The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Final (64/0/0) ended 22:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Snoutwood ( talk · contribs) – Snoutwood, né Blackcap ( talk · contribs), has been with Wikipedia since July 2005 ^[1] and has been editing regularly since August of the same year ^[2]. During that time, he has ammased something like 4500 edits (the toolserver is out of date, it shows them under his old username, as a matter of fact. Ah well.) ^[3]

More important than these raw statistics, however, is the intelligence, equality, kindness, and overall wonderful attitude that Snoutwood has carried with him throughout his editing. It's really difficult to describe or put into words, but it's obvious when one reads his contributions to discussions.

Given all these factors, I not only think he wouldn't abuse his privileges, he'd use them with aplomb. Sean Black ^(talk?) 20:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply

I absolutely insist on co-nominating. — Encephalon 08:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I gratefully and heartily accept. Snoutwood (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply

Support

1. I beat the nom support! Experienced and balanced editor. _-M ^o P-_ 22:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply
2. Another beat the nom support Moe ε 22:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply
3. Hey oy. I really shouldn't have to do this, it's implied... but eh, if that's what you're after.-- Sean Black ^(talk?) 23:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply
4. Support Would definitely make a good admin. Pegasus1138 ^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 23:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply
5. Support as per all comments above. -- M e ts501 ^{talk •  contribs} 23:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC) reply
6. Strong Support Editor is an insightful, generally spectacular WPian, for whom I have the highest respect. Xoloz 00:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
7. Support. Will make a great admin. DarthVad e r 00:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
8. Support - Richardcavell 00:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
9. Stop with the damn cite.php in RfAs, it's annoying. -- Rory 0 96 _(block) 01:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
10. Support, well rounded user and vandalism reverter, I particularly liked his work on USA PATRIOT Act. -- Andy123 (talk) 01:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
11. Support - meets my standards -- Tawker 01:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
12. Support wiz plezher - CrazyRussian talk/ contribs/ email 01:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
13. Strong Support although a bit too wedded to his edits if you ask me ... Eusebeus 02:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
14. Support Betacommand 02:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
15. Strong Support Rama's Arrow 03:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
16. Support Joe I 03:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
17. Support I like the answers to the questions. Would be a great asset with the mop.-- Kungfu Adam ^{( talk)} 03:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
18. Support, excellent user, should be an excellent admin. Tito xd^{( ?!? - help us)} 05:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
19. Support. Not likely to abuse the tools. Kimchi.sg | talk 06:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
20. Support-- Jusjih 08:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
21. Edit conflict Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 08:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
22. Very strong support. Snoutwood is quite simply the gold standard. Sean's nomination has pre-empted a 5 para essay from this user, but if the pleasure of nominating Snouty is not to be mine, I'm thankful, at least, to be able to lend my full support to this first among Wikipedians. — Encephalon 08:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
23. Support Sandy 11:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
24. Can't see why not. Well-rounded user. Redux 12:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
25. Support per nom and interest in uncommon admin tasks (per question #1). As far as the RfC in question #3, Snoutwood's statement may have been a little harsh, but it did bring up some issues with deletion at the time. That led up to development of the {{ prod}} system, which has helped to cool the issue down and reduce the contention with AfD. That's a good thing. -- E lkman - ^(talk) 13:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
26. Support per Wynaut! Stifle ( talk) 13:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
27. Support Will be a great admin. -- S iva1979 ^{Talk to me} 16:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
28. Support - I've had nothing but pleasant encounters with him. -- Cyde Weys 16:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
29. Support meets all of my numerical and behavioral standards. I previously expressed an interest in nominating him myself. — Apr. 28, '06 [18:34] < freakofnur_xture | talk>
30. Support. He was civil to me when I made an unintentionaly angering edit, and looking through his archives, his hawk eye on Ansel Adams is always great to see. Good luck! - Mysekurity ^[m! 21:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
31. Support. With pleasure. This user has done some good janitorial work, reversions of vandalism and is polite and cool. -- Knucmo2 21:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC) reply
32. Support Familiar name Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 00:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
33. Support, excellent candidate Deizio 00:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
34. Support, all around good great user. Roy boy crash fan 01:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
35. Support per nom Buck e tsofg ✐ 02:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
36. Support, he's great. -- Ter e nc e Ong 04:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
37. Support A very civilised wikipedian, I had an accidently mixup with him back in October or so when he was Blackcap about Kate's tool, I wrote him a message that accidently could be taken to be mean if seen in textual form solely but he realized that I was just kidding with him and he was really nice about it. He's a great person and a wonderful editor, I look forward to seeing him as an admin. - Patman2648 06:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
38. Support. Great mainspace editor, unlikely to abuse tools. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 07:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
39. Support why not? Computerjoe 's talk 14:15, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
40. Support. Two thumbs up. (^'-')^ Covington 22:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
41. Support -- Jay( Reply) 22:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC) reply
42. Support I really did think he was one.... Rx StrangeLove 06:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
43. Support: -- Bhadani 12:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
44. Support Per nom Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
45. Support. Thunderbrand 16:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
46. Support No reason why not. Davewild 16:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
47. Support General Eisenhower 17:36, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
48. Support Per nom OSU80 17:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
49. Support. -- MarcoTolo 18:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
50. Lesbian pile-on Support per nom (P.S. Your RfA ends on the same day as mine.. COINCIDENCE). Werdna648 ^T/ _C\ ^@ 22:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
51. Support Couldn't say otherwise! ~Linuxerist E/ L/ T 00:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
52. Support per nom. -- Arnzy ( Talk) 03:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
53. Support. Only just come across this user for the first time at Wikipedia:Abuse reports, on visiting here produced the usual 'I thought...' reaction. Looks good, and would certainly find admin tools useful. Petros471 09:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
54. Support See no reason to oppose.-- MONGO 02:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
55. Of course... Support + + Lar: t/ c 04:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
56. Snoutwood make a great administrator. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
57. Yes, I snoutwood this user too. JIP | Talk 07:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
58. Support No hesitation, quality contributor. -- Cactus.man ✍ 09:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
59. Support Well, duh! Primat e ^#101 11:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
60. Support Jared W 16:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
61. Unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
62. Support - good user. ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 04:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
63. Support Sarah Ewart ( Talk) 13:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
64. Support. Gosh, hope I didn't miss the deadline. -- Darth Deskana (talk page) 22:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

• See Snoutwood's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool and the edit summary usage with Mathbot's tool.

Total edits 4559
Distinct pages edited 2240
Average edits/page 2.035
First edit 03:20, 24 July 2005
 
(main) 1380
Talk 203
User 387
User talk 1217
Image 15
Image talk 7
MediaWiki talk 27
Template 56
Template talk 73
Help 5
Help talk 3
Category 34
Category talk 13
Wikipedia 887
Wikipedia talk 252

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:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.

A: WP:AIV! The absence of admins on that page has driven me mad through many a sleepless RC patrolling night. I also reckon that I'd be using my tools for cleaning up the CAT:CSD backlog, WP:SPLICE, and any other janitorial bit that's lying around waiting to be done. I always like running RC Patrol and the rollback (RfA cliché!), delete, and block tools would be very handy for said activity.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A: I've worked in a lot of different areas of Wikipedia. Altough I haven't spent a massive amount of time in any one place, at one time or another I've worked on *fD, newpages patrol, WP:DPL, WP:UI, welcoming, Category:Category needed, the admins' noticeboard, and I'm sure there's a few others that I've dipped into from time to time. I've done a fair bit of vandalfighting as well.

On the article side of things, my proudest piece is Among the Thugs. My current project is Joe Sacco, and though it's not so pretty now I have high hopes for it and am still trying to collect more sources. I'm moderately active on the Irish noticeboard, and dabble in a couple of Irish articles when the mood strikes me.

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: The largest conflict I've been in was with Snowspinner, back in October. Snowspinner had deleted a number of AfDs, and after some discussion on WP:AN/I I filed an RfC about it. I made a large mistake in asking Snowspinner to hand over his adminship, something I thought was appropriate at the time, and once I realized that that was poor judgement on my part I apologized. I did my best to talk is over and move the RfC forward, to no avail, and when I realized that nothing more was going to come out of it, I put it aside, fairly frustrated.

The whole thing emphasised for me the importance of keeping a cool head and being especially civil, kind, and calm in a dispute, something which I try to uphold. I try to always remember that when I'm talking to someone I disagree with, they're going to have just as strong an opinion as I do, and diminishing or belittling them is a sure way to escalate the problem and leave no one happy. I do my best to not lose my temper and always be reasonable, and if I'm wrong, which is something I've had lots of pratice in being, to admit it, apologize and move on.

Footnotes

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.