Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PullToOpen

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by WOSlinker (talk | contribs) at 06:34, 18 April 2022 (Fix lint errors). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

PullToOpen

Final: (72/1/1); Ended 23:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

PullToOpen (talk · contribs) - I'm going to take the plunge and nominate myself for adminship. I've had an account for 10 months, but I started actively editing 7 months ago. I've amassed over 3300 edits in my seven months here, with about 1200 in the mainspace, over 600 in the Wikipedia namespace, and over 800 in the User talk namespace. I've been an administrator at the Simple English Wikipedia for over four months now (see the RFA here if you care), so I have a technical knowledge of the tools already and will be ready to jump in to some of the more advanced administrative tasks (histmerging, etc.). I am an active checkuser clerk who jumped on board during the recent clerk reform, and I've had several situations where I have needed the tools specifically to delete misplaced RFCU requests. I'm not a great article writer, but I pride myself in bringing absolutely terrible stubs to acceptable status (such as my semi-rewrite of Amicalola Falls State Park). I'll use the shiny new tools well, if the community is so gracious to give them to me. PTO 23:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Yes, I accept my own self-nom. PTO 23:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: As a occasional vandal fighter, I'm going to return to the oh-so-helpful WP:AIV and help keep it clear when the vandals get rough. I'm at the computer right about the time that the Australian school vandalism starts trickling in, so I will help clear that out. I'd work at WP:RFPP as well, as I've seen some pretty large backlogs there before. CAT:CSD isn't quite as speedy as the name suggests, and the backlog never ends. I'd do my part in keeping it down. Another often-backlogged area is CAT:PER, which many admins seem to overlook. I'd work at CAT:PROD to keep the backlogs down, as well.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I suppose that I am most proud of List of House episodes, which I helped raise from absolute crap to just shy of FL status. I've worked on that for about two months now. I also do work rewriting some of the really bad articles that we have floating around, like the previously woeful Rocket Boys and Amicalola Falls State Park. I've also created some articles (NOT stubs) I found interesting from WP:RA, such as Battle of Simmon's Bluff and Gamekeeper's thumb. I helped found WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), which is still getting off the ground at the moment. I'm also a semi-active vandalfighter, and I boot up Lupin's wonderful anti-vandal tool when the vandalism DEFCON gets too low.
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: Actually, no, I have never been in any conflicts at all over editing. I've slipped up before with my civility ([1]), but that's the worst "conflict" that I have ever been in. However, I have been dragged into conflicts while trying to provide third opinions on the matter, such as the conflict with Boxingwear, which was resolved by his indefblock. On a lighter note, Cplot tried to report me to WP:AN3 for trying to revert his vandalism once ([2]). Back on topic, if I were confronted with a conflict, the first thing I would do would be to get up and get something to eat and take a break. Nothing helps stop a conflict like a full stomach.
General comments

Please keep criticism constructive and polite.

Discussion

Support

  1. ROFL at your opening sentence. --Deskana (talk) 23:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, that is pretty funny. YechielMan 01:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support, of course. I've seen you around and you consistently seem to know what you're doing. This, combined with your adminship on Simple, assures me that you won't misuse the tools. Picaroon 00:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support I thought he was one, which is why I didn't offer to nominate :( Good luck! Majorly (o rly?) 00:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Clear and Present Support Kntrabssi 00:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Aren't you an admin already Support --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 01:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Cheerful support. I love your attitude, what with the Australian school vandalism...if you've been here long enough to joke about Australian kids, you've been here long enough to start blocking them. :) YechielMan 01:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 01:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Nice guy. :) Captain panda In vino veritas 01:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support I don't see any major reasons to oppose this user. Acalamari 01:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support looks like a good and qualified candidate.-- danntm T C 03:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. John Reaves (talk) 03:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support. semper fictilis 03:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support I've seen the candidate around, no direct contact. About where I was when I ran for adminship at six months on a ten month old account, 3500~4000 edits, nice spread and shows a use for the buttons. No big deal. Teke 04:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. -- Richard D. LeCour (talk/contribs) 06:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. It will be a pleasure to have you as an admin. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 07:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. Couldnt find good and solid reasons to oppose this editors RFA. All the best. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me..) 10:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support nothing holding you back, good luck! The Rambling Man 10:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. Fine. --Bhadani (talk) 11:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Definitely. - Anas talk? 11:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. Very experienced. -Mschel 11:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support certainly seems to have the experience necessary to pull it off. – Riana talk 14:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support has a need for the buttons, and seems to have the experience and judgment to use them well. --Akhilleus (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support didnt get this far without being somewhat decent Twenty Years 14:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support--MONGO 14:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Strong Support He is a admin on wikipedia simple english and has done a great job. He is not abusive with his tools there and I do not think he will be here either:) I am shocked that he is not a admin already. Good luck:) James, La gloria è a dio 16:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Genuine case of RfA cliché number 1. Moreschi Request a recording? 16:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support - per good answers and considerable number of edits to WP:AIV. Addhoc 16:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support. --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 17:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support · j e r s y k o talk · 17:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Michael 19:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support. Shows a clear need for the tools, and is willing to help. I see no indication the tools would be abused. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support. Good user, good answers. Seems very level-headed when I see him around. A Traintalk 01:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support I have seen this user around and can trust him with the tools. Cbrown1023 talk 02:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support, has certainly had his patience tested and kept a level head. Absolutely no problems with his ability to use the tools. Kuru talk 02:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. And he is an admin in simple wikipedia, so he's certainly qualified. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, contribs, odometer) 02:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. --CyclePat 05:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. Anybody reported for 3RR by Cplot for reverting him must be doing something right.  :-) —Doug Bell talk 05:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Yes. Has been very helpful with WP:CHECK as well as vandal fighting. Real96 05:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. I see no red flags, I see a use for the tools. — coelacan — 06:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. What Coelacan said. Guy (Help!) 12:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Terence 14:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Oppose Too good to support. ;) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  17:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this candidate! - 18:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support Push to close. :) <-I apologize to PullToOpen here because my humour doesn't seem to be translating. I believe Pull is an excellent candidate. Xiner (talk, email) 20:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. No tricks, just a plain 'support'. Prodego talk 01:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support is given based on my intuition and the above comments. Anynobody 06:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  49. - NYC JD (interrogatories) 14:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support - Good answer to questions and I trust Cbrown1023's judgment about PullToOpen. -- Jreferee 16:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support. Michaelas10Respect my authoritah 21:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Support - Lakers 06:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  53. Support a trustworthy user. James086Talk | Email 13:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  54. Support, because he will use it well. Abeg92contribs 13:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support, good editor who will make a good admin. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support. WjBscribe 23:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Support. Dfrg.msc 00:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Pull To Support.--Wizardman 05:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support. Opening up a can of administrative goodness, and hopefully not a can of worms. This was supposed to be a joke, as in April Fool's Day, except that the support is quite serious. --Kyoko 14:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  60. I'm going to take the plunge and Support this user. He seems like he'll use it well. .V. [Talk|Email] 14:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support Garion96 (talk) 18:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  62. I reviewed your contributions history since Dec. 27 (2500 edits) and found nothing wrong (except for your obvious orgyphobia). Additionally, your responses to the questions are rather good. Hmm ... now I'm really suspicious.  ;) Cheers, Black Falcon 00:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support a good candidate --Steve (Stephen) talk 01:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support Yeoman service, deft touch with other editors (my delicate senses are attuned to patience), unsullied as far as I can see. A fine candidate. Pigman 03:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support! —Quarl (talk) 2007-04-02 11:10Z
  66. Support I have no doubt that PullToOpen will use the tools well. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Cleared for Adminship —Pilotguy cleared for takeoff 03:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support Endorsed... good canidate, based on the answers and history. - Denny 06:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support, it's a pity no one nom you. Apple••w••o••r••m•• 10:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support -- FayssalF - Wiki me up ® 14:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support ElinorD (talk) 20:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support. I've seen his posts, like his style, and trust his judgment. --Elonka 00:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. OpposeAwful member of the community. Tried to attack me for creating the article on the Australian Florin and making it great.Oppose — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAmTheCoinMan (talk • contribs)
    No I didn't. PTO 17:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In case anyone is interested, IAmTheCoinMan seems to have gotten into a conflict with PTO because PTO reverted a not-so-funny joke-edit made by IATCM to the April Fool's day article. In fact, PTO handled the situation quite well before getting slapped with this oh so tasteful message. This oppose vote should be struck out by a bureaucrat. Pascal.Tesson 19:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Neutral. I would suggest that the applicant be asked to reapply after his or her 12th month of membership. I am concerned that the editor has insufficient experience with conflict and may be inexperienced in conflict resolution. I say this because the longer I am here, the more I learn about the politics and workings of wikipedia. I also must say that I used to have a account name from 2006, but after a few months of inactivity, I have forgotten the password.Atlas87 23:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC) — Atlas87 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
While your comment is certainly welcome and based on valid concerns that you have, I'd like to point out that all administrative actions are voluntary. As such, the user does not have to get involved in conflicts or internal politics. A true definition of administrator is that of a janitor. The rest of the gravitas is just...well, gravitas. If someone puts on the admin hat to settle a dispute, it is in no way binding or official. Simply an experienced editor acting as a neutral third party. Something to keep in mind. Teke 02:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppet Atlas87 (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sockpuppet of Dereks1x (talk · contribs), Flyguy649talkcontribs 06:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/PullToOpen&oldid=1083317996"