final (24/1/1) ending 05:02 December 16, 2005 (UTC)
Rschen7754 (
talk·contribs) – I would like to nominate Rschen7754 for adminship. He/she has been here since March and is a excellent road contributor who has created the U.S. Roads and U.S Highways wikiproject. She does heavy grunt work in templates and categories and does good cleanup in general. He/she is also kind and civil who respect POV and also has a decent amount on wiki namespace. I think Rschen7754 would make a good admin.
Jarandawat's sup04:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support This user has participated in delete discussions, and talk pages in addition to article space. So what if most of it was related to highways? As per MONGO and Christopher Parham, this user is unlikely to abuse administrator tools. --
rogerd 15:06, December 9, 2005 (UTC)
Support - I stumbled into something I didn't like that had been going on in the California State Route Project, and found
Rschen7754 willing to work with me despite the fact that it required major rework on 200+ articles. It's true he works mainly in a specialized area, but admins are needed everywhere --
Mwanner |
Talk00:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. In my interactions with Rschen7754, I've found him to be knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies and conventions.
howcheng [
t •
c •
w •
e ]
23:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I freely admit that I am an un-fan of most road and highway articles. So, with that fair disclosure out of the way...the contributor's edits seem extremely specialized to road and highway stuff, and on top of only being a member since April, he leaves me a little bit cold. But I gotta say, I could be talked out of this one.
Lord Bob07:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
If you poke around a little with
Interiot's tool, you see that many admins currently being accepted have only been really active for a couple months. At an average of 500 edits a month (16 edits a day, a pretty easy pace), it only takes 4 months to hit 2000 edits. And even
User:BD2412, who was accepted with a record-breaking number of Support votes, had only been here since February '05. --
Interiot20:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
You're right. That was dumb of me. I stand by the vote because of not being a well-rounded editor, but that whole only-been-around-since-April thing was fatigue-induced moronity.
Lord Bob21:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose users' response to question #1 leaves me feeling they are either unsure of what an admins duties are (RC patrolling doesnt really require adminship), or would be sticking mostly to content creation. I just dont get the feeling this user needs the mop and bucket for what they are doing. You can probably persuade me to change my vote, if you gave a more specific reasoning for why you want admin powers.
ALKIVAR™10:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)reply
A. I anticipate doing whatever needs to be done... if I see a need I'll go over to that page and fix things. However, I'll probably focus on RC patrol and vandalism because there is no end to it! I tend to do most of my Wikipedia work on Friday nights and over the weekend and summer, and during these times I would be doing administrative tasks on Wikipedia. However, I would put on my watchlist the pages where non-administrators can report cases of urgent vandalism and page protects to ensure the integrity of the encyclopedia and to ensure that there is not much lag between the time that someone sends an SOS and when someone responds to it.
(added a few days later) There are areas on Wikipedia that need someone to work on... like today I noticed
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. There are quite a few items there that should be deleted (including inappropriate images) that have been tagged but need an administrator. I'd look for areas like that and take care of them.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
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. Inevitably, when you are involved in editing highway articles you do get involved in disputes. I have had a few in the past, and I have remained civil while defending a controversial position. While I have made my share of mistakes before, I believe that I have remained civil during debates. I plan to remain civil in the future and to offer compromises when nothing else seems to be working. I would never use my administrative privileges to gain an unfair advantage during a conflict, however (unless a rule of Wikipedia was clearly being broken).
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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
final (24/1/1) ending 05:02 December 16, 2005 (UTC)
Rschen7754 (
talk·contribs) – I would like to nominate Rschen7754 for adminship. He/she has been here since March and is a excellent road contributor who has created the U.S. Roads and U.S Highways wikiproject. She does heavy grunt work in templates and categories and does good cleanup in general. He/she is also kind and civil who respect POV and also has a decent amount on wiki namespace. I think Rschen7754 would make a good admin.
Jarandawat's sup04:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support This user has participated in delete discussions, and talk pages in addition to article space. So what if most of it was related to highways? As per MONGO and Christopher Parham, this user is unlikely to abuse administrator tools. --
rogerd 15:06, December 9, 2005 (UTC)
Support - I stumbled into something I didn't like that had been going on in the California State Route Project, and found
Rschen7754 willing to work with me despite the fact that it required major rework on 200+ articles. It's true he works mainly in a specialized area, but admins are needed everywhere --
Mwanner |
Talk00:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. In my interactions with Rschen7754, I've found him to be knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies and conventions.
howcheng [
t •
c •
w •
e ]
23:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I freely admit that I am an un-fan of most road and highway articles. So, with that fair disclosure out of the way...the contributor's edits seem extremely specialized to road and highway stuff, and on top of only being a member since April, he leaves me a little bit cold. But I gotta say, I could be talked out of this one.
Lord Bob07:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
If you poke around a little with
Interiot's tool, you see that many admins currently being accepted have only been really active for a couple months. At an average of 500 edits a month (16 edits a day, a pretty easy pace), it only takes 4 months to hit 2000 edits. And even
User:BD2412, who was accepted with a record-breaking number of Support votes, had only been here since February '05. --
Interiot20:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
You're right. That was dumb of me. I stand by the vote because of not being a well-rounded editor, but that whole only-been-around-since-April thing was fatigue-induced moronity.
Lord Bob21:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose users' response to question #1 leaves me feeling they are either unsure of what an admins duties are (RC patrolling doesnt really require adminship), or would be sticking mostly to content creation. I just dont get the feeling this user needs the mop and bucket for what they are doing. You can probably persuade me to change my vote, if you gave a more specific reasoning for why you want admin powers.
ALKIVAR™10:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)reply
A. I anticipate doing whatever needs to be done... if I see a need I'll go over to that page and fix things. However, I'll probably focus on RC patrol and vandalism because there is no end to it! I tend to do most of my Wikipedia work on Friday nights and over the weekend and summer, and during these times I would be doing administrative tasks on Wikipedia. However, I would put on my watchlist the pages where non-administrators can report cases of urgent vandalism and page protects to ensure the integrity of the encyclopedia and to ensure that there is not much lag between the time that someone sends an SOS and when someone responds to it.
(added a few days later) There are areas on Wikipedia that need someone to work on... like today I noticed
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. There are quite a few items there that should be deleted (including inappropriate images) that have been tagged but need an administrator. I'd look for areas like that and take care of them.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
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. Inevitably, when you are involved in editing highway articles you do get involved in disputes. I have had a few in the past, and I have remained civil while defending a controversial position. While I have made my share of mistakes before, I believe that I have remained civil during debates. I plan to remain civil in the future and to offer compromises when nothing else seems to be working. I would never use my administrative privileges to gain an unfair advantage during a conflict, however (unless a rule of Wikipedia was clearly being broken).
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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.