Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Dvyost

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] Dvyost

Final (33/1/0) ended 07:17 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Dvyost (talk · contribs) – Self-nom. I recently rounded the corner on my 3,000th edit (2,400 in the Article namespace) in about five months (though very, very technically, thanks to fixing a typo at Battle of Towton, I've been a user for seven months). Usually I concentrate on African history (on Wikipedia, certainly the road less traveled by), but lately I've been expanding my horizons with AfD and the "Random article" button. I've also been doing some work over on "Newest Articles," where I try to not just tag the speedies but also to wikify the unwikified, weed out the copyright vios, and welcome and coach those who've added both. I've worked hard to be the best editor I can be, and I think I'm ready for the admin tools; though I'm a little shy about self-nominating, I thought it was finally time to throw myself out there. Dvyost 07:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Yep. --Dvyost 13:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Article contributions are excellent, and the Frost allusion equally so. — Dan | Talk 08:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  2. Support - so long as he signs his acceptance of the nomination. I thought about neutralling but there's no sense in just having to change my vote. --Celestianpower hablamé 08:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    Not to be over-critical, but this is a bit silly. Acceptance is clearly implied in a self-nomination. — Dan | Talk 00:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support good editor --Rogerd 13:23, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support much needed interest areas Dlyons493 Talk 13:33, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  5. Support, great editor! Kirill Lokshin 14:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  6. Yub yub, commander! --Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 15:43, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support. Christopher Parham (talk) 16:01, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support Astrotrain 16:43, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support. 2400! Great job! Now its time to give him the mop an badge!Voice of All @|Esperanza|E M 17:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support Another Good Editor --JAranda | watz sup 17:21, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  11. Yeeeaaaaah! Howard Dean-like Support. Great work with African topics. - Darwinek 18:26, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support. Indeed a good editor. And love your choice of topics! They will help tremendously to change the wiki systemic bias. The Minister of War 20:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  13. Homicidal Batman Villain Support Very good editor, good edits, doesn't talk much though.... Will support even though I dislike those who self nominate.. :) --Spawn Man 23:05, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  14. Support. Shauri smile! 00:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  15. Oran e (t) (c) (@) 04:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support of course. Dmcdevit·t 06:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support Sounds good. --Ryan Delaney talk 08:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  18. FireFox 13:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 14:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support - no problem supporting, though it's tempting to start a conflict over the Bambara Empire just to spite the user's comment below... -- Francs2000 21:10, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  21. Support. El_C 21:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  22. Total support - It should've been automatic! Indeed, El C is confirming it! Dvyost one of the most active editors (if not the most) in all what relates to Africa and many other topics. After a long time waiting for help in Gnawa, he came for rescue Talk:Gnawa! Congras mate! -- Svest 22:22, 24 October 2005 (UTC)  Wiki me up™
  23. Support --Kefalonia 08:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support Friday (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support --tomf688{talk} 20:22, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support, User:Dvyost does good work.--Isotope23 02:34, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support Johann Wolfgang 17:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support, great contributor. Silensor 20:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support, a very good user with just the right attitude. I can't help being a little worried though that the admin tools might carry Dvyost away from providing Wikipedia with excellent and much-needed articles. — mark ✎ 12:42, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support, has shown focus as a contributor and helped expand Wikipedia's coverage. I have ran into him several times on DYK. He radiates warmth even through his edit summaries. I hope that his past performance as a contributor is a good indicator of his future performance as an admin. --Gurubrahma 16:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  31. Support Tedernst 19:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  32. Support Private Butcher 20:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  33. Support and much love Smmurphy 20:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. --Boothy443 | comhrá 21:04, 23
I find it very hard to assume good faith with Boothy's oppositions. Opposing nearly all potential admins. without explanation is essentially incivil, and without such explanation, in fact, he is not abiding by WikiGuidelines. Furthermore, I believe that these oppositions are a result of simple malice. I noticed that Boothy has 16,000 edits, but is not an adm - perhaps he is trying to hold others back. His contributions reflect a tendency of anger when people have only asked a simple question [1] or he is excessivley sarcastic [2]. I request that medition or arbitration be considered against this user. Him abusing the rights of RfA is harmful to the Wiki in my opinion - trolls, vandals and spammers are not allowed to continue in bad faith - so this user should also comport himself in a civil manner on these RfAs. He is abusing his rights here - and he is apparently making no attempts to stop. He has the right to vote, sure, but all the other Wikipedians have the right to a fair RfA. Something needs to happen! Molotov (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

She didn't oppose Kirill Lokshin... Spawn Man 23:29, 24 October 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. As I said above, I'm particularly interested in New Pages patrol. My internet connection is a bit spotty to track vandals for moment-to-moment whacking, but I do find a good deal of satisfaction in calling up fifty new pages, speedy-tagging those that need it, AfDing others, and wikifying as many of the others as I can. Lately I've been realizing how handy the admin tools would be for these things. Tagging the articles is helpful but it's also shucking the work off onto someone else; for similar reasons, I'd like to help clean out the AfD votes. I patrol over a 1,000 pages via my watchlist (though many of these are just redirects to obscure African kings), which means I revert vandalism on a daily basis; I intend to keep doing so and broadening the watchlist to whatever new topics I encounter.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I've added a substantial number of articles on West African culture and history, including most of the early kingdoms of Mali and almost every mansa of the Mali Empire. My crowning achievement here is probably the umbrella article History of West Africa, which drew together most of my summer's work (though another editor recently pointed out to me that I should have included Cameroon as well--I guess that'll go in next week).
I've also made substantial expansions to some literature articles, such as William Styron or Grace Paley, and I'll always be fond of Lucy Delaney, an early article of mine that I wrote from scratch.
My pet project, though, is to link up Wikipedia's Africa coverage as much as possible. When I started editing, I found duplicate articles on a number of topics (and accidentally created some myself), just because the French, Arabic, or African names allowed so many possible transliterations. El Hajj Umar Tall, for example, turned out to be referenced in Wikipedia in more than a dozen different ways, each of which I've now created a redirect for. For similar reasons I check the list of missing Africa topics almost every day, to try to properly wikilink, categorize, and stub tag any new Africa articles; I'm also always on the lookout for alternate spellings in existing articles that need to be redirected and properly linked. I feel I've made a substantial contribution to unifying our coverage in this respect, and made a lot of African coverage more user-friendly.
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 haven't run into much conflict with other users, in part because I usually work in such an isolated area of Wikipedia (who wants to argue about the Bambara Empire? No one I've met yet), but also, I hope, because I work hard to head off conflict before it can really start up. I discuss any major changes (or often the minor as well) I want to make at article talk pages, and try to encourage others to voice their opinions and engage in dialogue with me--preferably all of us citing the sources we're working from to make us disagree.
Unless I'm forgetting something, this is probably the angriest I've ever gotten with another editor; he had accidentally deleted an article I had just finished working on. The same week, Hurricane Katrina passed through my state of Louisiana, and I was simply in no mood to deal with it. While I'm not very happy with my original post (we had already hashed this out on the article talk page anyway), my later response shows what I hope is a more typical response from me--there are really very few things in this world that I find worth fighting about. I'll talk with somebody about facts for as long as it takes to get them to cite a source, sure, but flame wars just aren't worth it, and they never will be. Assume Good Faith is a good policy not just for Wikipedia but for life in general.
The above 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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.