Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WJBscribe: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Jeffpw (talk | contribs)
9,574 edits
m count
oppose
Line 131: Line 131:


'''Oppose'''
'''Oppose'''
#'''Oppose''' - Edits like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACoelacan&diff=116703386&oldid=116188904|this] - calling something that I strongly support "rubbish" - have the tendency to rub people the wrong way. The number of supporters of this RfA comfort me that this is most likely an isolated incident, and that WBJscribe will refrain from that kind of talk as much as possible after he is given the mop. The comment is enough to cause me oppose, though. [[User:Royalbroil|<font color="#000000">'''Royal'''</font><font color="#FFCC00">'''broil'''</font>]]<sup>&nbsp;<font color="#FF0000">[[User talk:Royalbroil|T]]</font>&nbsp;:&nbsp;<font color="#000000">[[Special:Contributions/Royalbroil|C]]</font></sup> 13:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
#


'''Neutral'''
'''Neutral'''

Revision as of 13:11, 22 March 2007

WJBscribe

Voice your opinion (95/0/0); Scheduled to end 23:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

WJBscribe (talk · contribs) - I have the pleasure of nominating User:WJBscribe for the mop and flamethrower. He joined us in November 2006, and, for those that count these things, has since made over 6,000 edits right across the 'pedia. Significant contributions include helping bring Ruth Kelly up to GA standard; finding dozens of free pictures for illustrationless articles; and translation of articles out of French Wikipedia, including Bernadette Chirac. He is an active member of Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies and has been barnstarred for hard work he's put in - the barnstar is joined by three others, for editing, graphic design and anti-vandalism work. He's bloody excellent at discussion and getting people to co-operate when arguments flair. I really mean that - this is a user who knows how to get people to work together (see here, here here here, to name just a few). Even vandals come back to say thanks for setting them straight! He's an excellent vandal fighter and a devout warner, following through at WP:AIV. He's long been into the discussion at WP:AN, helping out the lost and the bewildered as well as discussing, with a sharp grasp of 'pedia policy and guidelines, issues that arise - always in a helpful manner. He already does semi-admin work, clerking at Wikipedia:Changing username and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names, cleaning up at WP:AfD and WP:RfA (two places with much misplaced edits) and keeping an eye on WP:RfC. From his contributions, I can see need of the tools in cleaning-up vandalism and vandals, in acting on WP:AIV reports instead posting lots of them and in keeping the place generally tidy with judicious use of the delete button. From personal interaction, I can see that the tools will be used well and well used, that the reasonableness and discussion-mindedness will be a great aid in the admin tasks and that his knowledge of Wikipedia's laws, bylaws and twisted paths will benefit us all when he's got the keys to the closet. RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 17:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I am pleased to accept. Thank you for the kind nomination. WjBscribe 23:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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 participants:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I would like to assist in vandal fighting- there are few things more frustrating on Wikipedia than repeatedly reverting vandals that you reported for admin attention after a final warning some time previously. I have noticed a WP:AIV backlog often develops around 12:00 UTC and am at present often available to deal with the backlog around that time. I have experience in identifying candidates for speedy deletion and would be more than happy to help out with backlogs at WP:CSD. Also given my contributions at XfD (especially AfD and RfD) I would be willing to close discussions in those forums. I assist as a clerk with username changes- recently, it has been requested that clerks assist with moving pages over content when usurpation occurs [1]. Admin tools would allow me to assist with this process.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: In the mainspace, I am pleased with my development of articles on UK politicians, such as John Reid and Ruth Kelly. I have also written most of the article on the Declaration of Montreal- I wish more information were available to take that one further. I am involved in translations from fr.wikipedia such as translating Bernadette Chirac and proof reading Christiane Desroches Noblecourt. Also, I have had significant involvement in improving Portal:LGBT. I am perhaps most proud of my dispute resolution efforts outside my main sphere of contributions however, most notably in a heated dispute between various representatives of Anesthesia providers in the US following the protecting of Anesthesia, which occupied a lot of my time last month (see Talk:Anesthesia). This dispute appears to have been resolved to the satisfaction of all parties, who now seem willing to work together.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A: I don't tend to get stressed over disputes on Wikipedia and try to find common ground with those I disagree with. I had an early disagreement with a user over the Ruth Kelly article. In the end we came to work together on improving that article and he ultimately awarded me a barnstar for my efforts [2]. My contributions to WP:LGBT often involve me in disputes in controversial areas, I may not be able to resolve those disputes, but I believe my contributions tend to cool the situations. As Redvers points out above, I believe I have engaged in productive dialogue with those I have had a difference of opinion with recently and that those discussions have been kept calm and measured as a result. My usual approach if I think I am getting too personally involved in a disagreement is to concentrate my edits elsewhere for a while. There are a lot of non-contentious activities to take one's mind off disputes. I find sorting Category:uncategorized and my clerking duties in relation to WP:CHU and WP:CHU/U pretty relaxing. Actually I find vandal reverting quite relaxing, but that's just me .
General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

  1. Support -- unhesitatingly. WjB has been consistently hard-working, thoughtful, and responsible, and has my complete trust. -- Ben TALK/HIST 21:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC) (Earlier listed, reverted, and now listed again: I wished only to say that my support for the nomination was not dependent on the nominee's acceptance or answers to questions -- I have simply seen so much of WjB's contributing style in issue-deciding areas (as distinct from article edits), and found it so consistently responsible (even in contentious discussions, even when we disagreed) that I no longer have any reasonable doubt as to how WjB will handle admin tools. -- Ben 23:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  2. Strong Support - Excellent candidate, have seem them all over the place. Would make an excellent addition as an administrator. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 23:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - I cannot imagine a single person on all of Wikipedia who would make a better administrator. WJBscribe has (mostly) a cool head, a sharp mind, and always discussions with his input come out much better for it. His contributions to WP:LGBT has been immense (though that automation of the Portal hasn't happened yet ;) ). WJB is friendly, helpful and polite. I genuinely believe that WJBscribe will prove to be one of our finest admins. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per Chrislk02 and Dev920. Newyorkbrad 23:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support —dgiestc 23:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Cliche Support - you mean he's not one already? --BigDT 23:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - an excellent candidate. - Richard Cavell 23:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Unquestionable support - I've seen your work over on WP:CHU/U over the last while and your edits relating to WP:LGBT are extensive and legendary. I've seen you just about everywhere. (was holding off having anything to do with RFA until certain things were complete, but simply couldn't let this slip by). Another one of those "what? You're not an admin??" moments - Alison☺ 23:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Strong support Great user, around everywhere and always very reasoned, will do great work Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 23:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Strong Support Finally! WJBscribe is one of the most perfect candidates, he is a great user that will make a great addition to the administrative team. Cbrown1023 talk 23:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Easily. Kukini hablame aqui 23:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support! Great editor! :-) He'll make a really fine admin, I'm convinced of it. Raystorm 00:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Erm... yeah! I keep seeing WJBscribe literally everywhere and I think to myself "Wtf, not an admin???" It shocked me to realise he wasn't one, and even then I still kept forgetting. I offered to nominate him a few weeks ago, but Redvers beat me to it. WJBscribe is an asset here, knows exactly what he's doing and will make a fantastic admin. Good luck, not that you really need it... =) Majorly (o rly?) 00:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support Will make a fantastic admin. No reason to oppose this user at all. --sunstar nettalk 00:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per nom. I offered to nominate this user as well. Grandmasterka 00:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Ordinarily I'd say too soon, but from what I've seen of WJB I have no problems. I'm certain he'll be one of the best. —Moondyne 00:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Can't say it better than it's already been said. —Krellis (Talk) 00:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Excellent editor. Khukri 00:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support I've seen this user everywhere, no doubt he'll make an excellent admin.--Húsönd 00:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. It's about time, too. I've been suggesting he do this for a while now. Jeffpw 00:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Of course. Xiner (talk, email) 00:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Without a doubt.--Xnuala 00:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support. Will be happy to see WJBscribe as an admin. I've seen him be a calming influence in some heated situations, as well as offering excellent advice. Does good work, is ready for the tools, and giving him the tools will help the 'pedia. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Very Strong Support Can't really make a supporting statement, I left my box of superlatives at home today. – Riana shiny disco balls 01:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Wow... really? Not a sysop? Hm... - NYC JD (interrogatories) 01:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Strong Support per many of the reasons listed above. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Most definitely Pascal.Tesson 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Supportas per all the reasons stated above.Shindo9Hikaru 01:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Strong Support per nomination. An admirable and competent user who will make an excellent administrator. Xdenizen 01:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Seems to understand policy from the interactions I've seen. Good nom. —Doug Bell talk 01:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support ~ trialsanderrors 02:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support. yes yes yes. --- RockMFR 02:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Strong support - it's hard to add to what's already been said - a fantastic editor. -- Chairman S. Talk Contribs 02:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Strong Support. Very active contributor on WikiprojectLGBT, one of the main contributors to that, excellent writer and negotiator, absolutely HornandsoccerTalk 02:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Now this user is indeed a good admin candidate! Captain panda In vino veritas 02:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support I've seen him a few times, and I admire his contributions. YechielMan 03:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. What?? I never expected to say this, but- "you are not already an admin"? Well, it's about time, then. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support Excellent user. John Reaves (talk) 03:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support, all over the place, will use the buttons wisely. Kuru talk 04:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support WJBscribe is a good editor and I am sure will continue as a good administrator. Aleta 04:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Strong support, I've always been very impressed with WJBscribe and am sure he'll make an excellent admin. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support Will make an excellent admin. Beat me in vandal reverts and AIV's before i even clicked a button.... --KZ Talk • Vandal • Contrib 05:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Yep. Seen a lot of good stuff. Daniel Bryant 06:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support a good candidate --Steve (Stephen) talk 08:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support as nominator. Obviously :o) RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 08:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. I-need-not-even-look-at-this-guy's-edits-to-tell-he's-admin-material-super-support - Jumping jehoahoa! This guy deserves the smelly cleaning device we have come to know as the mop. May it reek especially so when you bash vandals with it. 100% support & we hardly (if at all) know each other. Great work man... :) Spawn Man 09:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    And I'm even willing to make an acception on the "6 month minimum rule" of mine because this guy is so great... Spawn Man 09:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support this is the first time I've ever seen WJBscribe but he definitely looks like admin material to me, it would be a mistake not to make him an admin --Lwarf 09:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support--Dwaipayan (talk) 09:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support No reason not to jump on the bandwagon. --Folantin 10:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support I've been consistently impressed with WJBscribe's civility and other fine qualities, even from our first meeting. Happy to support.-- Chaser - T 12:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. No-brainer Support - Anas Talk? 12:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support - Agathoclea 12:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Strong support. Adminship for you should have been automatic. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 13:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Strong support - This guy is everywhere and is superbly qualified. 100+% support. -- Jreferee 14:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  56. No question. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 15:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Strong Support I was thinking of nominating this user myself, particularly active in XFD's and generally an excellent user.Tellyaddict 15:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support Yep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Steel 16:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support Fantastic.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 17:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support, vehemently. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Yes please. Yuser31415 19:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support-- Nick t 20:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support as an excellent addition to the added responsibility which comes with the twiddled bit. I find WJBscribe to be an excellent contributor and see no indication the bit would be abused. Twiddle away. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support per above. Addhoc 20:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Hmm I thought he was an admin Support Jaranda wat's sup 21:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support WJBscribe has done great work on Wikipedia, both with articles and items in the Wikipedia namespace. I feel comfortable giving the admin tools to a trustworthy candidate. Nishkid64 21:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 21:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support. No red flags so far. Jayjg (talk) 21:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support → Why should I not? Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 21:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support, skills used with patience. Modernist 22:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support Excellent candidate – there are a few of those around at the moment. Bubba hotep 22:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Strong Support, excellent and intelligent editor. He will use the tools wisely. --Asteriontalk 23:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support, (insert cliche here per NYC JD). · j e r s y k o talk · 01:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support looks excellent.-- danntm T C 01:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Support --Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 02:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support. Great, level-headed contributor. utcursch | talk 04:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Support. WJB is an excellent RfA candidate and I am sure he will make a fantastic admin. Sarah 05:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support mrholybrain's talk 10:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  80. Support My only concern is that this will detract from real-world drinking time. Cheers. Chrislintott 11:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support. Mais oui, bien sur. Coemgenus 14:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Terence 15:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support. Oh yes. Will (aka Wimt) 15:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Support has excellent editing as well as janitorial experience. Definitely has my support.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 18:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  85. Support per Persian Poet Gal. Acalamari 18:53, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Support NoSeptember 20:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  87. Support Should make a fine admin. Good luck. IrishGuy talk 22:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  88. Support Definitely. Seen this user around and theres nothing but positive contributions. James086Talk|Email 23:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  89. Support I have seen this editor around and done business a couple of times. I can not see where giving the tools to this editor will hurt the project. I have faith that WJB will use the tools in accord with policy coupled with common sense. I do not foresee, based on the contributions and editor conduct where the tools will be abused. WJB, do what you can to improve the project. I have full faith, and confidence that you will do so. Now go write an encyclopedia. :P Navou banter / contribs 00:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  90. Support-Great editor. Active at admin places already. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 01:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  91. Support. Let's see if we can pull this to WP:100. bibliomaniac15 04:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  92. Support--MONGO 05:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  93. Support A good candidate/prospect. - Denny 05:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  94. Support. Seen and appreciated at WP:RFCN Shenme 08:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  95. Support - Thought WJB already was an admin!Pedro |  Talk  12:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose - Edits like [3] - calling something that I strongly support "rubbish" - have the tendency to rub people the wrong way. The number of supporters of this RfA comfort me that this is most likely an isolated incident, and that WBJscribe will refrain from that kind of talk as much as possible after he is given the mop. The comment is enough to cause me oppose, though. Royalbroil T : C 13:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/WJBscribe&oldid=117020290"