SCEhardt (
talk·contribs) – SCEhardt has been with us on Wikipedia since January 2005. In that period he's made around 3000 edits. I discovered him putting speedy tags on unsourced images... looking over his contributions and talk page, he seems trustworthy enough to be given admin tools. It would be good to have more admins that deal with images.
Coffee02:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support as neither nominator nor beating-nominator-to-it voter nor witty third voter nor fourth voter with a polychrome signature. ナイトスタリオン✉06:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support -- SCEhardt has made a lot of valuable contributions, especially in the area of images. Coffee beat me to nominating him. :)
WarpFlyght07:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support we need more people who have the power of delete to clear the backlog of no source images. SCEhardt has shown himself to be capable of this task. I have little fear he will abuse it.
ALKIVAR™08:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We don't need more admins. Images are being deleted fast enough - indeed, so fast that we now have users bitching about this to the mailing list. An admin is usually on hand to tackle requested moves, and it doesn't hurt if an article's at "the wrong name" for an extra day or two. Thanks to tagging and bagging, we speedy articles quite fast already. And as SCEhardt has noted, vandals aren't exactly easy to find these days. And when they are found, there's always an admin online who can be contacted to block them. (Just go to the admin noticeboard or IRC.)
202.58.85.807:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)reply
This is a proven vandal IP who has been disqualified and temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for disruption of the Requests for Adminship page and its subpages and for continued
WP:POINT violations. --
LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!>08:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
I would anticipate helping with correcting or deleting 'no source' images, working on requested moves, and going through the speedy deletion category. I would also place temporary blocks on vandal IPs, although thus far I have not come across many persistent enough to warrant blocking.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
I've contributed numerous photos that I think improve both the informative and aesthetic value of the articles. Examples include
Atlantic Station,
Centennial Olympic Park, and many food articles. I have also spent time working on disambiguation link repair and image license issues.
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?
The largest disagreement I have been in unfolded on the
Talk:Twix page about the inclusion of an ingredients list in the article. In any conflict situation I try to remain objective and work toward a satisfactory compromise.
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.
SCEhardt (
talk·contribs) – SCEhardt has been with us on Wikipedia since January 2005. In that period he's made around 3000 edits. I discovered him putting speedy tags on unsourced images... looking over his contributions and talk page, he seems trustworthy enough to be given admin tools. It would be good to have more admins that deal with images.
Coffee02:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support as neither nominator nor beating-nominator-to-it voter nor witty third voter nor fourth voter with a polychrome signature. ナイトスタリオン✉06:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support -- SCEhardt has made a lot of valuable contributions, especially in the area of images. Coffee beat me to nominating him. :)
WarpFlyght07:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Support we need more people who have the power of delete to clear the backlog of no source images. SCEhardt has shown himself to be capable of this task. I have little fear he will abuse it.
ALKIVAR™08:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We don't need more admins. Images are being deleted fast enough - indeed, so fast that we now have users bitching about this to the mailing list. An admin is usually on hand to tackle requested moves, and it doesn't hurt if an article's at "the wrong name" for an extra day or two. Thanks to tagging and bagging, we speedy articles quite fast already. And as SCEhardt has noted, vandals aren't exactly easy to find these days. And when they are found, there's always an admin online who can be contacted to block them. (Just go to the admin noticeboard or IRC.)
202.58.85.807:21, 6 December 2005 (UTC)reply
This is a proven vandal IP who has been disqualified and temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for disruption of the Requests for Adminship page and its subpages and for continued
WP:POINT violations. --
LBMixPro<Speak|on|it!>08:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Questions for the candidate A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
I would anticipate helping with correcting or deleting 'no source' images, working on requested moves, and going through the speedy deletion category. I would also place temporary blocks on vandal IPs, although thus far I have not come across many persistent enough to warrant blocking.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
I've contributed numerous photos that I think improve both the informative and aesthetic value of the articles. Examples include
Atlantic Station,
Centennial Olympic Park, and many food articles. I have also spent time working on disambiguation link repair and image license issues.
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?
The largest disagreement I have been in unfolded on the
Talk:Twix page about the inclusion of an ingredients list in the article. In any conflict situation I try to remain objective and work toward a satisfactory compromise.
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.