Edit conflict, hopefully right now, strike out section which is possibly unfair and response. |
reply |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
#: Should of mentioned I stopped the firest RFA and it was my 15th day aprox of making edits I was new I should not of been running for adminship but you should try to look at how I have improved and read [[Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers|Please do not bite the newcomers]] |
#: Should of mentioned I stopped the firest RFA and it was my 15th day aprox of making edits I was new I should not of been running for adminship but you should try to look at how I have improved and read [[Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers|Please do not bite the newcomers]] |
||
#::Also it was not twice in a week) --<span class="plainlinks" style="border: 2px solid #0000CC; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#FF9900">[[User:Adam1213|A]]</font>[[User:Adam1213|dam1213]] [[user_talk:Adam1213|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit&section=new +]</b></span> 09:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
#::Also it was not twice in a week) --<span class="plainlinks" style="border: 2px solid #0000CC; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#FF9900">[[User:Adam1213|A]]</font>[[User:Adam1213|dam1213]] [[user_talk:Adam1213|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit&section=new +]</b></span> 09:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
#'''Oppose''' For now. Having spoken to Adam in IRC on several occassions I know he is very keen to help wikipedia which is good even if I'm sometime not convinced his focus is "right". However from some of those discussions and the answers below I'm not convinced he has the overall grasp of what wikipedia is "really" about and the ability to deal with the situations and decisions he is likely to meet as an admin. |
#'''Oppose''' For now. Having spoken to Adam in IRC on several occassions I know he is very keen to help wikipedia which is good even if I'm sometime not convinced his focus is "right". However from some of those discussions and the answers below I'm not convinced he has the overall grasp of what wikipedia is "really" about and the ability to deal with the situations and decisions he is likely to meet as an admin. I'm not sure on the relevance between being able to put together an IRC client and the need to be an admin or being capable as an admin. The overall edit count is reaonable (2200) but the break down doesn't seem too good about 1400 of those on User and User_talk pages, Only 295 on Article pages (which for someone who reverts a lot of vandalism seems very low over the 4 months he has been active) and a looking through the history seems to indicate difficulty getting things right first time, which suggest unfamiliarity (we all have problems there sometimes, but I seem to see lots of "clusters"). Given that I know Adam I was in two minds as to if I should oppose or just add my comments as Neutral, but I feel I have opposed better candidates so... --[[User:Pgk|pgk]]<sup>(<font color="mediumseagreen">[[User_talk:Pgk|talk]]</font>)</sup> 10:16, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
#::Please think of how being an admin would benifet me (blocking vandals that will not stop) and for now you should be in #wikipedia-en-vandalism2 as there is a lot of vandalism and only me in both rooms active. --<span class="plainlinks" style="border: 2px solid #0000CC; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#FF9900">[[User:Adam1213|A]]</font>[[User:Adam1213|dam1213]] [[user_talk:Adam1213|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit&section=new +]</b></span> 10:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
#::Please think of how being an admin would benifet me (blocking vandals that will not stop) and for now you should be in #wikipedia-en-vandalism2 as there is a lot of vandalism and only me in both rooms active. --<span class="plainlinks" style="border: 2px solid #0000CC; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#FF9900">[[User:Adam1213|A]]</font>[[User:Adam1213|dam1213]] [[user_talk:Adam1213|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit&section=new +]</b></span> 10:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
#::: Maybe you just worded that badly, but I'm trying to think how overall being an admin would benefit Wikipedia, not to benefit you. --[[User:Pgk|pgk]]<sup>(<font color="mediumseagreen">[[User_talk:Pgk|talk]]</font>)</sup> 10:32, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
#:::Given timezones, there's bound to be at least one admin active (either in the channel or elsewhere) at any certain time. The question is wheher you getting the powers would ''necessarily'' benefit Wikipedia, it may, or it may not, we don't know. Until then, [[WP:AIV]] is watched by most admins. [[User:NSLE|NSL]][[WP:EA|<font color="green">E]]</font> <sub>([[User_talk:NSLE|T]]+[[Special:Contributions/NSLE|C]])</sub> 10:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
#I appreciate his earnestness, but I just don't think he's ready yet — and won't be for quite a while. I'm also concerned that he's placed his userpage in [[:Category:Pages watched by the Counter Vandalism Unit]]; I don't think I could trust anyone who uses the "watched by CVU" template or category to have a strong enough grasp of common sense and its application on Wikipedia. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 10:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
#I appreciate his earnestness, but I just don't think he's ready yet — and won't be for quite a while. I'm also concerned that he's placed his userpage in [[:Category:Pages watched by the Counter Vandalism Unit]]; I don't think I could trust anyone who uses the "watched by CVU" template or category to have a strong enough grasp of common sense and its application on Wikipedia. [[User:MarkGallagher|fuddlemark]] ([[User talk:MarkGallagher|fuddle me!]]) 10:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
#::Probably should not of added that category but it was because if an IP edited the page unless it is me its vandalism 99% of the time --<span class="plainlinks" style="border: 2px solid #0000CC; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#FF9900">[[User:Adam1213|A]]</font>[[User:Adam1213|dam1213]] [[user_talk:Adam1213|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adam1213&action=edit&section=new +]</b></span> 10:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
'''Neutral''' |
'''Neutral''' |
Revision as of 10:38, 24 January 2006
Adam1213
[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Adam1213 2|action=edit}} Vote here] (0/2/0) ending 02:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Adam1213 (talk · contribs) – Adam1213 was nominated in the past but was not accepted for adminship. I believe this user should be administrator because he has a high edit count, is committed to counter vandalism. He is an experienced programmer that can use his skills to better the encyclopedia. Adam (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Support
Oppose
- Sorry, I do not conider this user to be familiarised with workings of Wikipedia policy yet. Please see my talk page comment. NSLE (T+C) 03:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Addendum; high edit count does not mean one should be an administrator. NSLE (T+C) 03:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I agrea with you NSLE that I high edit count does not mean that you should be an admin, A person's policy does. I have a policy of following wikipedia policy and also what the majority wants. If you think I don't know the policy because of 1st or/and 2nd RFA you should realise the number of days I had edited wikipedia before them and that I was new to wikipedia.
- I probably know the policies that you would feal I do not know as your reasoning for me not knowing it seams to be just the RFA's and probably edits ages ago. Thanks for your vote. I hope that I can convince you that I do know the policy and that I would make a good admin --Adam1213 Talk 07:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Addendum; high edit count does not mean one should be an administrator. NSLE (T+C) 03:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Can't support someone who's self-nominated twice in a week. -lethe talk 09:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Should of mentioned I stopped the firest RFA and it was my 15th day aprox of making edits I was new I should not of been running for adminship but you should try to look at how I have improved and read Please do not bite the newcomers
- Oppose For now. Having spoken to Adam in IRC on several occassions I know he is very keen to help wikipedia which is good even if I'm sometime not convinced his focus is "right". However from some of those discussions and the answers below I'm not convinced he has the overall grasp of what wikipedia is "really" about and the ability to deal with the situations and decisions he is likely to meet as an admin. I'm not sure on the relevance between being able to put together an IRC client and the need to be an admin or being capable as an admin. The overall edit count is reaonable (2200) but the break down doesn't seem too good about 1400 of those on User and User_talk pages, Only 295 on Article pages (which for someone who reverts a lot of vandalism seems very low over the 4 months he has been active) and a looking through the history seems to indicate difficulty getting things right first time, which suggest unfamiliarity (we all have problems there sometimes, but I seem to see lots of "clusters"). Given that I know Adam I was in two minds as to if I should oppose or just add my comments as Neutral, but I feel I have opposed better candidates so... --pgk(talk) 10:16, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate his earnestness, but I just don't think he's ready yet — and won't be for quite a while. I'm also concerned that he's placed his userpage in Category:Pages watched by the Counter Vandalism Unit; I don't think I could trust anyone who uses the "watched by CVU" template or category to have a strong enough grasp of common sense and its application on Wikipedia. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 10:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Neutral
Comments
- Edit summary usage: 75% for major edits and 78% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 27 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 09:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- See information about Adam1213's edits with Interiot's edit count tool or Interiot's edit history tool.
- First RFA; second RFA NSLE (T+C) 03:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I do RC patrol but recently have been working on my IRC client. While I do admit to stuffing up some of my early edits, the edits after hem have been have been good edits 99% Most of the time that I stuff up, I soon realise and go back to fix it. I recommend looking through my contributions starting at my first edit and going through and looking at the improvement. I am familiarised with a lot of the workings of Wikipedia policy I admit that in the past I did not know much of it.
Some of my stuff ups:
- RFA 1 - 10 September 2005 - 6th day that I had edited wikipedia - I stoped this RFA
- RFA 2 - 3 October 2005 - 15 aprox day that I had edited wikipedia.
- the fact that I kept editing the page which caused some oppose votes to be removed accidentally
- later wanting to keep it open for remaining time
- Arbcom edit somewhere (should not of made it)
- A joke made on IRC that to most people would seam small and I said I was kidding but ended up causing problems (note that this issue can't be discussed [for reason's that I am not allowed to mention])
I feel that I respect other contributors. (excluding simple vandalism)
I have forced edit summaries in my monobook so I will be making a lot more edits with edit summaries. --Adam1213 Talk 07:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
My IRC client. Its code is approximately 123 kb 74 pages 3697 lines. It is almost done. It has plug-ins for computer2 (CVU bot) (it displays the words diff and revert which are hyperlinked instead of the long URLs) I have almost finished plug-ins for pgkbot.
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. I would use rollback but be careful with it.
- I would ban persistent vandals and impostors.
- A. I would use rollback but be careful with it.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A. A little pleased with Jaycar as it was small but I should of spent more time on it.
- It has wikipedia links (directly helped by User:Daverocks's code for hyperlinks (he also did connect 4))
- 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 try to avoid conflicts example User talk:Mpatel Talking to the person can avoid / solve a conflict.