Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Agüeybaná

Agüeybaná

Voice your opinion (talk page) (5/0/0); Scheduled to end 15:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Agüeybaná (talk · contribs) - It is my pleasure to nominate Eddie for adminship. I know his username isn’t Eddie, but I’m far too lazy and inept to type it in its entirety, so Eddie he will remain.

Eddie takes somewhat of a leadership role in WikiProject Puerto Rico, and is an excellent advocate for articles related to Puerto Rico. Many prolific editors have a general area of preference, Eddie’s is his homeland. Through his work in the project, he has brought several articles to good status, and has created numerous articles, many of which have gone on to appear on the Main Page through Did You Know? Portal:Puerto Rico, which Eddie has contributed to extensively, is currently a featured portal candidate.

Eddie is knowledgeable in policy, and is a regular participant in articles for deletion debates. He is also a username reporter. I envisage that if granted sysop rights, he would use his tools effectively in those areas, and in multiple others.

It may come as a surprise to some that I am nominating Eddie for adminship, considering that he and I have had several disagreements of late. My response is that one of the most important aspects of the Requests for adminship process, and one that must be agreed on in the current Request for comment for said process, is that “forgiving and forgetting” must become a central element of the process. I am not a religious person, and there is no reason to be one to forgive and forget, so I have chosen to overlook Eddie’s sometimes odd behaviour and occasionally atrocious sense of humour, and instead to see the many good points in this editor’s favour.

I believe that granting Eddie adminship will benefit the project and its ideals, and as such he has my support in this request. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 05:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

NB. This is Eddie’s second request for adminship. The first, under his old username of Boricuaeddie, can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Boricuaeddie. Please note also that Boricuaeddie (talk · contribs) has since been blocked, as it was recreated by a troll after Eddie’s renaming. Further information can be found on Eddie’s talk page or archives, but it should be noted that any edits or account creations logged under Boricuaeddie’s name were not performed by the current candidate. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 05:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Co-Nomination For me it is a privilege to co-nominiate Agüeybaná for adminship. I have seen Eddie grow in Wikipedia and I'm very impressed with how mature he is despite his age. He is a very dedicated editor whose excellent contributions are now part of our project. He is a courteous well mannered people-person who is calm under fire while interacting with others. This trait is especially useful when he deals with newcomers. Instead of discouraging a person, he encourages them. Agüeybaná is an excellent wikipedian and an asset to the Pedia. I truly believe that he will make a great administrator. Tony the Marine 06:16, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Co-Nomination I was actually working a nom for Eddie myself [1] so this is just a copy-paste work sorry if it sounds somewhat unusual since it was meant as the first paragraph of the nom Members of the Wikipedia community, I present to you Agüeybaná (more commonly refered to as Eddie) since March 10, 2007 he has been a productive member of our community, gathering more than 7,500 edits in this time period. Among his contribution are helping improve Ramon Emeterio Betances to both Good and Featured status, creating eight articles, successfully nominating 11 articles to DYK, frecuently working with Portal:Puerto Rico (which is currently a Featured Portal Candidate) and creating WikiProject Puerto Rico's Newsletter. He is also a frecuent contributor in several areas of the project icluding: WP:RFA, WP:FAC, WP:FL, WP:AFC and several kinds of deletion discussions. He had a previous RFA which was unsuccessful, but after working with him in several aspects of the project during the last three months and reviewing his contributions, I believe he has worked with the concerns raised in that nomination and several members of the community (including two admins) have agreed with me on this. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I'm Eddie and I approve this message! --Agüeybaná 15:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

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

A: I believe I have experience in several admin-related areas, and I would like to work with as many as possible. I think where I would be most active if made an admin would be WP:AIV, C:CSD, and WP:AFD. I am also an active user at the Wikimedia Commons, where I am a trusted user, and have moved more than 25 free images found here there. When the move is done, the image is eligible for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#I8. However, most of the time, the image just sits there for weeks waiting to be deleted, so I would like to participated in that area, too. Other areas I would drop by occasionally include other types of deletion debates and WP:ACC, as well as WP:UAA and WP:RFC, although I would probably participate with much caution, as the rules seem to have changed a lot since I last reported a username there.

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

A: I think my best contribs to this encyclopedia would be anything I have done to improve Wikipedia's coverage of my country and its people. Specifically, I think my edits to P:PUR, Ramón Emeterio Betances, Luis Muñoz Marín, and others are my best. I have also uploaded several photos from Flickr to the Commons and have used them to pretty-fy articles. I think those are pretty good, too, even though they're really minor.

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: Yes, many. I have found that disengagement is the best answer for me, as it prevents any further nasty discussions and ultimately solves the problem.

4. Optional question from After Midnight: Can you please describe what you did with my input from your prior RFA? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 16:59, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

A: Sure. I'll do it one by one:

"1) Withdraw this RFA" —  Done :-)

"2) Edit" —  Done. I've been editing for 2 more months and have almost twice as much edits, but I don't think edit count should be an important factor in determining one's suitability as an admin.

"3) Get into conflicts" —  Done, sadly. Some recent ones include trying to get GothicChessInventor (talk · contribs) to stop edit-warring with other editors on the Ed Trice and Gothic Chess articles, trying to stop Kappa (talk · contribs) from pushing his POV at the Tamao Satō article, and trying to stop Jemmy Button (talk · contribs) from adding unreferenced POVs to the Hogging article (I even got RfCd because of this).

"4) Resolve them" —  Done. See above.

"5) Help other people resolve their conflicts" —  Done. See the Ed Trice thing above.

"6) Contribute to policy" —  Done. I'm not entirely sure what you meant with this, but I did try to get consensus for non-admins to be able to close AfDs at WP:DELPRO.

"7) Understand that Wikipedia is more than a bunch of policies, guidelines and essays." —  Done. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and a community; I think I got that.

Hope this is satisfying. --Agüeybaná 17:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

General comments

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

RfAs for this user:

• Requests for adminship/Boricuaeddie
• Requests for adminship/Boricuaeddie2
• Requests for adminship/Agüeybaná

• Links for Agüeybaná: Agüeybaná (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. Remain civil at all times. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Agüeybaná before commenting.

Discussion

• Once again, a stupid amount of co-noms. I don't want to have to read through a huge mass of text just to get to the candidate's statement. 86.137.25.192 15:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
  • There is no statement from me. You don't have to read the noms; just review the contribs and participate. BTW, who are you, and how did you find this? --Agüeybaná 15:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
    • (1) Exactly? I'm pretty sure people would rather hear from you than random passers by who decided to drop on the popularity bandwagon. (2) Is that relevant? There's a big link to it on your talkpage. This is a wiki, you know. 86.137.25.192 17:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
      • If you don't want to read them don't do it, that's a easy solution for it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 17:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
• When a person has various co-nominators, it is an indication that he/she is held in high esteem by other editors. Participants are not required to read each nomination, that is their option. What I find curious, however is that the anon complaining states "Once again, a stupid amount of co-noms" indicating that he/she has participated in this process before, yet when I checked said editor's contributions I found this: [2]. Strange isn't it? Tony the Marine 18:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

  A nomination is to introduce a candidate. What's the purpose of a bunch of nominations? It need not be indicated that the candidate is held in high esteem. Let the RfA participants go through the contributions of the candidate and decide for themselves. We are lazy enough as it is. It's no favor to wikipedia if the RfA participants see 5 noms and say, "wow, all those noms... the candidate must be great!". No need to encourage that kind of thing. Anything that really needs to be said can be said in the discussion section or as part of your support. - TwoOars (Rev) 20:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please note: The first two supports were added before the RfA was accepted and transcluded. I'm not going to remove them, as they're the noms. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 02:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Completely irrelevant. Melsaran (talk) 13:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  • You guys are right. There's no need for so many noms. I have only accepted the ones I believe describe a different aspect of my editing. Thank you for your comments. --Agüeybaná 15:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I find it a little discourteous to delete positive good-faith comments without further discussion. You could have moved them to the talk page and add a link from this page, or something. Melsaran (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
      • I notified the noms. I think they're OK with it. --Agüeybaná 15:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
        •  Done. Added a link at the talk page. --Agüeybaná 15:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Support

1. Strong Support as co-nominator. Tony the Marine 06:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
2. Strong Support - Per my explanation above and great interaction with this user. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
3. I would definitely trust this user with the mop. SQL^{(Query Me!)} 15:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
4. Support I see no good reason to oppose. So support!RuneWiki⁷⁷⁷ 15:59, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
5. the_undertow ^talk 16:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
6. Strong support I've noticed Eddie many, many times here and he's done a great job of spreading his contributions across the namespaces, and truly doing a great job at participating in nearly every part of this project. He's a great help at articles for creation, has has even started some work on the Signpost (see here). And, of course, Eddie's outstanding participation in the mainspace must be noted, doing everything from minor edits, like referencing articles and reverting vandalism, to serious article editing [3] [4]. This, along with his always civil interactions with other users and the fact that Wikipedia would be greatly helped with Eddie in this capacity, leaves me no choice other than to support. Good luck, Eddie! ( arky ) 17:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
7. Support Great guy. :) GlassCobra (Review) 17:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

1. Neutral leaning support - I was really expecting to oppose this RFA, but I'm impressed with your response to my question. I'll do some additional research and make a final decision in a couple days. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 17:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)