Strong Support - I have seen him around here doing a lot of good work.
joturner 02:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support good editor. Will make a good admin.
FloNighttalk 02:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Looks good to me.
Grutness...wha? 02:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support His article space edits are of the highest caliber, his work in other areas is great, seems to keep a cool head. I also like his honest, open approach to question 1. It takes either a fool, an honest person or a very confident person to answer that question starting off with "I'm not too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with." I don't think Andy's a fool.
JoshuaZ 03:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I've often thought that the best shorthand for "good admin material" is "gets articles featured". The FA process requires a focus on article quality and the ability to take criticism on board and move forward with it in the most public of Wikipedia venues. The vandalism fighting is a bonus. -
BanyanTree 16:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Always writes succinct, useful edit summaries and is a keen RC patroller. --
Knucmo2 21:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, excellent editor, no worries Deizio 00:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, great asset to the project.
Royboycrash
fan 01:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Bucketsofg✐ 02:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support never ran into him before, but looking over diff looks good --
Deville (
Talk) 04:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, definitely. --
Terence Ong 04:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support He's proven himself a brilliant editor -
Patman2648 06:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support fantastic editor, unlikely to screw things up.
Matt Yeager♫(
Talk?) 07:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support If his work at peer review is anything to go by, he's a level-headed editor who should make a great admin.
Oldelpaso 09:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent editor, excellent nominator.
Xoloz 15:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. —
TKD::
Talk 15:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support His help has been huge in
WP:PR and
WP:FAC and, frankly, I thought he was an admin already. :)
RadioKirktalk to me 16:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
EXTREME SUPPORT excellent editor, even on non-technical topics (which I'm not so good at).
Just another star in the nightT |
@ |
C 00:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, he seems to be OK.
JIP |
Talk 06:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support: --
Bhadani 12:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support No reason why not.
Davewild 17:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support as per Davewild --
Mets501talk 17:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support. Good user interactions and outstanding content contributions (both in depth and range). And his answer to question #1 is perhaps the most refreshing I've seen—gold star for honesty. --
MarcoTolo 18:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Kukini 21:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Total edits 4120
Distinct pages edited 1706
Average edits/page 2.415
First edit 22:31, 28 September 2005
(main) 2068
Talk 342
User 189
User talk 535
Image 24
Template 49
Template talk 13
Category 8
Wikipedia 866
Wikipedia talk 26
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A: I'm not too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with- I'll probably start with a wide range of
sysop chores, including those listed on
Category:Administrative backlog, and then narrowing them down to the ones I'm most comfortable with. I plan on helping out doing more
recent change patrolling. I am aware that I only have 6 edits to
WP:AIV, and if this request does succeed I'll probably still list repeatedly-vandalizing editors on
WP:AIV for a while. Even with blocking privelidges, I would like to ensure that I will be fully comfortable with the blocking process before making a block. I might also help out on
Did you know? (4 of my new articles were DYKs). Before, I also used to do a lot of
new page patrolling, and will probably help out by speedy deleting new articles that fall under one of the
Criteria for SD. As I have also begun to do more work on
WP:AfD, I can also help out in closing AfDs. Finally (as of now), I might try helping around at
Category:Images with no copyright tag, following guidelines at
Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/Instructions for administrators.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
There were also a couple of unsuccessful featured article candidates that I did a lot of work on, including
Native Americans in the United States (I started my work on the article rather late, but still managed to fix several of the objections on
WP:FAC) and
Photosynthetic reaction centre. Additionally, I have begun to do more work on
WP:FARC, alone taking care of the removal comments for
Crash test dummy. Along with several other editors like
Ryz05, I also helped on
PRC in
WP:FARC, the site of several heated arguments. By adding over 30
WP:FOOTNOTEs and making other fixes, I took a major role in allowing the FA to retain its status. Among others, I also worked on
History of Greenland and
Ferdinand Magellan (the latter was removed).
Outside of the article namespace, I am also happy about my edits to Wikipedia namespace articles, like
WP:FAC and
WP:PR. Lately, I have become very active on
WP:FAC and
WP:PR, having made comments to around 129 FACs and 112 PRs so far. Additionally, I am the current maintener of
WP:USCOTW, which I have maintained for about 3 months, and also unfortunately am the only major participant doing work to the actual USCOTWs. I also am an active member of
WP:NJ, and started
WP:NJCOTW (which as of now is inactive).
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I have had minor conflicts over the content of articles, but have not let my wikistress level rise over such conflicts. I frankly have never entered any
edit wars as far as I can recall. At least as of my last 1,500 contributions, I have not had to make more than 2 reversions to any page over content disputes (not including
vandalism, though to
PRC one time I had one revert and a partial revert).
In the future, I plan on continuing
civility in response to any edit content disputes, and will not abuse administator privelidges on any such conflicts if they do happen.
The above 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.
Strong Support - I have seen him around here doing a lot of good work.
joturner 02:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support good editor. Will make a good admin.
FloNighttalk 02:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. Looks good to me.
Grutness...wha? 02:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support His article space edits are of the highest caliber, his work in other areas is great, seems to keep a cool head. I also like his honest, open approach to question 1. It takes either a fool, an honest person or a very confident person to answer that question starting off with "I'm not too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with." I don't think Andy's a fool.
JoshuaZ 03:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. I've often thought that the best shorthand for "good admin material" is "gets articles featured". The FA process requires a focus on article quality and the ability to take criticism on board and move forward with it in the most public of Wikipedia venues. The vandalism fighting is a bonus. -
BanyanTree 16:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support - Always writes succinct, useful edit summaries and is a keen RC patroller. --
Knucmo2 21:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, excellent editor, no worries Deizio 00:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, great asset to the project.
Royboycrash
fan 01:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Bucketsofg✐ 02:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support never ran into him before, but looking over diff looks good --
Deville (
Talk) 04:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, definitely. --
Terence Ong 04:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support He's proven himself a brilliant editor -
Patman2648 06:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support fantastic editor, unlikely to screw things up.
Matt Yeager♫(
Talk?) 07:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support If his work at peer review is anything to go by, he's a level-headed editor who should make a great admin.
Oldelpaso 09:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent editor, excellent nominator.
Xoloz 15:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. —
TKD::
Talk 15:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support His help has been huge in
WP:PR and
WP:FAC and, frankly, I thought he was an admin already. :)
RadioKirktalk to me 16:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)reply
EXTREME SUPPORT excellent editor, even on non-technical topics (which I'm not so good at).
Just another star in the nightT |
@ |
C 00:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support, he seems to be OK.
JIP |
Talk 06:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support: --
Bhadani 12:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support No reason why not.
Davewild 17:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support as per Davewild --
Mets501talk 17:44, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Strong Support. Good user interactions and outstanding content contributions (both in depth and range). And his answer to question #1 is perhaps the most refreshing I've seen—gold star for honesty. --
MarcoTolo 18:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Kukini 21:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)reply
Total edits 4120
Distinct pages edited 1706
Average edits/page 2.415
First edit 22:31, 28 September 2005
(main) 2068
Talk 342
User 189
User talk 535
Image 24
Template 49
Template talk 13
Category 8
Wikipedia 866
Wikipedia talk 26
Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A: I'm not too sure exactly what chores I plan on helping out with- I'll probably start with a wide range of
sysop chores, including those listed on
Category:Administrative backlog, and then narrowing them down to the ones I'm most comfortable with. I plan on helping out doing more
recent change patrolling. I am aware that I only have 6 edits to
WP:AIV, and if this request does succeed I'll probably still list repeatedly-vandalizing editors on
WP:AIV for a while. Even with blocking privelidges, I would like to ensure that I will be fully comfortable with the blocking process before making a block. I might also help out on
Did you know? (4 of my new articles were DYKs). Before, I also used to do a lot of
new page patrolling, and will probably help out by speedy deleting new articles that fall under one of the
Criteria for SD. As I have also begun to do more work on
WP:AfD, I can also help out in closing AfDs. Finally (as of now), I might try helping around at
Category:Images with no copyright tag, following guidelines at
Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/Instructions for administrators.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
There were also a couple of unsuccessful featured article candidates that I did a lot of work on, including
Native Americans in the United States (I started my work on the article rather late, but still managed to fix several of the objections on
WP:FAC) and
Photosynthetic reaction centre. Additionally, I have begun to do more work on
WP:FARC, alone taking care of the removal comments for
Crash test dummy. Along with several other editors like
Ryz05, I also helped on
PRC in
WP:FARC, the site of several heated arguments. By adding over 30
WP:FOOTNOTEs and making other fixes, I took a major role in allowing the FA to retain its status. Among others, I also worked on
History of Greenland and
Ferdinand Magellan (the latter was removed).
Outside of the article namespace, I am also happy about my edits to Wikipedia namespace articles, like
WP:FAC and
WP:PR. Lately, I have become very active on
WP:FAC and
WP:PR, having made comments to around 129 FACs and 112 PRs so far. Additionally, I am the current maintener of
WP:USCOTW, which I have maintained for about 3 months, and also unfortunately am the only major participant doing work to the actual USCOTWs. I also am an active member of
WP:NJ, and started
WP:NJCOTW (which as of now is inactive).
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I have had minor conflicts over the content of articles, but have not let my wikistress level rise over such conflicts. I frankly have never entered any
edit wars as far as I can recall. At least as of my last 1,500 contributions, I have not had to make more than 2 reversions to any page over content disputes (not including
vandalism, though to
PRC one time I had one revert and a partial revert).
In the future, I plan on continuing
civility in response to any edit content disputes, and will not abuse administator privelidges on any such conflicts if they do happen.
The above 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.