Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DVD R W

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.


[edit] DVD R W

Final (74/0/0) ended 00:58, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

DVD R W (talk • contribs) – I've seen DVD-RW around WP:AIV quite a bit recently, and he has an impressive record of contributions dating back nearly a year. A large volume of his recent edits are vandal fighting, which can be greatly expedited with admin tools. Also seems to be very knowledgeable about policy, having dealt with images and deletion on a highly competent level. Always works courteously and calmly, especially around new users. I feel that this is a user we can trust with the tools. (ESkog)(Talk) 04:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. DVD+ R/W 00:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Support

  1. I beat the nom support Looks like a very good candidate for the job, demonstrates a strong grasp of policy.--digital_me(t/c) 00:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support per me. (ESkog)(Talk) 00:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support Deals firmly, but courteously, knowledgeably and helpfully with problems. See User_talk:Will_RGC. Tyrenius 01:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support good contributor. ←Humus sapiens ну? 01:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support, very effective vandal-fighter, kind, courteous and helpful - perfect for the mop. Phædriel ♥ tell me - 01:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support, I am familar with DVD's contributions and feel he will make a fine admin. Accurizer 01:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support. Quick skim of contribs suggests knowledge, range and civility. RadioKirk talk to me 01:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support - per Tawker -- Tawker 01:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support - looks good :) -Goldom (t) (Review) 01:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  10. Support Rama's Arrow 02:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  11. Support It is time to give him the mop. The additional tools he would receive would definitely benefit Wikipedia i the long run. --Siva1979Talk to me 02:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  12. Support. Good user and deserves mop. I've seen that this user is a great vandal fighter. G.He 02:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support. Good editor. -- No Guru 02:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support - have a look at this diff, which demonstrates why he should be given the admin buttons. - Richardcavell 03:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  15. Support per Richard. —Khoikhoi 03:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support appears suitable for the job, loves edit summaries.--Andeh 03:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support --Terence Ong 03:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support. Everything checks out. —Cuiviénen 03:54, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  19. Support Per Richardcavell. Deserves the mop & the flamethrower. --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 03:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support ForestH2
  21. Support Very good RC patroller, he could use the "block" tool. Voice-of-All 04:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  22. Strong Support I see your name all the time...I just don't remember where...Yanksox 04:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  23. Support. DarthVader 06:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  24. Support One of my favorite Wikipedia usernames ;) and an editing record to match. Whenever i see him around i'm always impressed. Will be a good 'un. Rockpocket 07:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support good editor. --Tone 08:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  26. Yes. Misza13 T C 08:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  27. No worries. Deizio talk 10:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose, erm, Support Werdna (talk) 12:54, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support --Astrokey44 13:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  30. --W.marsh 13:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  31. Support excellent knowledge of policy and guidelines, fairly applied and across a wide range of areas. Will make a great admin Gwernol 14:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support -- Resuscitated the architecture portal, &ct. dogears (talk) 14:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support of course. Just zis Guy you know? 14:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  34. Support – good experience with policies and vandalism – Gurch 15:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support - by the way, You might be thinking of Deconstruction, but the featured architecture article is at Deconstructivism (in Q2)- Andy t 15:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support - Kilo-Lima|(talk) 17:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  37. Merovingian {T C @} 19:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  38. Support. Also first saw DVD-RW at WP:AIV! Great vandal fighter. Hopefully you won't need to use AIV before too long. haz (user talk) 19:34, 10 June 2006
  39. --GeorgeMoney T·C 22:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  40. Support; better than Blu-ray. -- Миборовский 22:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support per nom Anger22 01:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  42. Support Good answers to questions. --FloNight talk 01:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  43. Support blue520 02:05, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support All around good candidate. -- Samir धर्म 04:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  45. Support with pleasure - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support looks fine to me.--MONGO 10:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support per above abakharev 13:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  48. Support --Jay(Reply) 17:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support. DVDRW is already busy doing administrative tasks, and is clearly to be trusted with the tools. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 18:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  50. Support per nom, good bunch of candidates at the mo! - Glen Stollery 20:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  51. Jaranda wat's sup 01:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support - Good contributor. Afonso Silva 08:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  53. Strong support - Actually thought he was an admin. DVDRW has been very helpful and welcoming to me, as a new wikipedian.--Mcginnly 08:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support per above // Nevermind2 19:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  55. Support. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 14:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  56. Of course. Roy A.A. 16:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  57. yep, fits my criteria.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 20:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support Joe I 20:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  59. OMG HELLZ YA! ANOTHER CRAZY RAMBLING SASQUATCHIAN SUPPORT FOR A DAMN GOOD USER! (per Tawker) Sasquatch t|c 23:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  60. Support. Cliché. SushiGeek 01:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support. Excellent vandal fighter; understands deletion process; plenty of experience; can be trusted. --TantalumTelluride 05:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  62. Support. αγδεε (ε τ c) 07:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  63. SupportVandal fighter. Dolive21 15:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support Looks like another good candidate for the mop and bucket.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  17:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  65. Support Good contributor. With 5,000 + valuable edits under his belt, I am sure he will make a good admin. Jordy 19:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support--Jusjih 00:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support per that shouting Sasquatch thing/dude (and therefore per tawker). --james(lets talk) 03:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support, I've seen this guy around fighting vandalism and contributing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support - he's been hassling he a lot at AIV.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  70. Support, Good contributor with a strong record of communicating well with other users. Kukini 04:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  71. Support, seems a good editor. Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support Work so far equals no worries at all. Marskell 16:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support. See no issues. Jayjg (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  74. Support. Thunderbrand 19:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments User's edits.Voice-of-All 04:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

--Viewing contribution data for user DVD R W (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page)--  (FAQ)
Time range: 185 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 4hr (UTC) -- 10, Jun, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 12hr (UTC) -- 7, November, 2005
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 100% Minor edits: 98.4%
Average edits per day: 57.02 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 368 edits) : Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 98.33%
Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown of this page):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/rewrites/sourcing): 0.1% (5)
Minor article edits (small content/info/reference additions): 3.42% (171)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 13.66% (683)
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 3280 | Average edits per page: 1.52 | Edits on top: 25.12%
Significant edits (non-minor/reverts): 45.6% (2280 edit(s))
Minor edits (non-reverts): 23.76% (1188 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 29.76% (1488 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 0.88% (44 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 45.38% (2269) | Article talk: 2.34% (117)
User: 1.44% (72) | User talk: 32.72% (1636)
Wikipedia: 9.2% (460) | Wikipedia talk: 0.12% (6)
Image: 0.6% (30)
Template: 0.52% (26)
Category: 1.48% (74)
Portal: 4.98% (249)
Help: 0.04% (2)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 1.18% (59)

Username        DVD R W
Total edits     5131
Distinct pages edited   3444
Average edits/page      1.490
First edit      23:27, September 4, 2005
        
(main)  2401
Talk    120
User    73
User talk       1624
Image   30
Image talk      18
Template        26
Template talk   9
Help    2
Category        75
Category talk   8
Wikipedia       466
Wikipedia talk  6
Portal  249
Portal talk     24
G.He 01:57, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

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: The sysop chores that I anticipate helping with are reverting vandalism, RC Patrol (including CSDs), AIV blocking, and closing AfDs. I am open to taking on some other tasks If need arises and I am encouraged to do so, however I have some experience with these chores already and will continue to perform them. Though these duties take some time and effort away from the heart of wikipedia, reading and writing, they are satisfying and necessary in their own right. I think the most satisfying thing about them is that they bring the editor into unfamiliar territory, and introduce new ideas via drift from article to article.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am pleased with my wikipedia experience as a whole, and it is difficult to choose a single article or contribution. I really enjoy keeping vandalism off the articles, which I do daily. I also enjoy rotating the selected articles and selected pictures at the architecture portal, WP:ARCH, which I do every other week. I have contributed alot there, I started the nomination forum for selected articles and pictures, and I am honored that the portal recently won an award[1]. Another contribution that I am pleased with, is the article deconstructivism which in a very fruitful collaboration just ascended to featured status. I am undertaking another project with the same collaborator, expressionist architecture, though it still needs alot of work.
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 not been in any conflicts over editing in the past and have only recieved encouragement from other users. I think the wikipedia community is a fairly likable bunch, and using wikipedia relieves alot more of my stress than it creates. I think reviewing policy and WP:RULES helps alot with edit conflicts, for all parties involved. Policy has a sort of chilling effect on the bias and personal point of view that lies behind most arguments, and though arguments are vital and intriguing to read, they unfortunately don't have much of a place in an encyclopedia.

Optional (and unimportant) question from Goldom:

1. Are you a DVD-RW or DVD+RW? :)
A: (Ah, nevermind, your page says +. Wasn't sure cause nom said -. Good to know, hehe.) -Goldom (t) (Review) 01:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

DriniQuestion

Do you think admins performing actions (deletions, blocks) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned? If so, how? -- Drini 20:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Since being nominated for adminstrator I have had to do alot of evaluation of adminstrative actions, powers, and duties. I have subsequently added alot of policy and administrative pages to my watchlist, and brushed up on alot of reading. So, to answer your question as best I can, I think that actions performed outside of policy should not be sanctioned, if they are proven by consensus to be a violation of policy. Any excessive use of force at an administrators hand is deplorable, whether it is a deletion, blocking, edit warring, or personal attacks. Any questionable edits should be reported to WP:RFC/ADMIN, to be reviewed, and the appropriate actions, desyssoping if necessary, should be taken. If however, the actions outside of policy are in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia, expanding on policy and are possibly an improvement to the rules we already have, then I think they should be recognized and implemented. A case by case examination of edits unrecognized by policy is, in my view, required to determine whether the instance is favorable or detrimental to Wikipedia.


The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_adminship_DVD_R_W_488c.html"