't count up warnings on the talk page of the user in question. Finally, a glance at Hut 8.5 deleted contributions will reveal many articles that he correctly nominated for speedy deletion. I think he's very prepared for adminship; I hope you think the same. Maxim(talk) (contributions) 19:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Thank you. Hut 8.5 19:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

[edit]

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: Mainly work on WP:AIV and CAT:CSD, as I have experience in those areas and they always seem backlogged. I would also be interested in closing XfD discussions as I have some experience there as well.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have taken part in several areas. I am a regular RC and NP patroller, with over 200 edits to WP:AIV. I also comment at AfD and MfD debates frequently as well. I'm not a great writer, though I have done some good work on Robert May's School, amongst other pages.
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: I have been caught up in several disputes one way or another. Most notably when I was new to Wikipedia I was wikistalked and harassed by several vandals and their sockpuppets - see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Hunter91 for details. I think I dealt with that issue rather well given my lack of experience. If I get into a stressful situation I generally take a break and try to think things through calmly before proceeding. I find this works very well.

Question from User:Piotrus

4. Would you add yourself to Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall? Why, or why not? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A: Yes, I will. Administrators are accountable to the community, and the community should be able to take away adminship, so long as the process is not misused.

General comments

[edit]
RfAs for this user:

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Hut 8.5 before commenting.

Discussion

[edit]
Support
[edit]
  1. Might as well get here first - I've been impressed with Hut 8.5 every time we've come into contact, I'm sure he'll be fine with a couple of extra buttons. Good luck! Ryan Postlethwaite 19:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. XfD participation, CSD participation, and vandal-whacking experience. Support --Agüeybaná 19:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Strong support Looks like a great candidate, GDonato (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Per co-nom. Maxim(talk) (contributions) 19:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Hut+! The Rambling Man 19:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support User seems to understand when tools should be used. AIV reports by this user are blocked 97.8% of the time, I know I checked. The 2.2% that were not blocked were well within the range of admin discretion. 1 != 2 20:47, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support per nomination, gd luck Hut 8.5, give those vandals hell!!! --Boris 1991 21:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support - nothing in my interactions with this user make me worry that they will abuse the tools. So, good luck, and I look forward to mopping with you. - Philippe | Talk 21:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Over 5800 mainspace edits checked track it is good.See no concerns as per track. Pharaoh of the Wizards 21:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support From what I have seen of him, I would be very surprised if he abused the tools. -Jéské(v^_^v) 21:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Contribs show candidate invested lots of work into WP, in respectful and helpful attitude towards editors. Conflict solving skills. Apparent understanding of guidelines and tools. No reason not to trust him with the mop. Gray62 23:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Has earnt the trust of the community. Good luck! Dfrg.msc 23:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. support Yep. I support this because it is apparent how experienced and trustworthy this user is. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Hurrah! --Hirohisat 紅葉 01:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. Looks like a great candidate. Good luck! --FolicAcid 03:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support No major concerns here. Would make a fine admin. --Siva1979Talk to me 04:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. What the!?! I ran into edit conflict! er, I mean troppus (support spelled backwards) I've seen this user around several times, especially RfAs; looks like this user is ready for the mop. NHRHS2010 Talk 04:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support John254 04:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support No doubts, you are ready to be an admin. Good luck. Carlosguitar 04:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support User can be trusted. Phgao 05:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Jmlk17 06:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Excellent candidate whose judgment, especially at AFD, is pretty much always spot on. CIreland 07:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support After familiarizing myself with the RfA process, I can safely say that this user is more than qualified for the job. Wisdom89 07:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. support no worries right now.Yahel Guhan 08:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support - Sufficient experience gathered. Good, consistent editor, well done. Lradrama 10:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. I-thought-he-was-an-admin-already support. Melsaran (talk) 11:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Yeah Civil and sensible user--Phoenix 15 (Talk) 12:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support - Looks like this user has a lot of experience and I doubt he would abuse the tools. Tiddly-Tom 12:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Trustworthy fellow; fine addition to the admin corps. Xoloz 12:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Good candidate.--Húsönd 13:08, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Cheskopokuta klees ka tlanko ya oska. Will (talk) 14:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - 97.8%? - Well of course then. Rudget Contributions 16:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Pour Carbon Monoxide 17:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support I thought he already...oh, never mind. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 17:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Righto then. </i thought he was already></good contributor></wont abuse the tools> David Fuchs (talk) 18:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Will do great at AfD, which is where I've seen this user. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 18:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. bibliomaniac15 21:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support - solid editor who will make a solid admin.--Kubigula (talk) 21:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support, very solid candidate. --Coredesat 22:36, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support Looks great! This person is a solid candidate for the tools. Keep up the good work, Hut! GlassCobra 00:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support A model wikipedian. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 00:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support -- Gogo Dodo 03:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support - Contribs look very good. Lara❤Love 05:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support, excellent candidate. *Cremepuff222* 14:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support I am very impressed by this editor and the above discussion. Huge number of edits, close to 100 % edit summaries, rarely overruled at AIV, appears to need the mop. What's not to like? Bearian 15:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support Why not? Dustihowe 16:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Should do fine. --Kbdank71 17:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support, vast improvements were made since Hut 8.0. Burntsauce 17:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support should do well. Carlossuarez46 22:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support. Looked at his contributions and they seem good. He is effective in fighting vandals. Many experienced people are in his list of supporters above. EdJohnston 03:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support. A strong candidate. Axl 07:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support—Everythin's been said. Jonathan talk \ contribs — er 00:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support. Very good post count, user seems to know very well the tools for adminship, looks like a good candidate to me.TOL 05:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support. Impressive candidate. LАМВDОІD T C 18:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support 200 edits to AIV shows the user's credentials as a good vandal fighter and that he is ready for the extra tools.--WriterListener 19:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support - super editor and good vandal fighter. Excellent track record - Alison ❤ 03:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support - Always need more careful vandal fighters. --TeaDrinker 06:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  58. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 17:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support Have seen Hut around a lot, no worries. -SpuriousQ (talk) 17:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Great editor. Wikidudeman (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  61. No concerns whatsoever. Acalamari 18:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  62. What? Weren't you alredy an admin? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 01:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support See nothing to suggest will abuse the tools. Davewild 08:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support, seen him around, no reason not to. Wizardman 15:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
[edit]
Neutral
[edit]
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Hut_8.5&oldid=1090626954"