Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WikiFanatic: Difference between revisions

Requests_for_adminship/WikiFanatic|action=edit}} Vote here (33/3/0) ending 01:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiFanatic (talk · contribs) – (formerly known as WikiFan04) has been a Wikipedian for almost two years now, and has shown he will be a good admin. Objections from his previous failed RFA have since been addressed. Unfortunately for all you editcountitis sufferers, editcount is currently down. Wikiacc (talk) 01:19, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Wow. I got nominated. I accept! :-) --WikiFanatic

Also, to editcountitis people out there, I have more than 550-odd edits. Counting my edits as WikiFan04, my count is more around 1.3k (1,300).

Support

1. Support, obviously pending answers to questions. NSLE _{(讨论+extra)} 01:53, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support You're not allowed to beat the nominator to it! (**blocks NSLE indefinitely**) --Wikiacc (talk) 02:09, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support of course. MONGO 02:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support. This user has greatly improved as a community member and I think he's ready for the mop and broom. Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 02:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support Good User --Jaranda(^{watz sup}) 02:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support Good user, active on IRC and would make a good admin. Will be easy to contact when an admin is needed. I think WikiFanatic will make a really good admin. Have a look at WikiFanatic's contributions and you will find many reasons to vote support like me. Also it would help if WikiFanatic could delete pages as WikiFanatic is involved a bit with closing afd's --Adam1213 Talk + 02:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Support Hey, he nominated me. One good turn deserves another. He's improved a vast amount over the past few months, and he's always on IRC to help anyone who needs it. His only real weakness IMO is that he's too nervous, but after this start I think that'll be changing soon. karmafist 04:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support, this user is unlikely to abuse the admin toolbox. Christopher Parham (talk) 05:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support --pgk^(talk) 07:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Support yeeeah. Grutness...wha? 08:05, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support. Good contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:40, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Ayup. Good contributions. ナイトスタリオン ✉ 09:56, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
13. Support looking good, but ramp up the editing a notch would ya?  ALKIVAR™ 10:36, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
14. Support. Kirill Lokshin 14:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support. FireFox 17:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
16. Support - ooh, how exciting! --Celestianpower ^hablamé 20:31, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support who cares about edit counts? Izehar 20:33, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Give that man a cigar! Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 20:47, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

18. Support. What the heck. You opposed me (the only one to do so), but Im not one to hold a grudge and I believe that you can do it. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) 21:11, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support I don't care how long he's been an editor or how many edits he has I have interacted with him quite a bit both on the wiki and on IRC and I trust him not to abuse the extra tools if given to him. Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 22:16, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
20. Merovingian 22:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
21. Support Tedernst | Talk 23:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
22. Support εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support Everything seems in order ;] --негіднийлють ^{(Reply|Spam Me!*|RfS)} 23:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
24. Support; Despite low edits, WikiFanatic has shown his dedication to the project, and improved significantly since the last time he was up for nomination. After talking to him on IRC, I have no objections to speak of. Ral315 (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
25. Need more admins. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-12-2 15:03
26. Support. Never been a fan of editcountitis. Quality over quanity. --Martin Osterman 16:29, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
27. ZOMGSupport —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 01:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
28. That's hot. Mike H. That's hot 06:06, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
29. Support, yup. -- RattleMan 07:06, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 10:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support Definately. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 17:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
32. Support as per Ral315. Hamster Sandwich 21:58, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support. El_C 00:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

• The Ghost of Boothy. OOOOOOHHH!!!!

  lmao Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 04:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  damn someone beat me to it :(  ALKIVAR™ 10:36, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  That's just plain disrespectful. Ral315 (talk) 17:55, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  Somebody needs to grow a sense of humor...karmafist 18:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is not like he is lying, Boothy's behavior toward Wikipedia and its contributors (including myself) was un ultraje!εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On an unrelated note, I removed the picture, since it's fair use only, and we have no legal right to post it here. Ral315 (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

God, now you're resorting to legal threats in order to make Wikipedia a blander place. Way to go. karmafist 07:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a 'legal threat', any more than deleting copyright images or requesting fair use rationales are legal threats. We are not legally permitted to use fair use images on pages such as this, so could you please tell me what was so wrong with removing it? Raven4x4x 09:18, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A few things Raven

1. That was ultimately put up there to help ease the nerves of the candidate, who everybody on IRC has learned is incredibly anxious about this. After that picture, he was not anxious anymore, or at least less anxious since he spit out his tea unto his leg and no doubt had 1st degree burns to deal with rather than feeling worried about what has largely become an honorary process except in cases where a candidate is obviously not qualified.
2. If Ral had said "that breaks copyright under United States Code 'x'" or some International Copyright Treaty or something, I would have no problem. He didn't. I asked him on his talk page as well. Nada so far unless he responded there. I am not an expert on GFDL or CC or any of that, but if Ral is, I'd like him to enlighten the rest of us so he's not trying to pull a red herring so he can't say "Oh, that's copyright infringement" whenever there's something there he doesn't like, which seems to be anything joyful from my previous experiences with him. Being vague here is closer to censorship than trying to protect intellectual property
3. Why is it a big deal otherwise? Several people laughed. Boothy was responsible for his own actions and eventually become an urban legend on RFA, and he no doubt understood the consequences of his actions since he had tens of thousands of edits before eventually getting an indef ban. That picture was not malicious, it was a joke at the expense of his WP:POINT vio.

Proto below has good advice at the end, but I destest situations where people try to fearmonger their viewpoint through (in this case with Ral and the copyright situation/morality police) If he explained the former and said something "I respect your opinion, but I ask you to please remove that picture", I'd do so. I'll wait a bit to see if this happens. karmafist 17:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And he just did #1 here while I was waiting. Thanks, Ral. Please, say what you said there off the bat in the future with similiar situations. Share your knowledge. karmafist 17:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Picture aside, contributions like the initial one above are both immature and petty. Again, just let things lie. Proto t c 14:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. Oppose - 1355 edits in over 18 months is not very much. I don't care if he's active on IRC. IRC is not Wikipedia. Proto t c 17:06, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Oppose - exactly what I was thinking, too little edits in over a year and a half. Quentin Pierce 02:37, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The relatively low edit count relates to a period of about three months during my WikiFan04 days where I made practically no edits. This was because I was too busy in life to edit for a while. There's nothing I can do about those three months now. --WikiFanatic^{20:39, 1 December 2005 (CST)}

Furthermore, Wikipedia:Editcountitis states that "...it [edit counting] is not a reliable way of telling how experienced or worthy an user truly is..." It's true. Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 02:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's 1355 edits in 15 months, which is still low. If judgements about someones suitability are being made via chitchat on IRC, I might start opposing more RFAs. Proto t c 12:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of policy is discussed on IRC, Proto. Not all of it is senseless, meaningless "chitchat". --WikiFanatic^{15:45, 2 December 2005 (CST)}

Have a look at the edits from the username that WikiFanatic used to use as well. Also I dont see any problem with that ammount of edits. 15 months is long enough --Adam1213 Talk + 05:08, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

• Neutral for now. Despite low edits, WikiFanatic has shown his dedication to the project, and improved significantly since the last time he was up for nomination. But I'd like to talk to you on IRC sometime this week before I support. Ral315 (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Changed vote to support, see above. Ral315 (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• As noted, Wikifanatic was formerly known as WikiFan04. The change to a different username was not done using change username functionality though, so if the edit counter tool comes up you may think Wikifanatic only has 594 edits. This is erroneous. Wikifanatic+WikiFan04 edits = 1355, and he's been editing since the ides of March, 2004. Maybe he's the soothsayer? :) --Durin 14:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Etu Brute, thus dies Caesar :) Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 22:28, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate
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 delight in helping out with closing out AfDs that have reached a verdict of "Delete" (I have already closed out some "Keep" discussions in my Wikipedia career). I would also appreciate helping to block vandals, and I might do some RC patrol. I also would not mind settling RfAr debates.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. I'm pleased in the articles I've created, such as WestCOT and Samkon Gado. I've also created a few as an IP (Kurt Busch, EA Sports and Hideki Matsui, and yes, I did create those.)

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 have never been in a major edit conflict, other than possibly a few sockpuppet template reverts. I was in a minor one with Rktect, too, about rope stretchers, I believe.