Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/The Bushranger: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Support: support
Line 40: Line 40:


=====Support=====
=====Support=====
#'''Support''' – I like your WikiCup work (so far). --[[User:Perseus8235|'''<span style="cursor:crosshair;color:White;background:darkseagreen">Perseus</span>''']][[User talk:Perseus8235|'''<span style="cursor:crosshair;color:darkseagreen;background:White">8235'''</span>]] 17:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
#
<small>The above support(s) were added before the RfA started.</small>

<!-- Please do not submit comments before the RfA starts. Feel free to remove this notice once the RfA has been transcluded. -->


=====Oppose=====
=====Oppose=====

Revision as of 17:36, 15 February 2011

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (1/0/0); 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. Remove the <!-- and --> around subst: in the template (as well as this comment) once you transclude this request.

Nomination

The Bushranger (talk · contribs) – In my second RfA co-nomination, it is my honor to be able to present you with one of the best editors I know who also happens to be a good friend of mine. I think the work The Bushranger has done over the last three years, detailed below, qualifies him for today's RfA standards. As for civility, I have never seen a conversation where he has been purposely incivil or non-collegial, while the kind and sometimes playful attitude he displays at all times keeps the encyclopedia light-hearted and fun.

As for the technical stuff: edit count? He has more than 22,000,[1] ~98% of which are non-automated.[2] Time editing? Since June 2008. Content? A beastly combination of a FA, 15 GAs, and (if I counted right) 90 DYKs, along with a whole host of barnstars from the Military history WikiProject's contest. [3][4] Wikipedia-space work? He's one of the most prolific compilers of DYK preps, and is a member of the Military history and Aircraft WikiProjects, along with a participant in the battleship group, Operation Majestic Titan. Wikiknowledge? He's done more work with templates and categories than I want to think about. I think The Bushranger is an ideal candidate for administrator, and I hope you all agree. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Having also been involved in talking The Bushranger into allowing himself to be nominated for adminship, I should say something here. I've been a wikistalker of Bushranger's talk page for quite some time in order to benefit from the high-quality advice, excellent conflict resolution, and general appreciation of the state of Wikipedia that tends to flow across it, and I've been privileged to encounter Bushranger's quality work in a variety of Wikipedia arenas, most notably at DYK. During that time I've been impressed by his measured and courteous debating style, his reasoned and level-headed approach to learning and implementing policy, his engagement with and appreciation of the wider Wikipedia community, and the amazing quantity and quality of his content creation. It's astonishing that Bushranger isn't an admin already, and I'd urge the community to correct that as soon as possible. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thanks, Ed, Dust. :) I hereby accept the nomination. In the spirit of full disclosure, since I've read up on the relevant policy regarding the fact you should mention these things, I'd like to add that I do have a "previous" account, User:Aerobird, which was my first Wiki account. Back then I burned out and took a year or so (I think) hiatus; when I came back, I decided to make a new account with the user name I use/d everywhere else. I haven't used the old account since (edit history: [5], only logging in to check the edit count (to add to the ones Ed mentioned: an additional 5373). I notice many admins have a "public use" account, it's possible that might be wise to use it for that? If not, though, it'll remain "closed". Anyway, that out of the way, on to the questions. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:24, 15 February 2011 (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: Primarily I'd like to be able to assist at WP:Did You Know, with the compiling of preps, moving preps to queues, and other WikiGnomish work that doesn't make waves but generally keeps the wheels rolling smoothly. I might also assist in general housekeeping of military and aviation matters occasionally if and when needed. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I'd like to think it's in helping with "oddballs". Aircraft and missiles that never entered service - in some cases, never got off the drawing board, and the odd project that never even made it that far! - fascinate me, and I enjoy helping to ensure that other people have the opportunity to learn about "hidden history". While flashy Vipers get all the press, I enjoy making sure that almost-forgotten milestones are here; the ultimate compliment is knowing that somebody will read my work and go, "huh, I didn't know that!". - The Bushranger One ping only 08:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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: There have been the occasional brain-burp or two that probably should be mentioned; in one case I removed a speedy-delete tag from a category I'd created, that was a forgetting-I'd-made-it moment (it actually went to AN/I over other issues, but it was resolved amicably), and another was editing a talk-page comment for grammar out of "editing habit" (quickly reverted when it was pointed out to me). (A second speedy-delete-tag removal on the record was when it had been placed on the talk page (created by me) of an article (not created by me) in error, quickly and cheerfully resolved.) There have been the occasional rather (in one case very) heated debate over at AfD as well, but my policy on debates is that what happens in a debate stays in a debate. No matter what previous stress or mud-slinging may have occured with another editor, I don't allow that to color my opinion of their contributions. We all have opinons, and they all differ, and even when someone is acerbic in their expressing them, that's just how the world works - it doesn't make the quality or validity of their contributions any more or less. I live and let live, and allow the past to be the past, always looking forwards to a bright future of improving Wikipedia and assisting in it becoming a paperless repositiory of the sum total of human knowledge. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General comments


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

Discussion

Support
  1. Support – I like your WikiCup work (so far). --Perseus8235 17:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above support(s) were added before the RfA started.

Oppose


Neutral