This small fish has been swimming in our big pond since June 2004 and already has accumulated way over 5000 edits. He's been working hard trying to get
Exploding whale featured, and has shown to be a good researcher (see
Strathfield). Very active on
Featured article candidates and other places, especially
Australian topics, and communicates well with other Wikipedians. Also has a keen eye on suspected copyright violations. I trust him and I think he'd make a fine admin.
Lupo 07:00, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Wow, such nice things said about me =) I accept this nomination. -
Ta bu shi da yu 07:22, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Can we extend the deadline on this one, to ensure that consensus is reached? func(talk) 19:31, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I don't know. That could raise a lot of controversy. Best wait and see if things are more clear in the next 16 hours. --
Grunt🇪🇺 14:39, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)
[[User:Nichalp|¶ ɳȉčḩåḽṗ |
✉]] 20:24, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
Wow. Nice to see such a gung ho user.
COGDEN 20:26, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
I could've sworn I put this vote here already, but I guess not. To repeat what I (apparently have not) said: I always thought he'd been around for much, much longer than this; he impresses me with his strong knowledge of the 'pedia. Strongly support. --
Grunt🇪🇺 21:31, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
Geogre 00:49, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) (I'm not voting twice am I? Thought so.)
Absolutely. How could I not vote for someone who's so familiar with the featured-article quality standards that he managed to get
exploding whale featured? We need more admins like him: committed to quality, a leader who is strong but
civil.
• Benc • 00:55, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sure, seems like a good editor to me.
Everyking 02:02, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Jwrosenzweig 05:19, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) I arrive too late to say anything complimentary about TBSDY that hasn't already been said, other than that if we had a
Wikipedia:Featured contributor candidates page, I'd nominate him. :-)
TBSDY isn't an admin yet? Time to fix that! Dedicated, experienced, calm, contributes well to a wide range of articles as well as being active "behind the scenes"—a real class act.
—
Gwalla |
Talk 17:13, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think I may find blocking vandals useful. However, I'm going to try my best not to make this my first port of call, as I'd prefer to think that articles are done in good faith. The rollback feature looks interesting, but then here too I may not use it that often unless I can see obvious vandalism. I've worked out (over a period of time) that it's best to take something to the talk page first and then discuss it. I'd like to make peace between warring parties also, so I'd kind of like to see if I'm any good at arbritration. I guess I'm most interested in the ability to restore from what vandals have mucked up, especially on Australian articles as I'm quite involved in there. The only thing I can also say is that it looks like a lot of these admin powers are there for "last resort". Kind of makes me nervous that I don't use them incorrectly when I start out at admin'ing! -
Ta bu shi da yu 09:26, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
Sure! Personally, I've worked pretty hard at fixing up the
exploding whale to get it to featured articles. I'm in the middle of editing the
Strathfield article to make it what I call a "featured suburb" (not entirely an accurate name, but I worked out this idea before I realised that the term suburb is not as appropriate as area). For this I've actually gone to the State Library of NSW and refernced material, plus I've borrowed books from the local library. I participated in the first
Australian Collaboration of the week and helped the editors (amongst them Ambi, who did the vast majority of the work) get it to featured article status. The article was
Cyclone Tracy. The two projects I've started on Wikipedia is
WP:ACOTW and
Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney.
Further: I've also gone through all the
March 1 "what links here" articles and added them to this date. I have far too much time on my hands. -
Ta bu shi da yu 06:04, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
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?
One article I liked working on was
Windows XP, I attempted to NPOV it and I think this largely succeeded. I managed to annoy a few people along the way, though I think that was part of my learning process. Now I know what not to do! I've also had a few disagreements with
Adam Carr, but both he and I worked this out together and now there are no hard feelings. Hmmm... you might as well know so I'll be completely honest and say I went a bit overboard with comments to
Denni, something I'll have to watch in future.
That all said, however, I think I'll be OK in an admin position because I'm going to make it a personal rule not to take admin action in articles that I'm heavily editing. For those articles I'll be asking another admin to help out. This seems to be the most common trap admins get into. Also, I'll be happy to try mediating between parties and resolving issues of POV in articles.
Lastly, I kind of think that being an admin won't change me that much (I hope not anyway!). I fully intend to keep editing as per normal.
This small fish has been swimming in our big pond since June 2004 and already has accumulated way over 5000 edits. He's been working hard trying to get
Exploding whale featured, and has shown to be a good researcher (see
Strathfield). Very active on
Featured article candidates and other places, especially
Australian topics, and communicates well with other Wikipedians. Also has a keen eye on suspected copyright violations. I trust him and I think he'd make a fine admin.
Lupo 07:00, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Wow, such nice things said about me =) I accept this nomination. -
Ta bu shi da yu 07:22, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Can we extend the deadline on this one, to ensure that consensus is reached? func(talk) 19:31, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I don't know. That could raise a lot of controversy. Best wait and see if things are more clear in the next 16 hours. --
Grunt🇪🇺 14:39, 2004 Oct 18 (UTC)
[[User:Nichalp|¶ ɳȉčḩåḽṗ |
✉]] 20:24, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
Wow. Nice to see such a gung ho user.
COGDEN 20:26, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
I could've sworn I put this vote here already, but I guess not. To repeat what I (apparently have not) said: I always thought he'd been around for much, much longer than this; he impresses me with his strong knowledge of the 'pedia. Strongly support. --
Grunt🇪🇺 21:31, 2004 Oct 14 (UTC)
Geogre 00:49, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) (I'm not voting twice am I? Thought so.)
Absolutely. How could I not vote for someone who's so familiar with the featured-article quality standards that he managed to get
exploding whale featured? We need more admins like him: committed to quality, a leader who is strong but
civil.
• Benc • 00:55, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sure, seems like a good editor to me.
Everyking 02:02, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Jwrosenzweig 05:19, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC) I arrive too late to say anything complimentary about TBSDY that hasn't already been said, other than that if we had a
Wikipedia:Featured contributor candidates page, I'd nominate him. :-)
TBSDY isn't an admin yet? Time to fix that! Dedicated, experienced, calm, contributes well to a wide range of articles as well as being active "behind the scenes"—a real class act.
—
Gwalla |
Talk 17:13, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think I may find blocking vandals useful. However, I'm going to try my best not to make this my first port of call, as I'd prefer to think that articles are done in good faith. The rollback feature looks interesting, but then here too I may not use it that often unless I can see obvious vandalism. I've worked out (over a period of time) that it's best to take something to the talk page first and then discuss it. I'd like to make peace between warring parties also, so I'd kind of like to see if I'm any good at arbritration. I guess I'm most interested in the ability to restore from what vandals have mucked up, especially on Australian articles as I'm quite involved in there. The only thing I can also say is that it looks like a lot of these admin powers are there for "last resort". Kind of makes me nervous that I don't use them incorrectly when I start out at admin'ing! -
Ta bu shi da yu 09:26, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
Sure! Personally, I've worked pretty hard at fixing up the
exploding whale to get it to featured articles. I'm in the middle of editing the
Strathfield article to make it what I call a "featured suburb" (not entirely an accurate name, but I worked out this idea before I realised that the term suburb is not as appropriate as area). For this I've actually gone to the State Library of NSW and refernced material, plus I've borrowed books from the local library. I participated in the first
Australian Collaboration of the week and helped the editors (amongst them Ambi, who did the vast majority of the work) get it to featured article status. The article was
Cyclone Tracy. The two projects I've started on Wikipedia is
WP:ACOTW and
Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney.
Further: I've also gone through all the
March 1 "what links here" articles and added them to this date. I have far too much time on my hands. -
Ta bu shi da yu 06:04, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
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?
One article I liked working on was
Windows XP, I attempted to NPOV it and I think this largely succeeded. I managed to annoy a few people along the way, though I think that was part of my learning process. Now I know what not to do! I've also had a few disagreements with
Adam Carr, but both he and I worked this out together and now there are no hard feelings. Hmmm... you might as well know so I'll be completely honest and say I went a bit overboard with comments to
Denni, something I'll have to watch in future.
That all said, however, I think I'll be OK in an admin position because I'm going to make it a personal rule not to take admin action in articles that I'm heavily editing. For those articles I'll be asking another admin to help out. This seems to be the most common trap admins get into. Also, I'll be happy to try mediating between parties and resolving issues of POV in articles.
Lastly, I kind of think that being an admin won't change me that much (I hope not anyway!). I fully intend to keep editing as per normal.