Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/A Link to the Past

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Oskar Sigvardsson (talk | contribs) at 11:21, 6 October 2005 (→[[User:A Link to the Past|A Link to the Past]]: oppose). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Vote here (5/2/3) ending 04:50 October 13, 2005 (UTC)

A Link to the Past (talk · contribs) – A Link to the Past has been a great user since his first edit in December 2004, being very active in cleanup projects and other Wikipedia activities. 4720 edits for those with editcountitis, well distributed throughout namespaces. Would make a good admin. Ral315 WS 04:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Mild lesbian acceptance - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:07, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. As nominator, of course. Ral315 WS 04:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Extreme DeCSS support, of course! I have seen this user around a lot. — JIP | Talk 05:28, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support CambridgeBayWeather 06:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support - A clever, diligent editor --Knucmo2 09:33, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I've seen a lot of ALTTP. --Merovingian (t) (c) 10:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. --Boothy443 | comhrá 06:30, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Too few edit summaries. Oleg Alexandrov 06:47, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose The discussion on Talk:Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back really disturbes me. I believe that comments such as the one A man in black cites ([1]) and others on that page (such as [2] and [3]) is unacceptable for any wikipedian, let alone an administrator. And yes I realise that the discussion was frustrating, but an admin needs patience in boatloads, enough to be able to handle these things. However, from what else I have seen of A Link To The Past, he seems like a very good user, and I am willing to change my vote in a few months if this RfA fails (barring any similar incidents, naturally). gkhan 11:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. I must admit to moderately heated disagreements with ALTTP recently over stub categories. Not strong enough to oppose, but I'm a little wary of supporting. Grutness...wha? 06:23, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I'm a bit ambivalent, too, although the timing is unfortunate, as I'm currently engaged in a fairly heated debate with him. (If anything, his patience in that dispute is a point in his favor.) I have mixed feelings about his tendency to edit without edit summaries and his occasionally confrontational tone in talk pages and edit summaries (particularly when dealing with confrontations by other editors). If it weren't for that, I'd be inclined to support. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 06:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Since it's not really fair to be this critical without examples, here's one. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 07:11, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I must admit that I don't like the answer to question 1 below at all; if you're not ready to use Brainpower before deleting, blocking and especially closing AfD's or others.... I don't know what to say about this, but: are you taking the admin-stuff seriously at all? (and I don't mean to offend here, that's why I 'voted' neutral) Lectonar 10:42, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    And yes, I've seen that you meant it basically as a jest; I just don't feel thats easily recognisable Lectonar 10:49, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • *grumble*I have several criticisms of this candidate. First off, the candidate floods peer review. Second, the answer to the first question makes me think twice. Third, a severe lack of edit summaries (in some cases). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Taking on your comments in order: Yes, I admit that perhaps it was rude of me to flood the Peer Review with articles, no matter how legitimate they were. I apologize, although the way you worded it makes it seem like I do it on a regular basis. c_c
    • That was just a jest, basically, anything that I can do without having an innate knowledge in, say, HTML or C++ I'll be able to do.
    • Yes, yes, I had a speech on that, and I do have a problem with edit summaries. However, the only time I really made no edit summaries was that one time recently where I was stub-sorting. I was trying to get it done as soon as humanly possible, so I just c/ped the stub to be applied and saved. I'll try my hardest to remember to keep writing edit summaries. Thanks for your comments. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the response! I apologize if I was a bit terse... OK, so I've got one last question for you (and please realize these are just to address my own concerns as I'm very much undecided). At least from what I've seen you tend to drift towards owning articles, as statements such as Talk:Star_Wars_Episode_V:_The_Empire_Strikes_Back#This_is_a_community_article. would indicate, and in general the disputes that follow. Am I incorrect? What do you think? Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:20, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • I wouldn't say owning, but I was being a pinch selfish with what I thought was quality. Although, the statements I made were in response to the additude that this is for Star Wars editors to edit. Also, Grutness, I don't quite recall conversing... @.@ - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:30, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yes, I realize I was testy with Clawson, and I do apologize for any aggression towards him, but in my own defense, the guy was ignoring what I was saying completely, and being respectful was not working to get him to stop ignoring what I was saying (he was saying that change was needed, and was ignoring me because I did not want change, and was demanding that I give a different change opposed to his change). - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:18, 6 October 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 read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. Well, I'd say anything that doesn't require a lot of brain power (deleting, (un)blocking, closing, (un)protecting, etc.)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Wario, Henry Fonda, Cat, Lakitu and Katamari Damacy, five articles that I have helped feature. Wario is my biggest work, where I contributed more content than anyone (A Man in Black helped out a lot too, however).
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. Well, let's just say that in the past, I have let my temper get in the way of good judgement. Often, however, while i was at some fault for my temper being unleashed, there was fault in the receiver of my temper often, such as Adamwankenobi (who, after being blocked, returned and became a much better user). I plan on cleaning up my act, and promise to not abuse my power TOO much (if you didn't already get it, that statement was injest :). While I have a mean side if you look hard enough for it, I have a nice side - I rarely ever bite the newbies, and I strive to help improve the quality of Wikipedia. I have never been blocked, and I have never vandalized an article. I won't destroy you if you object, so don't worry. *waves*
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/A_Link_to_the_Past&oldid=24888936"