|
m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)
|
||
(98 intermediate revisions by 64 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #f5fff5; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a '''successful''' [[wikipedia:requests for adminship|request for adminship]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it'''</span>.[[Category:Successful requests for adminship|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
|||
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Krimpet|Krimpet]]=== |
===[[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Krimpet|Krimpet]]=== |
||
'''Final (35/17/6); Ended Sat, 29 Apr 2007 14:46 UTC''' |
|||
'''[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Krimpet|action=edit}} Voice your opinion]''' |
|||
'''Scheduled to end 07:06, [[29 April]] [[2007]] (UTC)''' |
|||
{{User|Krimpet}} - I guess I'll [[WP:BOLD|be bold]]... I'm Krimpet, and I've been a Wikipedian for about three months now. I would like to humbly nominate myself for access to the administrative toolbox. |
{{User|Krimpet}} - I guess I'll [[WP:BOLD|be bold]]... I'm Krimpet, and I've been a Wikipedian for about three months now. I would like to humbly nominate myself for access to the administrative toolbox. |
||
Line 29: | Line 31: | ||
'''Optional question from Naconkantari:''' |
'''Optional question from Naconkantari:''' |
||
:'''4.''' When is it appropriate to implicitly invoke [[WP:IAR]]? Explicitly? Are there times when it should not be invoked? [[User:Naconkantari|< |
:'''4.''' When is it appropriate to implicitly invoke [[WP:IAR]]? Explicitly? Are there times when it should not be invoked? [[User:Naconkantari|<span style="color:red;">Nacon</span><span style="color:gray;">'''kantari'''</span>]] 18:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
::"The spirit, not the letter" sums up IAR as I understand it. [[WP:NOT#BUREAUCRACY|Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy]], and IAR should be invoked if someone is abusing process to [[WP:POINT|make a point]], such as a clearly bad-faith AfD nomination. On the other hand, [[WP:IAR]] goes hand-in-hand with its fellow trifecta principle [[WP:DICK]]. This project is built upon consensus, and ignoring the perfectly valid viewpoints of others and throwing consensus out the window in the name of IAR does nothing to help improve or maintain Wikipedia. [[User:Krimpet|Krimpet]] ([[User talk:Krimpet|talk]]) 18:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
::"The spirit, not the letter" sums up IAR as I understand it. [[WP:NOT#BUREAUCRACY|Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy]], and IAR should be invoked if someone is abusing process to [[WP:POINT|make a point]], such as a clearly bad-faith AfD nomination. On the other hand, [[WP:IAR]] goes hand-in-hand with its fellow trifecta principle [[WP:DICK]]. This project is built upon consensus, and ignoring the perfectly valid viewpoints of others and throwing consensus out the window in the name of IAR does nothing to help improve or maintain Wikipedia. [[User:Krimpet|Krimpet]] ([[User talk:Krimpet|talk]]) 18:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
'''Optional question from Kotepho:''' |
|||
:'''5.'''Are there any problems with [[:Image:177cal.jpg|these]] [[:Image:AdlaiEStevenson.jpg|four]] [[:Image:CPC Rebelstar 1.png|images]] [[:Image:Caeruleus1.jpg|?]] [[User:Kotepho|Kotepho]] 12:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
;General comments |
;General comments |
||
Line 43: | Line 49: | ||
'''Discussion''' |
'''Discussion''' |
||
*[[Wikipedia:Consensus not numbers]]: This seems to be a reasonably strong candidate and I don't yet see anything suggesting that he's unsuitable. I propose that he should be promoted at the end of this discussion. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] 22:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
* |
|||
Why all the oppose !votes based on metrics? Do arbitrary edit counts and time-in-service really tell us anything about a candidate? Aren't there those who within a couple months who have a better grasp of the place than some here for much longer, even some people with the mop? Just some thoughts. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] 06:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
* I appreciate the strong self-nomination and the clear dedication the candidate has to the project. He seems to have a firm grasp on what adminship means, and a clear plan for use of admin tools. I do not see any convincing reasons to deny him adminship, and therefore call for his reception of admin tools. --[[User:Mus Musculus|Mus Musculus]] ([[User talk:Mus Musculus|talk]]) 20:30, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
'''Support''' |
'''Support''' |
||
#'''Support''' — sufficient handling of disputes shows ability to handle the situations often thrust upon a [[WP:SYSOP|sysop]]; experience in [[WP:RCP|RCP]] work demonstrates requirement of [[Special:Blockip]]; some more [[WP:XFD|Deletion Debates]] involvement would be great, but otherwise you're a great candidate and, in my book, it's the quality not quantity of your contributions on the encyclopedia that matter and today, you've proved me right; <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:Anthony_cfc|<span style="color:black;font-weight:bold;">anthony</span>]]<sup><nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Anthony cfc 3|<span style="color:#ff5b00;font-weight:bold;">review</span>]]]</sup></span> 07:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' — sufficient handling of disputes shows ability to handle the situations often thrust upon a [[WP:SYSOP|sysop]]; experience in [[WP:RCP|RCP]] work demonstrates requirement of [[Special:Blockip]]; some more [[WP:XFD|Deletion Debates]] involvement would be great, but otherwise you're a great candidate and, in my book, it's the quality not quantity of your contributions on the encyclopedia that matter and today, you've proved me right; <span style="font-family: Verdana">[[User:Anthony_cfc|<span style="color:black;font-weight:bold;">anthony</span>]]<sup><nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Anthony cfc 3|<span style="color:#ff5b00;font-weight:bold;">review</span>]]]</sup></span> 07:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' sound candidate, no alarm bells. Would prefer to see a higher volume of user talk edits, but you seem to be polite and communicative and I doubt it will pose a problem. Good luck! – <span style="font-family:trebuchet ms">[[User:Riana|Riana]] <sup>[[User talk:Riana|< |
#'''Support''' sound candidate, no alarm bells. Would prefer to see a higher volume of user talk edits, but you seem to be polite and communicative and I doubt it will pose a problem. Good luck! – <span style="font-family:trebuchet ms">[[User:Riana|Riana]] <sup>[[User talk:Riana|<span style="color:seagreen;">ऋ</span>]]</sup></span> 07:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' - Has a reasonable amount of experience and seems to be able to handle disputes well now, I don't think he would abuse the admin tools. [[User:Camaron1|Camaron1 | Chris]] 09:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' - Has a reasonable amount of experience and seems to be able to handle disputes well now, I don't think he would abuse the admin tools. [[User:Camaron1|Camaron1 | Chris]] 09:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' per no big deal. Sufficient experience of AfDs, warning and reporting vandals to deal with backlogs. Also willingness to help with images is appreciated. [[User:Addhoc|Addhoc]] 13:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' per no big deal. Sufficient experience of AfDs, warning and reporting vandals to deal with backlogs. Also willingness to help with images is appreciated. [[User:Addhoc|Addhoc]] 13:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
Line 54: | Line 64: | ||
#'''Support''' Edit counts are hardly a good measure of an administrator's abilities, and you have proved exactly that. --[[User:Ali|Ali]] 19:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' Edit counts are hardly a good measure of an administrator's abilities, and you have proved exactly that. --[[User:Ali|Ali]] 19:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support''' Although, contra Durin, I favor this form of RfA, I certainly concur in his comment with respect to Krimpet's demeanor; a brief review indicates to me that he is generally cordial and even-tempered, such that a few (rather old) comments should not be taken as demonstrative of his disposition. He seems well-acquainted with policy and generally to be possessed of the characteristics of moderation and respect for other editors and for consensus that well suit an admin, such that I think one can conclude with much confidence that [[User:Jahiegel/Views on Wikipedia/Requests for adminship|the net effect on the project of his being sysopped should be positive]]. [[User:Jahiegel|Joe]] 19:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Support''' Although, contra Durin, I favor this form of RfA, I certainly concur in his comment with respect to Krimpet's demeanor; a brief review indicates to me that he is generally cordial and even-tempered, such that a few (rather old) comments should not be taken as demonstrative of his disposition. He seems well-acquainted with policy and generally to be possessed of the characteristics of moderation and respect for other editors and for consensus that well suit an admin, such that I think one can conclude with much confidence that [[User:Jahiegel/Views on Wikipedia/Requests for adminship|the net effect on the project of his being sysopped should be positive]]. [[User:Jahiegel|Joe]] 19:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Support'''. My review of the candidate's contributions history leads me to conclude that he or she has a good grasp of policy. I agree with YechielMan that the "henpecking" comment was unnecessarily negative, but am inclined to view that as a unique incident (I found nothing of the sort in future diffs, but then again, I didn't look through them all) that has not been repeated since and hopefully will not be repeated in the future. Cheers, '''[[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]]''' <sup>''([[User talk:Black Falcon|Talk]])''</sup> 22:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. In spite of the short history, he seems ready and able to help. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] (<sup>[[User_talk:Jehochman|talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Jehochman|contrib]]</sub>) 02:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' I was considering not supporting due to lack of experience, but after reviewing the areas of editing, I noticed a high Wikipedia, user talk, and mainspace talk. This made me support. [[User:Captain panda|<span style="color:orange; font-family:comic sans ms;">Captain</span>]] [[User talk:Captain panda|<span style="color:red; font-family:Papyrus;">panda</span>]] 03:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Ready to help, and seems very nice. [[User:The Phoenix Enforcer|<span style="color:#FF4040;">The </span><span style="color:#FF9900;">Phoenix </span><span style="color:#FFEE00;">Enforcer</span>]][[User talk:The Phoenix Enforcer|<span style="color:#FFEE00;">(Talk </span><span style="color:#FF9900;">to </span><span style="color:#FF4040;">me)</span>]] 04:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' to negate the Oppose votes that state inexperience. 4 months of editing at a high level shows interest and consistency. He'll not hurt the project. [[User:Kntrabssi|Kntrabssi]] 07:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. The key here is looking at the contributions, rather than edit- or time-counting (although 3 months and 2000 edits is always enough for me) and rather than "henpecking" over one mildly controversial edit in a sea of great contributions. Those backlogs aren't getting any smaller. [[User:Grandmasterka|<span style="color:green;">Grand</span>]][[User talk:Grandmasterka|<span style="color:blue;">master</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Grandmasterka|<span style="color:purple;">ka</span>]] 10:28, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' We need admins, and you seem reliable enough. Adminship is no big deal, after all. I definitely would've preferred a higher edit count and a longer time around, though. —[[User:Anas Salloum|'''<span style="color:black;">''A''n</span><span style="color:#808080;">as</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:Anas Salloum|<span style="font-size:x-small;">talk'''?'''</span>]]</sup> 11:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. Adminship is no big deal. The candidate obviously understands the place and I have no reason to believe the tools would be abused. Most importantly, Krimpet has a positive reaction to feedback, advice and suggestions, and learns from mistakes. Seems about exactly what we should look for in a candidate, instead of metrics. [[User:Vassyana|Vassyana]] 12:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Strong edit history, time matters less than commitment. [[User:Monty845|Monty845]] 12:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#[[User:Kusma|Kusma]] ([[User talk:Kusma|talk]]) 13:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Adminship is no big deal, and the user has demonstrated sufficient commitment to the project already. Answers to the questions are satisfactory. Cheers, [[user:Lankybugger|Lankybugger]] ○ [[User_talk:Lankybugger|Yell]] ○ 14:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''- Good experienced friendly editor. [[User:Retiono Virginian|Retiono Virginian]] 15:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''- A bit green, but an enthusiastic editor. No big deal. [[User:AKAF|AKAF]] 17:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' New, but a willing and so-far capable editor.-- [[User:danntm|danntm]] <sup>[[user talk:danntm|T]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Danntm|C]]</sub> 20:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. I don't see a problem with his "newness", 3 months+ on the project is plenty. 90 days probation is pretty standard in the business world to make sure a new employee has got a grip on the job, I don't see why it shouldn't be plenty here as well - and as far as I can see this user has got a grip on the job. [[User:Arkyan|<b><span style="color:#0000FF;">Ark</span><span style="color:#6060BF;">yan</span></b>]] • [[User_talk:Arkyan|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 22:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. Thip (this person) seems to have a stronger grasp of Wikipedia's policies, operations, and jargon than your typical 3-month beginner. Thip has been well-behaved over the past 3 months, so I have no problem with thip being given the mop. '''''[[User:The Transhumanist|The Transhumanist]]''''' 06:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' - I'd prefer to see slightly more experience, but the user seems competent to use the admin tools. The "incivility" highlighted by other editors does not seem particularly incivil to me; I've seen much worse in the past. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">[[User:Walton_monarchist89|<span style="color:purple;">'''Wal'''</span>]][[User talk:Walton_monarchist89|<span style="color:silver;">'''ton'''</span>]] <small>[[WP:ASSIST|<sup style="color:purple;">Need some help?</sup>]]</small></span> 17:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' This user appears to have just over 3 months of experience, which is plenty long enough really. [[User:Lollipop Lady|Lollipop Lady]] 20:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''': While generally I would enjoy seeing more time around I however feel that this user can be trusted and has not done anything in the past to show that they cannot be trusted. Should make a good admin if not now then in the future. <span style="font-family:arial;border:2px ridge #FF0000;background-color:#000000;color:#FF0000>''' [[User:Orfen|<span style="color:#ff0000; font-family:arial;">''Orfen''</span>]] '''</span><sup><small>[[User_Talk:Orfen|<span style="color:#FF0000; font-family:arial;"><u>User Talk</u></span>]]</small></sup> | <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Orfen|<span style="color:#000000; font-family:arial;">'''Contribs'''</span>]]</sub> 02:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Good work ethic, and seems to understand the need for better communication. The question is whether he would cause harm with the tools and I see no reason to think such. [[User:JodyB|<span style="color:#FFFFFF; font-family:Bazooka;"><span style="background-color: #0000FF">Jody</span><span style="background-color: #429D37">B</span></span>]] 11:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' I don't think he will abuse the tools. [[User talk:Frise|Frise]] 02:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Experience here is a function of edits, not time. You're experienced. And we need more admins who get stuck into image issues. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] 13:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support'''. I trust this user not to willingly or accidently abuse the tools. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' 04:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' No evidence will abuse the tools. [[User:Davewild|Davewild]] 17:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' [[User:A.Z.|A.Z.]] 06:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''', he's got enough experience.--[[User:Wizardman|<span style="color:#0F0;background:#006">Wizardman</span>]] 01:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Support''' Valuable user [[User:Vpopescu|Vpopescu]] 12:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
'''Oppose''' |
'''Oppose''' |
||
Line 63: | Line 100: | ||
#'''Oppose''' I think the candidate is on the right track, but I'm not comfortable with his mophood just yet. A few more months will do wonders here. [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 14:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Oppose''' I think the candidate is on the right track, but I'm not comfortable with his mophood just yet. A few more months will do wonders here. [[User:Xoloz|Xoloz]] 14:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Oppose''' I am sorry, but while I accept that this editor has over 2,000 edits with a reasonable number in namespace, I just do not feel that 3 months experience is adequate.--[[User:Anthony.bradbury|Anthony.bradbury]] 18:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
#'''Oppose''' I am sorry, but while I accept that this editor has over 2,000 edits with a reasonable number in namespace, I just do not feel that 3 months experience is adequate.--[[User:Anthony.bradbury|Anthony.bradbury]] 18:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#'''Oppose''' per experience note above. - [[User:Patricknoddy|'''Patricknoddy''']] |
#'''Oppose''' per experience note above. - [[User:Patricknoddy|'''Patricknoddy''']][[User talk:Patricknoddy|<sup style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#000000;">'''TALK''' (reply here)</sup>]]<sup style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#000000;">|</sup>[[Special:Contributions/Patricknoddy|<sup style="font-variant:small-caps; color:#000000;">'''HISTORY'''</sup>]] 20:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#:<s>'''Oppose''' Inexperienced. -[[User talk:THB|<span style="color: #e5e4e2; background: #66023C; font-family: sans-serif; padding: .1em .25em .75em .25em;">t h b</span>]] 20:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)</s> [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Croton_Gorge_Park_sockpuppetry|Sockpuppet]] - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] 00:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' I think this user needs more experience in Wikipedia, even though he is a great editor. I think with a couple more months of experience, and learning more about Wikipedia, Krimpet will be ready for adminship. [[User:Chickyfuzz14|Chickyfuzz14]]<sup>[[User talk:Chickyfuzz14|(user talk)]]</sup> 22:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''', regretfully. You need a few months more experience on Wikipedia, although you seem like a great, productive editor. '''[[User:Sr13|Sr13]]''' '''([[User talk:Sr13|T]]'''|'''[[Special:Contributions/Sr13|C]]''') <sup>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Sr13 2|ER]]</sup> 03:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' Needs much better experience, and is still too young on the site to warrant admin. [[User:Jmlk17|Jmlk17]] 06:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' As above. [[User:Bjrobinson|Bjrobinson]] 14:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' due to experience concerns, sorry. Keep up the good work, raise the edit summary usage for minor edits and try again in a month or two. --<strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 16:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' - there is simply no substitute for experience. Spend some more time with the project, and come back in a couple of months. You are certainly on the right track. -- [[User:Pastordavid|Pastordavid]] 17:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''' The incivility incidents were too recent to ignore. Regretfully I thus must oppose. Please come back in a few months. [[User:Xiner|Xiner]] ([[User talk:Xiner|talk]]) 02:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Oppose''': 2000+ edits in three months is not even enough for the mop. Come back by the fall and I'll raise it up a notch. --S[[WP:EL|l]][[WP:GA|<span style="color:#006400;">g</span>]][[WP:RS|r]][[WP:AFD|a]][[WP:NFT|n]][[WP:DP|d]][[WP:DS|s]][[WP:NOR|o]][[WP:N|n]] <small>([[User:Slgrandson|page]] - [[User talk:Slgrandson|messages]] - [[Special:Contributions/Slgrandson|contribs]])</small> 03:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#'''Weak Oppose'''. While I think Krimpet has shown great promise during the last three motnhs, I suggest waiting at least three more motnhs and continuing to contribute as in the past. ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<span style="color:darkblue;">日本穣</span>]]<sup>[[Help:Japanese|?]] · <small>[[User talk:Nihonjoe|<span style="color:blue;">Talk</span>]] <span style="color:darkblue;">to</span> [[WP:JA|Nihon]][[WP:MOS-JA|<span style="color:darkgreen;">joe</span>]]</small></sup> 06:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#:<s>'''Oppose'''</s> User has not edited anything related to arthritis. If he does this, then I'll support. BUT IT HAS TO BE SIX MONTHS OF ARTHRITIS-RELATED EDITS! --[[User:Doctor Arthritis Morbid1|Doctor Arthritis Morbid1]] 11:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#::I've struck this oppose: this is this user's first edit to Wikipedia and is clearly not a serious reason to oppose. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 11:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#:::Uh, I think that was a satirical send-up of those who focus on edit counts and edits in a particular namespace. I think Doctor AM should have also mentioned that this candidate has not written a featured article on arthritis either. --[[User:Richardshusr|Richard]] 20:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#::::Sorry Richard, that's not satire its a (now indef blocked) abusive sockpuppet of a long-term vandal who labels all arthritis-related articles as hoaxes. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 11:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#Way too new and inexperienced with the project. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 03:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#I '''vote oppose'''. (RfA '''is''' a vote, despite what some people want to think, and I want that to be clear.) I oppose this candidate because he has insufficient experience in article writing, and because he nominated [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unusual units of measurement]], when he could have made an attempt to fix it. <span style="font-family:serif;font-size:120%">'''[[User:Argyriou|Αργυριου]]''' [[User talk:Argyriou|(talk)]]</span> 05:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#:RfA is a discussion, not a vote. Why are you giving any reason when you believe it's a vote? —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' 05:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#:As stated in the deletion nomination, the reason I nominated that article for deletion was that I felt the very concept of the list was POV (with no objective criteria for what makes a unit "unusual"), not because it needed to be cleaned up; I adamantly understand that AfD is not the proper forum for cleanup discussion, and I apologize if it appeared that way. [[User:Krimpet|Krimpet]] ([[User talk:Krimpet|talk]]) 05:25, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#::<s>'''Oppose''' User hasn't edited any arthritis-related articles. --[[User:Tabersyn30|Tabersyn30]] 08:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)</s> |
|||
#:::Sockpuppet/SPA vote. <i><b>[[User:WarpstarRider|Warpstar]]</b>[[User_talk:WarpstarRider|Rider]]</i> 09:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#::<s>'''Oppose''' This user is an inveterate POV-pusher, and has never edited arthritis-related articles. --[[User:Hopw-2|Hopw-2]] 10:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)</s> |
|||
#:::See above. <i><b>[[User:WarpstarRider|Warpstar]]</b>[[User_talk:WarpstarRider|Rider]]</i> 10:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#Has not demonstrated sufficient dedication (in both active time and editing) to the project for me to trust this user with the tools. '''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|<span style="color:#2E82F4">Daniel Bryant</span>]]''' 00:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#Not comfortable with this user at this time. Next time, probably. [[User:DragonflySixtyseven|DS]] 01:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
'''Neutral''' |
'''Neutral''' |
||
# '''Neutral, leaning to support.''' Your contributions and comments here leave a very good impression, but I prefer admins to have the experience that comes with having made at least 3000 edits - even though, per Anthony above, that may be a mere formality in your case. [[User:Sandstein|Sandstein]] 08:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
# '''Neutral, leaning to support.''' Your contributions and comments here leave a very good impression, but I prefer admins to have the experience that comes with having made at least 3000 edits - even though, per Anthony above, that may be a mere formality in your case. [[User:Sandstein|Sandstein]] 08:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
#:Shouldn't that tell you there's something wrong with your 3000-edit requirement? Here's more evidence of that: I've been a Wikipedian for almost three years, and I made my 3000th edit last month, when I had already been an admin for more than a year. Do you think I'm too inexperienced? [[User:Rspeer|'''<span style="color: #63f;">r</span><span style="color: #555;">speer</span>''']] / [[User talk:Rspeer|<span style="color: #555;">ɹəəds</span><span style="color: #63f;">ɹ </span>]] 20:15, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
# '''Neutral'''. No fundamental problem here, just a little bit of unseasoning and a couple of bits of early hastiness that will undoubtedly go by the wayside with a bit more experience. Suggest coming back in a couple of months and I'm sure everything will be fine. Best, --[[User:Shirahadasha|Shirahadasha]] 14:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
# '''Neutral'''. No fundamental problem here, just a little bit of unseasoning and a couple of bits of early hastiness that will undoubtedly go by the wayside with a bit more experience. Suggest coming back in a couple of months and I'm sure everything will be fine. Best, --[[User:Shirahadasha|Shirahadasha]] 14:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
# Appears to be a suitable candidate; support withheld pending receipt of a WikiProject endorsement per my policy. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 15:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
# Appears to be a suitable candidate; support withheld pending receipt of a WikiProject endorsement per my policy. [[User:Kelly Martin|Kelly Martin]] ([[User talk:Kelly Martin|talk]]) 15:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
# '''Neutral''' Seems a good candidate, can't see any reason to oppose but would perhaps like so see longer editing history that would give more experience of the various aspects of Wikipedia. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 17:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
# '''Neutral''' Seems a good candidate, can't see any reason to oppose but would perhaps like so see longer editing history that would give more experience of the various aspects of Wikipedia. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 17:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
# '''Neutral''' - I am impressed by how quickly you have taken off, but I think that you still need a little more time to amass more edits in a myriad of fields. You show a lot of promise and I agree that admin is "no big deal" (and am hoping others feel that way too when I go for an RfA), but I know I speak for a lot of us here that you need to cross that numerical line to cast that affirmative "no big deal" vote. When that day comes, you'll almost certainly get my support. --[[User:Valley2city|<b><span style="background:blue"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;"><span style="color:white;">Valley</span></span></span>2<span style="background:skyblue"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="color:white;">city</span></span></span></b>]][[User talk:Valley2city|<sup>₪‽</sup>]] 08:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
#I feel that the editor is experienced enough to obtain the sysop bit, however the sockpuppetry in this RFA has me troubled. [[User:Naconkantari|<span style="color:red;">Nacon</span><span style="color:gray;">'''kantari'''</span>]] 22:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
---- |
||
Line 75: | Line 139: | ||
* I choose not to engage in a voting system since RfA is supposed to be a consensus garnering system, which is very poorly served by voting. Please do not construe this commentary as "support", "oppose" or "neutral" since it is none of those. The opposition based on demeanor is perhaps troubling. I suspect the nominee has learned from it, as he indicates in his apology so I'm not sure this should be considered troubling anymore. The lack of time is a non-issue. Similarly, some of the reservations in the supports regarding edit counts in certain areas are a non-issue as well. Not sure why this is a concern. He went through editor review, where a concern raised was edit summary usage needing to be higher. He responded with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Krimpet&diff=prev&oldid=115800677], and since then his edit summary usage has gone up considerably. This shows ability to respond positively to criticism and advice. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 19:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
* I choose not to engage in a voting system since RfA is supposed to be a consensus garnering system, which is very poorly served by voting. Please do not construe this commentary as "support", "oppose" or "neutral" since it is none of those. The opposition based on demeanor is perhaps troubling. I suspect the nominee has learned from it, as he indicates in his apology so I'm not sure this should be considered troubling anymore. The lack of time is a non-issue. Similarly, some of the reservations in the supports regarding edit counts in certain areas are a non-issue as well. Not sure why this is a concern. He went through editor review, where a concern raised was edit summary usage needing to be higher. He responded with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Krimpet&diff=prev&oldid=115800677], and since then his edit summary usage has gone up considerably. This shows ability to respond positively to criticism and advice. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 19:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
:It's not really important, but I don't consider "neutral" to be a vote. Why did you decide to separate your comment from the others? [[User:YechielMan|YechielMan]] 19:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
:It's not really important, but I don't consider "neutral" to be a vote. Why did you decide to separate your comment from the others? [[User:YechielMan|YechielMan]] 19:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
:While attempting to avoid construing this comment as "support", "oppose" or "neutral", I accidently construed it as "paradoxically confusing and mildly amusing". Hopefully the closing bureaucrat will come up with a different construe. It's always good to have multiple construes. It fosters consensus. --<strong>[[User:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">Hús</span>]][[User:Husond/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">ö</span>]][[User talk:Husond|<span style="color:#082567;">nd</span>]]</strong> 02:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:*Because I no longer find the voting system possible to use. The current climate at RfA regards discussion, beyond a few bare comments, as something to be avoided. I can't support a system that does such a thing, when the system is supposed to be a consensus building one. Further, voting has nothing to do with consensus. So, I refuse to participate in a voting system. I'd rather discuss merits of a candidate. Since I can't do that in this system, I've added a section. If you'd like to discuss the reason for this section, I'd suggest we take it to WT:RFA or at least the talk page of the RfA. We should be discussing the nominee, not the format. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 20:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:*Maybe to clarify; I don't find time issues compelling in this case. Same for edit counts. On demeanor, there's perhaps some validity. I do think he's capable of accepting criticism. I'm not voting on the candidate. I'm trying to help form consensus on potential obstacles to adminship. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 13:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:''meta discussion on format of this RfA has been moved to [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Krimpet]]'' |
|||
:''The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either [[{{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{PAGENAME}}|this nomination]] or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div> |
Final (35/17/6); Ended Sat, 29 Apr 2007 14:46 UTC
Krimpet (talk · contribs) - I guess I'll be bold... I'm Krimpet, and I've been a Wikipedian for about three months now. I would like to humbly nominate myself for access to the administrative toolbox.
One of my primary areas of activity has been bridging the Wikimedia language and project barriers by moving images to the Commons. I've done my best at unclogging the enormous backlog of Commons images, including maintaining a user script tool to ease the process further.
I've substantially contributed to several GAs in WikiProject U.S. Roads, including Interstate 476 and Schuylkill Expressway, as well as reviewing potential GA candidates. I've also walked the beat, patrolling my watchlist and recent changes for vandalism, reporting it to AIV when necessary, as well as encouraging good-faith inexperienced editors to read up on how to better contribute.
Another area I've been heavily involved in is in deletion discussions; I try to base my arguments on an objective basis, while always keeping the quality of the encyclopedia my foremost goal. I always strive to keep a cool head and assume good faith no matter how hot the debates get.
As an administrator, I would extend my current backlog-clearing efforts to the administrative backlogs, particularly Category:Images on Wikimedia Commons and company. I'd keep a constant eye on WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. I would also help clear out speedy deletions, expired PRODs, and close old XfDs.
If handed the mop and bucket, I solemnly swear to put them to good use, and make sure not to spill that disgusting brown mop water everywhere! Krimpet (talk) 07:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
Optional question from Naconkantari:
Optional question from Kotepho:
Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Krimpet before commenting.
Discussion
Why all the oppose !votes based on metrics? Do arbitrary edit counts and time-in-service really tell us anything about a candidate? Aren't there those who within a couple months who have a better grasp of the place than some here for much longer, even some people with the mop? Just some thoughts. Vassyana 06:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support
Oppose
Neutral
Abstain from voting, but wish to comment