Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rjd0060 2

Rjd0060

Voice your opinion (talk page) (21/0/0); Scheduled to end 18:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Rjd0060 (talk · contribs) - I’d like to present Rjd0060 for your consideration. He’s been a member here since August 2007 and has amassed over 13000 edits. He had a previous RfA when he was very new here which failed, but since then, he’s made fantastic improvements in every single area. Article wise, he’s made some great contributions to a number of articles that focus on Big Brother topics. He does some great anti-vandalism work, and he always correctly revert, warns and reports to AIV. His reports are almost always accurate and his 200 contributions to AIV show he could really use the block button and has shown his ability to use it well. He’s a regular contributor to XfD discussions where his responses are always thoughtful and show an excellent understanding of article notability and inclusion criteria. I think he’d be great at closing these discussions with policy in mind. Rjd0060 is also a valuable contributor to the help desk showing a tendency to help out users who have problems here. I can also see some great contributions to requests for page protection and I think he’d use the protection button effectively and help out with the back logs that can build up there. He’s tagged numerous pages for speedy deletion, showing a full understanding of the speedy deletion criteria, he could certainly use the delete button to help clear out CAT:CSD which often gets backlogged. All in all, Rjd0060 is a great contributor who appears in numerous places throughout the project, I believe he would make a fine administrator, and I hope you guys agree. Ryan Postlethwaite 18:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept this nomination and thank Ryan Postlethwaite for it. Also, thank you all in advance for your comments. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: I would definitely continue my work on recent changes patrol. Other things I’d like to do are monitor requests for page protection, work on XFD backlogs, as well as anything that needs admin attention via the Admin backlog. While doing these things, of course I will continue doing the things I am already doing like maintaining articles, especially articles within the 2 WikiProjects that I am active in.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I think all of my contributions benefit Wikipedia in some way or another. Whether I am assisting a new user, adding citations to an article, updating out of date information, reverting vandalism and reporting consistent vandalism to administrators, this all helps Wikipedia. But getting specific, I am most proud of my edits relating to Ice hockey and Big Brother (the 2 WikiProjects that I am active in). I enjoy writing about these things, and in all reality, that’s why we are all here…to write an encyclopedia.

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:This answer will be similar to the answer I gave at my last RfA. I do a lot of RCP, and communicating with users who vandalize is sometimes (a lot of times) going to cause conflicts. A lot of times they do not believe they are doing anything wrong. Whenever in a conflict, I feel it important to listen to the other side of the situation. I see a lot of conflicts result from misunderstandings or miscommunication between users. It is always important to try and understand other points of view.

I don’t get stressed out over these conflicts though. The worse they get, the more motivation I have to continue to try and resolve them. Wikipedia is just like any other work environment, and we’re all better off without the hostility and conflicts, but with so many users, with so many different points of view, they are bound to happen.

General comments

• See Rjd0060's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.

RfAs for this user:

• Requests for adminship/Rjd0060
• Requests for adminship/Rjd0060 2

• Links for Rjd0060: Rjd0060 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

---

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Rjd0060 before commenting.

Discussion

• Reply to comment from User:Dlohcierekim:I'd just like to say I'm not quite sure what happened here, and I've replied on your talk page. However, to argue one point you make "one out of over 500+ is pretty impressive", I'd like to say I don't agree, and think if one article is deleted and shouldn't be, that is one too many. I apologize for that, but again, I'm not entirely sure what happened there. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I looked at it too. From what I can tell you put a db-bio on a page that was vandalised with a different "Andrew Nichols" (IOW, "replaced") than the notable Andrew Nichols that article was supposed to be about. A quick check through the history instead of a quick "db" would have meant you would have reverted instead of tagged. No biggie, though, it was caught and remedied appropriately. And a success rate of .998 is something you should be proud of! Keeper | 76 20:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't sure if you'd checked the history or not. The subject does not look terribly notable, and an admin did delete the thing. Sometimes, we get in a rush and forget to check the history. Anyone could make that misstep. And the tagged for deletion version was rubbish. Dlohcierekim 20:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both for clarifying that. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Support

1. Support as nominator - best of luck! Ryan Postlethwaite 18:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Absolutely!. There are a few names of editors that stand out in my mind that make me say "If they ever do an RfA, I'll chip in quickly. Rjd0060 is one of those editors, and he is a fantastic editor with lots of clue. He will do extrememly well with the mop and bucket. Keeper | 76 19:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
3. May as well support, whilst I'm under this name. Rudget. 19:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Strong Support - I interact with this user often, and nothing he has ever done has proven to me he will abuse to mop. Has a core understanding of deletion policy and a good track record of dealing with vandals. While every user has had there "incidents" this user has handled them all with a calm demeanor of reasoning. Tiptoety ^talk 19:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Support Reviewed talk page and contribs. Looks good. My only possible quibble is the speedy deletion tagging of Andrew Nichols. Only one out of over 500+ is pretty impressive. Dlohcierekim 19:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

   Reply above. - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

6. Support ^Avruchtalk 21:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Support Are you kidding? Absolutely trustworthy. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Yes! NHRHS2010 21:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
9. Yeah, WP:HOCKEY member. Maxim_(talk) 21:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
10. Like Maxim said. GoodDay (talk) 21:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
11. Support knows what's what and who's whom. RMHED (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
12. Support worked with him in the past and he is great contributer to the project. -Djsasso (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
13. Strong support - I've seen this user around the Wiki and my interactions with him have been very favourable. I have absolutely no doubt that he will put the tools to good use and will continue to provide the strong and smooth contribution that he has always brought to this project. He is always civil, calm and productive and I have never seen him produce a bad edit. Definitely admin material. Scarian^{Call me Pat} 22:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
14. Support great understanding of CSD, will make a good admin (and will help clean out CAT:CSD, as Ryan Postlethwaite pointed out).   jj137 (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
15. Support user can be trusted with the tools. Cheers, LAX 22:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
16. Support Can't say no to this one. :) GlassCobra 22:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
17. Support - experienced and prolifically helpful user. The Transhumanist 23:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
18. Support. Looks fine to me. Malinaccier (talk) 23:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
19. Support. I've seen this user around somewhere, but don't remember exactly where – whatever happened, I do remember I appreciated his viewpoint and the way he put it across. — alex.muller (talk • edits) 23:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
20. Support from what I've seen at WP:HOCKEY, I have no reason to object. This nom should only serve to benefit the community as a whole. Kaiser matias (talk) 23:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
21. Support A good editor. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 23:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
22. Support Indeed good sir, indeed! Jmlk17 23:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
23. Support! Majorly (talk) 23:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

    I must say I agree with Gurch below, but I feel that his comments aren't significant enough for me to switch. Majorly (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

1. – Gurch 23:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)