Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Aguerriero

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

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 07:44, 3 April 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). 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.

Aguerriero

[edit]

Final (51/2/2) Ended 14:57, 2006-08-16 (UTC)

Aguerriero (talk · contribs) – Andy, who signs as Aguerriero, is a prime example of both an ideal Wikipedian and admin candidate. Aguerriero has written numerous great articles for the project[1], being the voice of three FAs (one of them being Phil Collins), communicated well with users[2][3], founded Wikiproject Guitarists, fights vandalism (both simple and not so simple[4]), is thoughtful in the maintenance aspect of the project[5] and is open minded[6]. It is obvious that he will use, but not abuse, the tools.

The Downlow (stolen from RfA/Gwernol/Crzrussian/Alphachimp)

  • Edit Count: 3400+ (right on edge of 3500)
  • Time Around: First Edit in February of '06
  • Edit Summaries: Batting 100%
  • Mistakes: Everyone is prone to mess up, but he doesn't really make them.
  • E-mail: Yes
  • Userpage: Clean and helpful
  • Any edit warring/blocks?: No blocks and warring, he's part of Medcab and helps resolve disputes.
  • FA participation?: Perhaps Andy could tell us, he looks more like a GA type man, though.

Aguerriero is one of the most model Wikipedians I have encountered and there is no doubt in my mind he would be a fine admin. Now, shall we all support Andy and give him the tools that he will use for the benefit of the project? Yanksox 05:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nom. Andy has an amazing temperament, and great reserves of patience. I had recently asked him to come mediate an incipient edit war at Sanhedrin and related articles, after I recused myself due to partiality. He is continuing to put in a tremendous effort there, and is producing tangible results, despite the fact that the parties are quite entrenched, and despite having to wade through a swamp of Hebrew terms and unfamiliar Jewish politics. We need more admins like that. - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept! --Aguerriero (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2006 (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 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: Through my active participation in the AfD process, I have worked to become familiar with how the community deals with article deletion. I will use this knowledge to close out nominations, and to assist with CAT:CSD backlogs in a timely manner. I have taken initiative to improve the deletion process by collaborating on an AfD notice template that currently appears at the top of WP:AFD. This and my other contributions to this important area of Wikipedia illustrate my commitment to participate and to help the deletion process function at its best. Administrative tools will assist me in helping the community efficiently and fairly.
I am also significantly involved in dispute resolution. I am an active member of the Mediation Cabal, and I also help in other disputes that have not reached that level. I have also participated in vandal fighting. Through these experiences, I have learned the value of appropriate protections and blocks. As an administrator, I will use those tools responsibly and efficiently to help resolve a variety of disputes that arise at WP:AN/I, WP:AIV, and other places.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I have created a number of articles and improved many others, but I think these examples best illustrate my commitment to the project:
I am the creator of WikiProject Guitarists, which quickly grew in participation, and I feel it is a good example of my understanding of the principles of organization and collaboration. I helped bring the article Crime in Mexico from being nominated for deletion to GA status, and I recently brought the Phoenix Zoo article from a one-sentence stub to GA. I have recorded spoken word versions of Featured Articles such as Central Processing Unit and Phil Collins. Additionally, I work on the Missing Encyclopedic Article project to create needed articles, and I have fulfilled long-standing article requests such as Subconscious Cruelty.
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: I am a very level-headed editor and have not been involved in any disruptive conflicts. Of course, there have been disagreements of opinion, but I have always tried to remain rational and calm in stating my position. I do not shy away from taking an unpopular position if I believe it is best for Wikipedia.
One time that I got carried away was the deletion nomination of the Doorknob (game) article that I worked on earlier in my time on Wikipedia. While my conduct in this AfD might not seem too bad at first glance, I was indeed peeved over the idea that "my" article might get deleted and I had set my mind to preventing its deletion rather than constructively engaging my peers. I had a lot to learn about consensus, policies, and about assuming good faith in my fellow editors, and I learned it over the ensuing months.
Today, I use any disagreement as an opportunity for improving the encyclopedia.
4 Bonus question from Dlohcierekim. Bonus questions are optional, and sometimes for the edification of the asker.
Q:' How do we establish notability for a mall?
A: In my opinion, a shopping mall is notable if there is something unique about it that gets covered in multiple non-trivial publications, or if something similarly covered happens at the mall. If the article is but a directory of stores and a geographic location, I generally advocate for its deletion. --Aguerriero (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 :) Dlohcierekim 20:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

5 Optional Question from Crzrussian (talk · contribs): If promoted, do you plan to join Category:Administrators open to recall? Why or why not? If yes, what course of action will you take if recalled? - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: In short, absolutely. I think that since admin tools are granted by a mandate from my peers, so should they be recalled. I think I stand to gain more trust by assuming accountability if that trust is breached. I will also say that there is a significant opportunity to create and refine a consistent process for recalls, but I would rather work on that from the inside than from the outside.
If a potential exists for my recall, I would take the following action:
  • If six editors in good standing (>2 months, >350 edits, <2 blocks) initiate the request, I will open an RfC for myself.
  • If there is a consensus for me to lose the tools, or no consensus exists, I will open a new RfA.
  • If the consensus of the RfA is for me to lose the tools, I will stand down immediately.
--Aguerriero (talk) 14:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

All user's edits.Voice-of-All 05:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply] 

Viewing contribution data for user Aguerriero (over the 3554 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ)
Time range: 171 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 5hr (UTC) -- 11, Aug, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 19hr (UTC) -- 22, February, 2006
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 100% Minor edits: 100%
Average edits per day: 35.74 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 383 edits): Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 100%
Analysis of edits (out of all 3554 edits shown on this page and last 63 image uploads):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.39% (14)
Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 1.97% (70)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 40.57% (1442)
Unique image uploads (non-deleted/reverts/updates): 57 (checks last 5000)
Superficial article edits marked as minor: 18.95%
Special edit type statistics:
All edits to deletion pages: 11.48% (408 edit(s))
Marked XfD/DRV votes: 8.3% (295 edit(s))
Article deletion tagging: 0.06% (2 edit(s))
Page (un)protections: 0% (0 edit(s))
Page moves: 0.51% (18 edit(s)) (10 moves(s))
Page redirections: 0.03% (1 edit(s))
User talk warnings: 0.39% (14 edit(s))
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 2276 | Average edits per page: 1.56 | Edits on top: 17.53%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 73.13% (2599 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 13.73% (488 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 3.46% (123 edit(s))
Unmarked edits with no summary: 7.32% (260 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 47.16% (1676) | Article talk: 12.07% (429)
User: 8.38% (298) | User talk: 7.51% (267)
Wikipedia: 18.23% (648) | Wikipedia talk: 3.15% (112)
Image: 1.8% (64)
Template: 0.59% (21)
Category: 0.76% (27)
Portal: 0.03% (1)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.31% (11)
Username         Aguerriero
Total edits         3489
Distinct pages edited 2234
Average edits/page 1.562
First edit 19:40, February 22, 2006
 
(main)         1663
Talk            423
User         298
User talk 263
Image         64
Template 21
Template talk 9
Category 27
Category talk 2
Wikipedia 614
Wikipedia talk 104
Portal         1
Support
  1. Strong support per my co-nom. - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong support per nom Anger22 15:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support. Wikibofh(talk) 15:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Lone Star Support Rama's arrow 15:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Clichéd I thought you were one Support. :) Srose (talk) 15:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Ditto Clichéd "I thought you were" Support. Agent 86 15:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong support I was able to constructively and respectfully disagree with Aguerriero (on Kylu's RfA), and his contact with me was engaging and well thought-out. I have nothing but good things to say-- Good luck! AdamBiswanger1 16:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support more candidates like this please. :-) Eluchil404 16:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support just makes it in at 6 months, otherwise looks like a great editor with terrific answers to the questions. Themindset 17:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Hrm, thought he was already an admin Support seriously, I've been using this comment quite often as of late, and I think it's due to the large amount of users that are well-versed in policies and have the level head needed to become a succesful administrator but just haven't completed an RfA for one reason or the other. This candidate is obviously one of these users. I've yet to meet the candidate personally but I've seen his work around AfD and when I do RC patrolling sometimes and I've always thought that he was using the extra buttons hoopydinkConas tá tú? 17:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. It's all been a pack of lies oppose "I've been waiting for this moment"-primary nominator support. Yanksox 17:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support per nomination and comments above :) —Xyrael / 18:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Aguerriero has made great use of his ability to edit Wikipedia. --Gray Porpoise 18:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Supporte; not a typo. Excellent editor. Kalani [talk] 18:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support per contributions. G.He 18:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Merovingian - Talk 19:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - I concur with the nomination and this user will make a great janitor. —this is messedrocker (talk) 19:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support as my personal standards met. Nice person to boot. Ifnord 19:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support per nom. Michael 19:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support per nom Bucketsofg✐ 20:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Aguerriero has quite a few edits in the short time he has been here. Many of his contributions are the thankless-unacknowledged type of work that many take for granted. I am thankful that people like this are willing do all that. Give him a mop. JungleCat talk/contrib 20:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Strong Support Meets my standards. (He has been here since February.) Even meets 1FA X 3. Quick review of AfD edits shows good judgement and that he has saved articles by rewriting them. I find no indication of incivility in his talk pages. On the contrary, I find his comments (even his edit summaries) urbane and articulate. I find many instances of other editors thanking him or asking him for advice.  :) Dlohcierekim 20:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support—Quarl (talk) 2006-08-09 20:47Z
  24. Support per all of above. Newyorkbrad 21:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support an excellent editor and contributor. Stubbleboy 22:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support A great editor. --Siva1979Talk to me 22:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support. Of course. I've seen nothing but great things. alphaChimp laudare 00:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Several good GAs is a viable alternative to my 1FA standard. -- Миборовский 01:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Having a FA under one's belt is not a criterion for me, but you having three defintely is positive!--Kungfu Adam (talk) 02:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support No evidence this user would abuse the m&b :) Ziggurat 02:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Pleasure to work with on Crime in Mexico. Surely would be a great admin. --Aude (talk contribs) 03:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support, per all of the above. :) —Khoikhoi 03:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support per convincing noms. Fireplace 03:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. - Mailer Diablo 05:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support - very positive contributions all round. Yomangani 13:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support seems like a fantastic editor. ViridaeTalk 00:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. A responsible, capable editor with good communication skills. Tyrenius 01:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. WP:38 Support Nothing goes against my "standards", as far as I can see. I've seen Aguerriero around quite a bit. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 03:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support per above. No red flags, no glaring errors, no funny smells.. so you must be doing something right. :) RandyWang (chat me up/fix me up) 13:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. This one goes to eleven support. Helpful, bright, and courteous...will be a model admin. PJM 13:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. DarthVader 00:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support No problems supporting. Thε Halo Θ 11:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support. íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 19:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support esp. because of willingness to put self in admins open to recall. Time regardless, willing to help out at CSD is always good. -Royalguard11Talk 02:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support Some P. Erson 01:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support -- Deville (Talk) 02:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Looks like Andy will make good use of the tools. Jayjg (talk) 21:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support Great user, and always Wikipedia:Assume good faith in every situation. Daniel's page ☎ 03:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. Meets my criteria, quality user, seen around a lot. Grandmasterka 05:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Support Slightly new for my taste but doubtfull to abuse tools. VegaDark 21:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support Blnguyen | rant-line 04:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Weak Oppose -- not enough time here, another 2/3 2 to 3 months and this would be a support vote --T-rex 19:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm just asking for clarification, do you mean 2 to 3 months or 2/3 of a month? Yanksox 22:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    The rest of this thread has been moved to the associated discussion page as it does not pertain to the RfA and we'd all like to keep this beautiful for this deserving individual. Srose (talk) 00:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I've re edited this to make it more clear --T-rex 02:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose Per above. --Masssiveego 05:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Neutral
  1. Neutral: Off to a promising start, but he is about two months too soon for that. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 15:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral, the user wants to help at AIV but I found little evidence of vandal fighting. Other than that the user seems legit and wants to help at AfD and CAT:CSD, which is where admins are ALWAYS needed. Tempted to weak support as user appears to have good edit history and answers are strong, but according to the above user hasn't been here that long either.--Andeh 16:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Aguerriero&oldid=1147963489"