Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Phil Boswell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Phil Boswell

final (29/1/0) ending 15:35 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Phil Boswell (talk • contribs) has been a user since 2 October 2003 (when he was welcomed by Angela). He has contributed substantially to new articles (Kate's counter says 5,560 article edits out of a total of 8,493) but also takes on various admin tasks (he received a wikimedal for janitorial services from Topbanana as long ago as 8 November 2004).

I can't think of any reason why he should not be an admin. --ALoan (Talk) 15:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Well, hot damn :-) Thank you very much. —Phil | Talk 17:27, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. Me, of course ALoan (Talk) 15:43, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
2. A horse is a horse BRIAN0918 • 2005-08-16 15:44
3. He's not an admin yet? --Merovingian (t) (c) 15:55, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
4. Support, he has 4 cats, how could i possibly oppose? (good editor as well) Martin - The non-blue non-moose 16:05, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
5. Support I like the sort of passive admin picture you've painted in your answers. All too often, I see an admin start blocking people the same day they are promoted. I can't imagine you ever abusing those powers. (Not that newly-promoted admins are abusing their powers by jumping right in. I just think it'd be a good idea if they sat back and watched the older admins at first). Acetic Acid 18:51, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
6. Support - from what I've seen, civil, and by his question answers looks reliable, trustworthy and a good admin in the making. Open and shut case. --Celestianpower ^hab 20:34, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
7. Support, I can't think of any reason either. Rje 20:54, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
8. Support, since then and still not an adm. ? D. J. Bracey (talk) 22:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
9. Support. Very fine editor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:19, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
10. Support. His contribution history shows a willingness to take on thankless maintenance tasks (well, not completely thankless, since he's getting this RFA). Give the man a mop! --Deathphoenix 13:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
11. Support The JPS 21:26, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
12. Support, seems like an editor who will make good use of sysop rights. --Sn0wflake 00:56, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
13. - Guettarda 04:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
14. Extreme ultra support. Beyond any question or doubt, Phil is qualified, Phil is trustworthy, Phil is perfect admin material. Func( t, c, @, ) 04:40, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
15. Support. I agree with the bit about the cats. David | Talk 15:03, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
16. Support - everything I've seen has been great. violet/riga (t) 23:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
17. Support. Though four cats are not really enough. - Nunh-huh 23:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
18. Support. --Briangotts (talk) 05:01, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
19. Support - Of course. Sango123 14:36, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
20. Support For a user that was welcomed on my birthday ;) Good editor. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 15:37, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
21. Support as per Func. Hamster Sandwich 06:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
22. Cool. JuntungWu 08:45, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
23. Support, he's been here, like, forever! the wub "?/!" 09:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
24. Support. Happy to support. All my contact with Phil has been positive. Paul August ☎ 16:33, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
25. Support. Seems to be calm and level-headed. (It also doesn't hurt that he's contributed to the Harry Potter Wiki! :-)) Hermione1980 23:59, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
26. Support. -- DS1953 03:50, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
27. Support. Cliché--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 15:49, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
28. Support, an excellent and more than qualified contributor. Hall Monitor 17:02, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
29. Support. He isn't one already? I thought he was, and a good one, too. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 03:30, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

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. Anything I'm asked for, really. I hadn't really thought about it much yet, not expecting to need to. I'm not intending to go on some sort of blocking/protecting/rollback blitz: that doesn't sound fun at all.

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

A. I hope I did a good job on the ISO 3166 lists, where there is still a lot of work to do (hint to anyone wanting something to get their teeth into). I've also poked around the various reports produced by the mighty Top Banana and helped out where I could. I tend to re-organise stuff which can take a long time; I started WikiProject Color and there's still loads of work to do on that. My particular forté is documenting and organising stuff: I set up the wikipedia:to-do lists on various writer-related categories (such as Science fiction writers and similar) and I try to check on those every now and again.

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. None in particular that I can recall, although there are a few that have come close. Mostly I just relax and wait a bit: since I only do wiki-stuff during my "lunch-time" (so I have a tremendously long "lunch-time", you goin' ter make summat of it? :-) I just leave it until the next session and see what happened; usually whichever numbskull pushed my button has decided to play somewhere else and I can quietly go in and fix whatever it was up again.