Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Krimpet

Krimpet

Voice your opinion Scheduled to end 07:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Krimpet (talk · contribs) - I guess I'll be bold... I'm Krimpet, and I've been a Wikipedian for about three months now. I would like to humbly nominate myself for access to the administrative toolbox.

One of my primary areas of activity has been bridging the Wikimedia language and project barriers by moving images to the Commons. I've done my best at unclogging the enormous backlog of Commons images, including maintaining a user script tool to ease the process further.

I've substantially contributed to several GAs in WikiProject U.S. Roads, including Interstate 476 and Schuylkill Expressway, as well as reviewing potential GA candidates. I've also walked the beat, patrolling my watchlist and recent changes for vandalism, reporting it to AIV when necessary, as well as encouraging good-faith inexperienced editors to read up on how to better contribute.

Another area I've been heavily involved in is in deletion discussions; I try to base my arguments on an objective basis, while always keeping the quality of the encyclopedia my foremost goal. I always strive to keep a cool head and assume good faith no matter how hot the debates get.

As an administrator, I would extend my current backlog-clearing efforts to the administrative backlogs, particularly Category:Images on Wikimedia Commons and company. I'd keep a constant eye on WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. I would also help clear out speedy deletions, expired PRODs, and close old XfDs.

If handed the mop and bucket, I solemnly swear to put them to good use, and make sure not to spill that disgusting brown mop water everywhere! Krimpet (talk) 07:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work, if any, do you intend to take part in?

A: I would extend my current backlog-clearing efforts to the administrative backlogs, particularly Category:Images on Wikimedia Commons and company. I'd keep a constant eye on WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. I would also help clear out speedy deletions, expired PRODs, and close old XfDs.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I feel my best contributions to Wikipedia are those to the U.S. Roads WikiProject. I've contributed to several articles on Philadelphia-area roads and highways, a few of which, including Interstate 476, Schuylkill Expressway, and Interstate 95 in Pennsylvania have reached GA status. I have really enjoyed documenting the history of these roads for Wikipedia (especially I-476, which I have fond memories of travelling on as a youngster when it first opened.)

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: Being a frequent debater in XfDs has exposed me to tons of potentially stressful situations, including heated debates, criticism, and accusations of bad faith, and I understand that being administrator will probably increase that tenfold. Nevertheless, I always strive to relax, keep cool and AGF; if the editing gets too hot, I can always walk away from the computer for a while! I understand that Wikipedia is built on consensus, and I'm willing to accept when consensus disagrees with my personal viewpoint.

There have been a couple of conflicts in particular that I have been involved in, including the AfD for and my resulting attempt to merge The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny, which was opposed by a couple people; I bowed out after a RfC suggested that consensus was against a merge. Another was the extremely heated Cyrus Farivar AfD and its associated DRV. Perhaps the most heated was an argument on my talk page regarding replacement of the neologism "multiplex," where an editor accused me of "disrupting Wikipedia" and "acting without consensus," though I explained to him that WP:NEO is an important guideline to follow to ensure clarity for the reader, and that I had tried to ensure consensus by gradually rolling out my changes and ensure there were no objections. In all of these cases, WP:COOL and WP:AGF have been my guiding philosophy.

General comments

• See Krimpet's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

---

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Krimpet before commenting.

Discussion

Support

1. Support — sufficient handling of disputes shows ability to handle the situations often thrust upon a sysop; experience in RCP work demonstrates requirement of Special:Blockip; some more Deletion Debates involvement would be great, but otherwise you're a great candidate and, in my book, it's the quality not quantity of your contributions on the encyclopedia that matter and today, you've proved me right; anthony^[review] 07:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
2. Support sound candidate, no alarm bells. Would prefer to see a higher volume of user talk edits, but you seem to be polite and communicative and I doubt it will pose a problem. Good luck! – Riana ^ऋ 07:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
3. Support - Has a reasonable amount of experience and seems to be able to handle disputes well now, I don't think he would abuse the admin tools. Camaron1 | Chris 09:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
4. Support per no big deal. Sufficient experience of AfDs, warning and reporting vandals to deal with backlogs. Also willingness to help with images is appreciated. Addhoc 13:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
5. Support 'aight. --Infrangible 16:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose because Krimpet has had some strained relations with other editors, and it can get on his nerves. Looking at his user talk page archive, he had a long discussion with Daniel Case about using "multiplex" for roads. DC said yes, and Krimpet said no because it's a neologism. They worked it out, and then on a non sequitir, DC advises him that there was some kind of image problem which he had to fix. Krimpet responded, "OK, a small mistake, you easily fixed it... what point was there in pointing this out to me on my talk page? Please don't start henpecking."

   Later in the archives, Krimpet defended a complaint from Jsnell saying that he meant no harm. Krimpet concluded, " WP:AGF is one of the primary guiding principles of Wikipedia; I suggest you bone up on it yourself."

   Both these incidents happened in February, and I'm sure Krimpet has improved his use of language since then. But until I see some positive examples to counter these negative ones, I will oppose. YechielMan 08:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

   Diff for incident: [1] --Shirahadasha 14:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

   I concede that in the past I may have been a little sharp-tongued when stressed, and I apologize. I have learned to better keep my WP:COOL in the two months since. Krimpet (talk) 15:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

2. Oppose I think the candidate is on the right track, but I'm not comfortable with his mophood just yet. A few more months will do wonders here. Xoloz 14:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral, leaning to support. Your contributions and comments here leave a very good impression, but I prefer admins to have the experience that comes with having made at least 3000 edits - even though, per Anthony above, that may be a mere formality in your case. Sandstein 08:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
2. Neutral. No fundamental problem here, just a little bit of unseasoning and a couple of bits of early hastiness that will undoubtedly go by the wayside with a bit more experience. Suggest coming back in a couple of months and I'm sure everything will be fine. Best, --Shirahadasha 14:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
3. Appears to be a suitable candidate; support withheld pending receipt of a WikiProject endorsement per my policy. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
4. Neutral Seems a good candidate, can't see any reason to oppose but would perhaps like so see longer editing history that would give more experience of the various aspects of Wikipedia. Adambro 17:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)