Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/SWD316 3

SWD316

[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/SWD316 3|action=edit}} Vote here] (6/1/1) ending 20:14 23 December 2005 (UTC)

SWD316 (talk · contribs) – I do not know SWD316 well enough; however, I decided to renominate him for adminship based on the recent revelation that sock puppetry was involved in opposing him in the last RfA, leading to likely prejudice against him even among other voters. (See WP:AN#Mcfly85 for details.) I am bringing this RfA to hopefully restore some procedural justice to SWD316. Nlu (talk) 19:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept, and may I just say I dont care if I am accepted or not but I just like the fact I got another chance. SWD316 20:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. Strong support - he deserves it. FireFox 20:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
2. Support yes I agree, would be great admin.Gator (talk) 20:45, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
3. Strong support absolutely and the info about McFly appears to be correct [1]--MONGO 20:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
4. Support. KHM03 21:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
5. In spite of annoying pastel box and tons of pointless user boxes on user page, this use deserves my support. Smmurphy^(Talk) 21:21, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
6. Strong support as before - brill user! --Celestianpower ^háblame 21:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Woah, your nomination was withdrawn yesterday. Dont you think that just one day is enough time between adminship requests? Oppose also per censoring McFly's user page regardless of him being a vandal/troll/sock whatever he's called. Jobe6 20:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
   • Still you can always decline. No harm in waiting. Jobe6 21:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
     • The reason this RfA is being redone is because the prior RfA for SWD316 this week had at least three votes done by a single person, and were the first three votes. The RfA was polluted and affected by the sock-puppetry. --Durin 20:46, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
     • Yes; note that this was not a self-nomination by SWD316; I brought the RfA because otherwise the process would be a travesty. Please reconsider your vote; obviously, I am not asking you to vote a particular way on the merits (I myself voted neutral), but the tainted RfA should not cause you to vote against him. --Nlu (talk) 20:48, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
2. Oppose Mcfly85 21:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Im sure since you were just been found out about making 40 sockpuppets you vote is invalid

Neutral

1. As mentioned, I don't know him well enough; the RfA is brought to remedy the wrong that has been done. --Nlu (talk) 19:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments

• Previous nominations: Self-nomination in August and the sockpuppet-affected nomination earlier this week. --Michael Snow 20:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate
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. I want to work with Account suspensions.I already work with The deletion process with Wikipedia, I already roll back vandalism where I can, and I try to spot copyright infringment where I can. I will try to improve in areas I dont already investigate in. Rolling back vandalism would be tons easier if I was an admin.

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

A. Well, there is one I consider good. the Current World Wrestling Entertainment roster I created a while back has been one of the most frequently updated and prefered list on the internet, see www.mywrestlingspace.com and other lists all over the internet. Most other edits are clean-up, vandalism roll back and other stuff. I edit only in the area of professional wrestling as of right now but I would edit in more areas if I could.

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. Yes many users have caused me stress over edits because of not adding correct information, no source, wrong sources and such. I usually asked for better sources of information from the user and if they continue to edit with faulty info, I usually contact and admin. Not many conflicts outside that over editing an article as much as a sockpuppet vandal conflict. I would like to add a big fat "duh" at the end of this statement considering thats why I have been renominated because of Mcfly85's attempt to ruin my second nomination.