Mailer diablo is a very good janitor, spending lot of time doing
New Pages Patrol. Apart from the regular
maintainance tasks, he/she also regularly welcomes and helps new users. I think, Mailer diablo will be a good admin.
utcursch |
talk 10:44, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm honoured to accept the nomination. -
Mailer Diablo 10:52, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Contributions
Support
utcursch |
talk 10:46, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC) (Nominator)
Support without reservation. Great editor.
--
Scotteiπ + 1 = 0 11:09, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Support He already functions like an admin anyway, so this is a smooth transition. ;) --
Huaiwei 11:13, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support for skill, patience and common sense. --
Hoary 11:20, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
What skill, patience and common sense? --
Netoholic@ 15:24, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
Support. A name I'm familiar with from some of the janitorial work he's done. I didn't know much about him until now, but the more I look into his edits, the more impressed I am. MD should make a good admin.
SWAdair |
Talk 10:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Good collaboration with other users on noticeboards, etc.
Rad Racer 13:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose
(Added -- I have seen actions and qualities of this person that make me feel they are not a good admin candidate.) Can't give this person the benefit of the doubt unless we had an
appropriate procedure for revoking adminship in active use. --
Netoholic@ 15:03, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
Could you please elaborate a little bit? —
Instantnood 17:06, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
So are you saying that you oppose each new admin unless your (somewhat controversial) proposal passes?
Radiant_* 12:02, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
There is no controversy. If a procedure for revoking adminship was in regular use, I could lower my expectations of an admin nominee. In this case, there is enough doubt that I'll not be supporting. --
Netoholic@ 07:16, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
Since
Netoholic hasn't yet responded, I'll very tentatively answer "no", as he or she hasn't opposed every other request for a new admin. (Meanwhile, I'm still left wondering about the nature of this "doubt".) --
Hoary 04:05, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
Neutral
Comments
4537 edits, 2041 to the main namespace. —
Korath (
Talk) 17:25, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. You can consider me to be a "newpage patroller". :) These "newborn articles", some unwikified, need tender-loving care and attention to integrate with the ever-growing encyclopedia. The speedy feature may come in a bit handy for me and time-saver for other admins - right now I have to tag them with {{delete}} and wait for an admin to clear them up. I'm some sort of a regular on
Votes for Deletion and
Copyright Problems too.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A.
MTR. It is currently a Featured Article and the only FA article I contributed majorly. It was an article changed radically, and it has been a pleasant experience collobrating with other editors on this article. I also have a comparatively small collection of photos that I have uploaded on Wikipedia. As for now, I'm trying to get
Singapore and
KCR to FA status, which I find it rather challenging. (I guess
Singapore will fail FAC for the 3rd time, my next consideration could be a complete rewrite). I believe in trying, trying, and trying again to succeed.
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 will deal with it in the future?
A. The only direct conflict I had was once, when by accident reverted a page back to its vandalised version, got misunderstood and listed on WP:VIP, but that was ressolved quickly. I try and douse some fires with soft approaches - I have this belief that people can and do change for the better, so I doubt I will ever be handing out red cards outright. I had a few dealings with Anonymous IPs with conflict with others, clarified their doubts and even got them to sign up for an account. ;) Quite recently, I did attempt to mediate a dispute (somewhat unsucessfully) between two editors (which I believed were geninue contributors) over edit wars, which I'm still thinking of a resolution plan. I'm also a strong believer on civility, especially the policy
of no personal attacks, perhaps because I received my first abuse within two weeks of my first edit while working at newpage patrol.
Mailer diablo is a very good janitor, spending lot of time doing
New Pages Patrol. Apart from the regular
maintainance tasks, he/she also regularly welcomes and helps new users. I think, Mailer diablo will be a good admin.
utcursch |
talk 10:44, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm honoured to accept the nomination. -
Mailer Diablo 10:52, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Contributions
Support
utcursch |
talk 10:46, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC) (Nominator)
Support without reservation. Great editor.
--
Scotteiπ + 1 = 0 11:09, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Support He already functions like an admin anyway, so this is a smooth transition. ;) --
Huaiwei 11:13, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support for skill, patience and common sense. --
Hoary 11:20, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
What skill, patience and common sense? --
Netoholic@ 15:24, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
Support. A name I'm familiar with from some of the janitorial work he's done. I didn't know much about him until now, but the more I look into his edits, the more impressed I am. MD should make a good admin.
SWAdair |
Talk 10:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Good collaboration with other users on noticeboards, etc.
Rad Racer 13:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose
(Added -- I have seen actions and qualities of this person that make me feel they are not a good admin candidate.) Can't give this person the benefit of the doubt unless we had an
appropriate procedure for revoking adminship in active use. --
Netoholic@ 15:03, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
Could you please elaborate a little bit? —
Instantnood 17:06, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
So are you saying that you oppose each new admin unless your (somewhat controversial) proposal passes?
Radiant_* 12:02, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
There is no controversy. If a procedure for revoking adminship was in regular use, I could lower my expectations of an admin nominee. In this case, there is enough doubt that I'll not be supporting. --
Netoholic@ 07:16, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
Since
Netoholic hasn't yet responded, I'll very tentatively answer "no", as he or she hasn't opposed every other request for a new admin. (Meanwhile, I'm still left wondering about the nature of this "doubt".) --
Hoary 04:05, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
Neutral
Comments
4537 edits, 2041 to the main namespace. —
Korath (
Talk) 17:25, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
A. You can consider me to be a "newpage patroller". :) These "newborn articles", some unwikified, need tender-loving care and attention to integrate with the ever-growing encyclopedia. The speedy feature may come in a bit handy for me and time-saver for other admins - right now I have to tag them with {{delete}} and wait for an admin to clear them up. I'm some sort of a regular on
Votes for Deletion and
Copyright Problems too.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A.
MTR. It is currently a Featured Article and the only FA article I contributed majorly. It was an article changed radically, and it has been a pleasant experience collobrating with other editors on this article. I also have a comparatively small collection of photos that I have uploaded on Wikipedia. As for now, I'm trying to get
Singapore and
KCR to FA status, which I find it rather challenging. (I guess
Singapore will fail FAC for the 3rd time, my next consideration could be a complete rewrite). I believe in trying, trying, and trying again to succeed.
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 will deal with it in the future?
A. The only direct conflict I had was once, when by accident reverted a page back to its vandalised version, got misunderstood and listed on WP:VIP, but that was ressolved quickly. I try and douse some fires with soft approaches - I have this belief that people can and do change for the better, so I doubt I will ever be handing out red cards outright. I had a few dealings with Anonymous IPs with conflict with others, clarified their doubts and even got them to sign up for an account. ;) Quite recently, I did attempt to mediate a dispute (somewhat unsucessfully) between two editors (which I believed were geninue contributors) over edit wars, which I'm still thinking of a resolution plan. I'm also a strong believer on civility, especially the policy
of no personal attacks, perhaps because I received my first abuse within two weeks of my first edit while working at newpage patrol.