Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Space
Start the clock
Line 1: Line 1:
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|Ajpolino]]===
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|Ajpolino]]===
<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|action=edit&section=4}} <b style="color: #002BB8;">Voice your opinion on this candidate</b>]</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|talk page]])
<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|action=edit&section=4}} <b style="color: #002BB8;">Voice your opinion on this candidate</b>]</span> ([[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino|talk page]])
'''{{RfA tally|Ajpolino}}<!-- WHEN CLOSING THIS RFA, REPLACE THIS PART WITH {{subst:finaltally|[OPTIONALMESSAGE] OR [result=successful] OR [reason=SNOW] OR [reason=NOTNOW] OR (blank)}} SEE TEMPLATE FOR MORE DETAILS -->; Scheduled to end {{<!--subst:-->RfA/time|subst={{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Requests for adminship||nosubst}}}}''' {{red|'''Remove the <code>&lt;!--</code> and <code>--&gt;</code> around <code>subst:</code> in the template (as well as this comment) once you transclude this request.'''}}
'''{{RfA tally|Ajpolino}}<!-- WHEN CLOSING THIS RFA, REPLACE THIS PART WITH {{subst:finaltally|[OPTIONALMESSAGE] OR [result=successful] OR [reason=SNOW] OR [reason=NOTNOW] OR (blank)}} SEE TEMPLATE FOR MORE DETAILS -->; Scheduled to end {{RfA/time|subst={{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Requests for adminship||nosubst}}}}'''


{{User|Ajpolino}}
{{User|Ajpolino}}

Revision as of 13:03, 16 September 2020

Ajpolino

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (0/0/0); Scheduled to end You're almost there. All you need to do now is substitute the time parser function (it isn't as scary as it sounds, edit the page and inline comments will guide you). This will generate a fixed end time.

Ajpolino (talk · contribs)

Nomination

I am delighted to nominate Ajpolino for adminship. In my view, he is the epitome of a stealth candidate - someone who works hard in the background, always willing to lend a hand, and happy to pick up the slack where it's needed. I first encountered him in January 2017, just after my return to active editing. While working through the orphaned article backlog, I had discovered quite a few related to genetics. After I posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology/Molecular and Cell Biology, Ajpolino jumped in and offered to work on all of them. The workload was substantial - I think it amounted to several hundred orphaned pages, all told - and Ajpolino patiently took the time to deal with all of it, for no other reason than that a stranger asked for help.

Not simply a hard worker, Ajpolino is a consummate team player who excels at reaching out to collaborate with other editors, whether that means nudging editors into reviewing GAs, or seeking partners for GA/FA work. When SandyGeorgia approached him about RfA, he was humble but willing, and quickly identified areas where he could help. I have no doubt that he will be as patient, even-tempered, and helpful as an administrator as he is as an editor. ♠PMC(talk) 01:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nomination

A very knowledgeable and reliable medical editor who consistently gets the job done, Wikipedia could really benefit from giving Ajpolino (talk · contribs) the tools. I was aware of Ajpolino’s steady work in initiating collaborative improvements of medical content (sample), but the quality of his work came more prominently into my focus when he and Spicy took on improvements at Chagas disease during its Featured article review, resulting in a saved bronze star for a 15-year-old badly neglected and outdated Featured article that would have lost FA status without their intervention. Ajpolino is currently working Buruli ulcer up to be presented at FAC, and is very active in reviewing Good article nominations for other editors. Willingness to review and improve someone else's very dated work for the benefit of Wikipedia's readers is typical of Ajpolino's character, work ethic, and steadiness. He is unfailingly civil, professional, calm, trustworthy, thorough, and reaches out to other editors to encourage a collaborative spirit: see samples here and here. Ajpolino has helped bring new life to the Medicine Wikiproject by starting, producing and delivering a monthly newsletter. Wikipedia is chronically short on admins in the medical realm—a difficult editing area—where content and policy knowledge is helpful in sorting the disruptive from the merely unknowledgeable about medical editing guidelines. Medical journal access is key in tracking down and dealing with copyvio and distinguishing disruptive edits. Ajpolino has an interest in, and has been helpful in, dealing with copyright problems: see here, here, and here for samples. More help is always needed in sorting out move discussions and determining when semi-protection is needed, and when it is not: see samples here, here, here and here. I enthusiastically join PMC in bringing forward Ajpolino as an excellent candidate for adminship. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:34, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thank you both for the kind words. I accept the nomination. I have never edited for pay. The only alternative account I have is User:Ajpollino, which I made to use in an airport one day, but ended up never really needing. Ajpolino (talk) 23:41, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: I plan to stick largely to my "home" areas of the encyclopedia, molecular biology and medicine, both areas where a bit of background knowledge goes a long way in differentiating inexperienced editors (who need a helping hand) from the truly disruptive (who occasionally need administrative intervention). In my free time I'll continue dipping my toes into text and image copyright; in spite of myself I find the convoluted half-logic of copyright law intriguing, even beguiling. I'm happy to lend an occasional hand elsewhere in the project, wherever I can be useful. I'm not a specialist in any particular Wikipedia process, so I'll enter new areas cautiously and seek more experienced help as I need it.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I'm pleased with my reviewed content contributions. Spicy and I overhauled Chagas disease earlier this year after SandyGeorgia posted at WT:MED looking for help. That got me interested in neglected tropical diseases and I'm working on a major overhaul at Buruli ulcer now. I've also done some heavy lifting at a handful of other articles, mostly related to Earth's predominant (and most interesting) life forms: microbes. An incomplete list is at my userpage. Putting together coherent medicine/biology articles is probably the activity here that brings me the most joy. I'd like to be useful in the administrative sphere, but article building will likely continue to take up most of my Wikipedia time.
I've also been gratified by the positive response to the new WikiProject Medicine newsletter that SandyGeorgia mentioned above. I can only claim some credit, as the format is lifted entirely from Enwebb's excellent Tree of Life newsletter. I hope it can stimulate collaboration and a sense of cohesion among medicine-interested editors going forward.
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: As I alluded to above, editing here brings me joy. I try to avoid spending my editing time engaging in unnecessary conflict (and thus dissipating that joy). When conflict is important or inevitable, I try to be brief but human in explaining myself. If I can't agree with someone, I'm happy to bring in other editors and abide by whatever consensus is reached. I haven't been in any particularly explosive conflicts, but off the top of my head, a couple of fairly recent examples when the temperature of discussions rose: 1 (after 1 and 2) and 2 (followed by this).

You may ask optional questions below. There is a limit of two questions per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

Discussion


Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review their contributions before commenting.

Support


Oppose


Neutral


General comments