Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Emt147

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

[edit] Emt147

Final (12/16/3) ending 22:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Emt147 (talk · contribs) – A dedicated, intelligent, curious, pragmatic, and easy-to-work with member of WikiProject Aircraft. I have spent a great deal of time working with Emt, and I have seen what he has written, both on talk pages and in articles (such as FICON), and have always been pleased. I have no doubt that Emt147 will make an excellent admin. Ingoolemo talk 07:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. - Emt147 Burninate! 22:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Support

  1. Of course, seeing that I'm the nominator. Ingoolemo talk 08:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support New, but excellent user. Already very active throughout all spaces. Great potential for the adminship. gidonb 23:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support Good editor, nice to work with, quick learner abakharev 00:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support Has made some great edits and would be glad to work with him ILovePlankton 02:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  5. Strong support The best balance of edits I've seen, and plenty of them. (We're here to edit, not talk). Excellent candidate. Waggers 10:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support A good user. --Siva1979Talk to me 14:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support. Solid contributions; adminship should be no big deal. +sj + 19:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support. He looks just fine. Just because he is lacking on project edits does not mean he isn't familiar with the policies. --Krashlandon (e) 21:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support A good users whose contrubutions are very helpful. While he hasn't much experience, this won't stand in his way to becoming a good admin. The Halo (talk)
  10. Support Mjal 21:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  11. Weak support, a bit new, but off to a good start. JIP | Talk 21:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
  12. Support Capable user. — Adrian Lamo ·· 01:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Not enough project space yet. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 22:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Sorry for hounding the oppose votes, but I would like to point out that Emt has been extremely active in the non-article space, it's just not well reflected by the edit count. Ingoolemo talk 22:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    What do you mean by that? Is the edit count wrong? Or are you saying he's active in project space but has no edits there? -- SCZenz 23:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    I should have been more clear. I meant very little activity as far as WP:AfD, WP:IfD and other administrative tasks as far as I can tell. Most of the activity relates to WP:Air. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 03:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, less than 2000 edits and virtually none in the Wikipedia: namespace. Stifle 23:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
    Comment Doesn't the edit count say this? "Do not judge the person at your door by the length of the road he has travelled to reach you." ILovePlankton 02:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  3. Per above and criteria. NSLE (T+C) at 01:57 UTC (2006-02-28)
  4. Oppose, The lack of project space edits prevents me from justifying whether or not this editor is familiar with Wikipedia policies and methods. Try to get more involded in admin tasks within the project namespace (RFA, AFD, etc) and I'll be happy to consider you in the future. --ZsinjTalk 02:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose, lace of project space, would like to see more involvement on 'the back end' xaosflux Talk/CVU 02:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose Lack of edits and experience in general, let alone Project namespace. DaGizzaChat © 07:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose, due to lack of edits and experience, and most of all the prjoect space edits. Do try again in future. --Terence Ong 11:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose for now per standards. Essexmutant 14:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose due to lack of experience and Wikipedia namespace edits. Stifle 16:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose, not enough edits in Wikipedia namespace. Naconkantari e|t||c|m 21:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose lack of project space edits. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 00:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose not enough edits in Wikipedia namespace, not active enough, and a little too new. Prodego talk 15:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  13. Oppose per above. --CFIF (talk to me) 15:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
  14. Weak oppose per above. I don't think project space edits are a requirement, but whole package of experience not there yet. – Doug Bell talk•contrib 03:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  15. Oppose. Lack of Wikipedia namespace edits. SushiGeek 04:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  16. Oppose not enough edits on Wikispace and lack of user talks. --Ugur Basak 10:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral. Keep doing what you are doing for a while longer. pschemp | talk 05:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  2. Neutral Better have more experience.--Jusjih 01:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral. Agree with above. Raven4x4x 00:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Comment

Doesn't the edit count say this? "Do not judge the person at your door by the length of the road he has travelled to reach you." ILovePlankton 02:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Edit summary usage: 97% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace. Mathbot 22:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
  • See Emt147's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.

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. Housekeeping chores in the backlog including splits, merges, wikification, cleanup, categorization, and vandalism reversal. Also I would be happy to address other tasks as they come up as well as requests for admin assistance. - Emt147 Burninate! 22:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. The FICON project seems to have gotten a lot of positive press. I have written/significantly expanded several other aicraft articles including F-4 Phantom II which I'm currently improving to FAC status. Although I do not have the highest of edit counts, I have authored and greatly expanded over 40 articles on aircraft and aviation technology (a complete rewrite of a 10-page article is still only one edit on the counter!). An ongoing activity is migration of all WP:Air articles to an agreed-upon unified layout format which will add over 2,100 edits if anyone is counting. - Emt147 Burninate! 22:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
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've had issues with one user's metric-imperial unit conversions but I chose to ignore them (the changes were minor and were mostly a nuicance because they cluttered the watchlist). Vandals are always a hassle and I've strictly adhered to the WP:Vand procedures for polite adequate warnings before listing users for ban. I will deal with these matters in the same way as an admin. - Emt147 Burninate! 22:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.