Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sabine's Sunbird

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anonymous Dissident (talk | contribs) at 14:13, 8 April 2008 (→Oppose: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sabine's Sunbird

Voice your opinion (talk page) (20/0/0); Scheduled to end 04:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sabine's Sunbird (talk · contribs) - I hereby nominate User:Sabine's Sunbird for adminship. He's been an active member of Wikiproject Birds (I was going to say the coordinator but I think we've all been on fairly equal footing there), which has yielded 22 Featured Articles in the past year or so. SS has nominated 4 Featured Articles himself. I nagged him to do this as he just asked me for Rollback rights. He has 1200 pages on his watchlist, and much of coordinating involves Moving and Renaming, as well as the frequent vandal-reversion which comes with a sizeable watchlist. I have found him thoughtful, helpful and cool-tempered and able to negotiate with others. Having been here since October 2004 I see no reason why Sabine's Sunbird should not be an admin. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

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 don't actually think I'll be doing too much to start with. The ability to move pages to existing pages will be a massive help in helping with the ongoing project to sort out some of our confusing bird pages. I may also find it useful to semi-protect some high traffic pages on occasions. I watch a lot of pages (or it seems like a lot!) of all kinds. I'll put myself at the disposal of the various wikiprojects I help (New Zealand, birds, mammals, dinosaurs, etc) for any admin related tasks they might have.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have to say my four featured articles. Okay, three and a half, because bird was a collaboration, albeit one that gave me repetitive strain injury. I've learnt a lot in the time I've been here about research, writing and collaborating and have been able to turn that into some articles that are considered amongst Wikipedia's best. The most important thing anyone can give this project is content, because that is what the millions of people that come to Wikipedia are looking for. I mean no disrespect to the many thousands of editors who contribute by fighting the hordes of barbarians (sorry, vandals) or who deal with policy and the like, but at the end of the day it is content that drives everything we do.
I'm also proud of my research. The one thing that gets my blood boiling on Wikipedia is the use of {{fact}} or {{cite}} tags, particularly when the citation being asked for is on the end of the next sentence. I appreciate without question the need for proper citations, but if I find a fact that needs citing I go off and try to cite it. Only if I fail do I flag it, or, more commonly, I pull it out of the text and place it in the talk page. I understand that citing is harder than simply throwing in a tag, but to me research is a massive part of my work here. I'd say I spend as much time reading journal articles, hunting through my university library and reading books and monographs for information as I do actually adding the info here. Perhaps more than half.
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: My approach to problems I have on Wikipedia is to try and endlessly negotiate. If I disagree with an edit I would rather ask an editor about it than simply change it back. It works! On a few occasions these discussions have spilled over onto email and gone on for weeks. I have, on occasions, been terse and snapped at people (I'm only human) but I have apologised afterwards. It is easy to forget that tone isn't carried well in text and it is easier to cause offence. If I've been unreasonable, or suspect I have, or if it is suggested that I am, it is important to apologise.

Optional Question from Jon513

4. Would you speedily delete a bird-related article that you, with your vast knowledge of birds, are certain is a hoax?
A.
Optional questions from Malinaccier Public (talk)
5. In your opinion, should bans on the En-Wikipedia transfer over to the Simple English Wikipedia? Why or why not?
A.
6. Would you be willing to make "tough" blocks?
A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malinaccier Public (talk • contribs) 12:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7 When should cool down blocks be used? added by Cameron
A.
8How do you interpret the policy of WP:IAR and the essay WP:SNOW and how would you apply them? added by Cameron
A.

General comments

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

Discussion

Support
  1. Support as nominator. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support valuable contributor and will be able to make good use of additional tools. Shyamal (talk) 05:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oh, absolutely excellent user. No hesitation. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong support - great contributor. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - an ideal candidate. Risker (talk) 06:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, great editor, will make a good admin.-gadfium 06:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - Exceptional article builder. I suggest taking the time to bask in the warmth of that which is admin-related areas in the near future, however, given what you intend to work on, and where you experience lies, I think I can trust you with the tools. Wisdom89 (T / C) 06:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Just what we need. Hesperian 06:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support per Casliber. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 06:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support. Excellent work. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 06:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support. An excellent and experience editor who knows what he's doing. Useight (talk) 06:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support A long-standing, important contributor, always civil, accurate and diligent. no concerns at all - I'd vote twice if I could Jimfbleak (talk) 06:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Sure looks good to me. faithless (speak) 06:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Yes, please.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 07:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - excellent contributor who well deserves the "next step". MeegsC | Talk 08:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Automatic-Casliber-support. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Strong Support - How are you not a admin already? =D --Liempt (talk) 08:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Suppport, no concern here. Seems capable and sensible. Neıl ☎ 09:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support, seems sensible enough, no indication that they would abuse the tools. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]
  20. Support, Support, Support, erm, if I didn't a) see exemplary contribs and b) already trust the superb nominator I'd c) be blown away by some excellent answers to questions. Can I support three times? --Dweller (talk) 10:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Very impressive indeed. Orderinchaos 11:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support - trustworthy editor. PhilKnight (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose -- Sorry not enough work at WP:AIV to name just one! I also found the answer to Q1 rather worrying...--Cameron (t|p|c) 11:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Work at the various editing abuse forums and the like are not a mandatory requirement for adminship, you know... -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 14:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
  1. Neutral I find it hard to support a candidate that has not made a case for needing admin tools (Question 1). And while adminship is no big deal it is also not a recognition of hard work. It is almost impossible to ask follow up questions about how he would deal with admin related tasks as he has stated that he plans to only seldom use them. Nevertheless I found nothing problematic in his contributions and I have no real reason to oppose. Jon513 (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Neutral per lack of deletion and vandal-fighting experience. Epbr123 (talk) 11:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Sabine%27s_Sunbird&oldid=204216637"