Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Howabout1 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Howabout1

Vote here (4/4/1) ending 23:36 31 July 2005 (UTC) Howabout1 has been a longtime user, takes care of vandalism, is organized, and is a member of the kindness campaign. He is a model Wikipedian. He has also made upwards of 1470 edits. He helps many people with their work and probably has the help desk on his watchlist so he can help people. Howabout deserves some recognition for his proper treatment of vandals and the help he has given. A proper reward is the job of administrator.

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I accept. No really, what do you think, I've nominated my self twice. I suggest anyone here sees my first and second RfA's. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 20:54, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Ok. I decline. Two days isn't enough. I'll wait another six months. Now I look like an idiot for telling all those people... Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 21:35, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. Although I don't recognise the nominator, I'm going to vote support this time too.  Grue  21:15, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
2. User:Merovingian (t) (c) 21:25, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
3. Support - Sango123 21:34, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
4. Support as per last time. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 23:21, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose in the strongest possible terms. Editor is trying way too hard to become an admin. Nominator didn't sign the nomination, which is questionable, and I don't recognize the nominator as trustworthy. In fact, it's quite obvious that Howabout1 put Anti-Anonymex2 up to putting up the nomination solely in order to comply with previous requests that he not self-nom again. [1] [2] Kelly Martin 21:07, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
2. Oppose. Although I supported last time, I believe that such a quick re-nomination is silly. -- JamesTeterenko 21:10, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
3. I am very surprised that the nominated user accepted two days after he had withdrew his self-nom. This is an abuse of process. I am sorry, but his accepting this nomination tells me he will not make a good admin. It is doubtful I will ever vote for him now. He has my sincerest apologies. gkhan 21:12, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
4. Oppose. Abuse of process. Either you are serious about withdrawing yourself from consideration while you improve your resume, or you aren't. Even if we assume there is no collaboration between you and the nominator, then we are left to assume that you saw the only problem with the last nom was that you nominated yourself. Your excess of enthusiasm makes me wary. The fact that you would, in effect, game the system by allowing a vote to restart only two days after you closed a previously losing vote makes me question your judgment and pushes me over to oppose. Dragons flight 21:32, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I would gladly support in the future, I did not have time to vote on last RFA. However, I share the concerns of others about another very quick RFA, 2 or 3 days is too short to start one again IMHO. ∞Who?¿? 21:34, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Comments

• Note - he has changed his mind and decided to decline the nomination about an hour after he initially accepted it, after seeing the first couple of votes. I hope that 3-strikes-you're-out won't affect him here, and that he'll get nominated by an admin in a few more months (the end of this year should be safe), as he is a good user, but this nomination's done, so it should be closed ASAP so that people don't get confused. --Idont Havaname 03:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

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.First of all, I am going to copy my answers from my last RfA since it was so recent (within 48 hours). Just about every sysop chore imaginable. I intend to clean out CSD and VfD. I would block vandals, I'm not afraid to. I would also love rollback to help reverting. And to top it all off, I am the founder of a wikicity and have sysop powers there, so I am familiar with them (just not blocking, I'm the only editor except for one edit by an anon.).

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

A.I'm very pleased with Christian Children's Fund, an article I brought up from a stub.

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.See wikipedia:Disruptive user and User talk: Grace Note. Also, wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of songs played at dances for two half-conflicts.