Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Firsfron

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] Firsfron

Final(62/0/1) Ending 20:33, 2006-07-28 (UTC)

Firsfron (talk · contribs) – It is my pleasure to nominate Firsfron of Ronchester for adminship. He approached me about a month and a half ago, asking for admin coaching. After looking over his contributions and activities, I thought he was already a strong admin candidate. But Firsfron wanted to give himself time to learn more about Wikipedia guidelines and procedures.

I am confident that Firsfron understands what Wikipedia is all about. He is friendly, helpful, unselfish, and works well with others. He is very active at WikiProject Dinosaurs, and has participated in the creation of three featured articles: Psittacosaurus, Albertosaurus, and Velociraptor. (Though it may not look like he wrote much of those articles, the WikiProject Dinosaur team members work together on the subject, and one usually writes the actual article or large chunks of it.) Firsfron has also created numerous articles, many of them dinosaur related. In addition, he is a member of WikiProject Buffyverse, WikiProject Television Stations, the Counter Vandalism Unit, and Esperanza. He has contributed since 2004 and has over 9000 edits. Firsfron is ready for adminship. --Fang Aili talk 20:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Accepto. I humbly accept. --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nominator. --Fang Aili talk 20:36, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support edit counters will be pleased, over 9000 edits. His 400 project edits only seems low in comparison to the huge volume of contribution... looks like a great admin material. Themindset 21:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support A fantastic user. --Tuspm(C | @) 21:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Strong Support - meets my standards. I like also that he is knowledgeable about Wikipedia policy but is truely an editor, helping to build our encyclopedia. —Mets501 (talk) 22:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support Excellent user all round. Seivad 22:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support Good at mediating disputes, likely good admin material. --CFIF (talk to me) 22:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support. Looks good to me. G.He 22:27, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support Nothing appears to be wrong, but alot appears to be right. Yanksox 22:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  9. Strong Support How could I fail to support such a strong user? Thε Halo Θ 22:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  10. Support This Fire Burns Always 22:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  11. Merovingian (T, C, @) 23:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  12. Saurpport. Er, support. And, apatasourus on the back for three featured articles. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 23:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support, especially after such a well reasoned and presented nomination. Agent 86 23:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support, certainly. --Draicone (talk)
  15. Support per nom. Obviously Firsfron is overdue for adminship. 1ne 23:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support, excellent user. RandyWang (raves/rants) 00:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support A good admin candidate, looking at contributions and answers to questions below.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  00:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support per nom. Roy A.A. 01:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  19. Support in all that I've seen of him, and my interactions, he has been extremely courteous and professional. He has dialup, but nobody can be perfect, I guess =D. Alphachimp talk 01:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support per nom. Bucketsofg✐ 02:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support seems to be a great editor and I'm confident that having the extra tools will benefit both Firsfron as an editor and the Wikipedia project at large hoopydinkConas tá tú? 02:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support Great work on TV-related articles CoolKatt number 99999 02:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  23. Support per ↑ AdamBiswanger1 02:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  24. Orane (talk • cont.) 03:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support. Can't think of anything to add, an exceptional candidate. Rje 03:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  26. Support. Heyhey, let's jump on the bandwagon! :D --Terrancommander 03:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  27. Support, due to his work on articles relating to dinosaurs and television stations, and per the answers to the below questions. Would make a great admin. —Whomp t/c 04:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  28. Support --Terence Ong (Chat | Contribs) 04:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support, Mailer Diablo 06:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support per nom. Michael 07:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  31. Support. Plenty of experience, well rounded and thoughtful. One moppery, coming right up! Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 07:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support. I am a relatively 'young' wikipedian and it must be said that Firsfron's example, guidance and support have been exemplary - anyone would have guessed that he already WAS admin. He has always been prompt and courteous in all communication and I have witnessed his powerful, fair, non-inflammatory and decisive mediations in times of potential difficulty between wikipedians. A few editors stand out on WP. Firsfron is one of them. With extra tools, he'll be a phenomenon. - Ballista 07:29, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support. Experienced editor. Also I like dinosaurs :). - Darwinek 08:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  34. Support - great editor abakharev 08:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support. DarthVader 10:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support Looks all clear to me! TruthCrusader 15:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  37. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 16:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  38. Support None here either. SynergeticMaggot 17:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  39. Support. No dings, no problems, no big deal. Ifnord 18:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  40. Support I have not seen this user around Wikipedia, but the numbers say I should vote for him. So I will. Viva La Vie Boheme 21:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  41. Jaranda wat's sup 22:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  42. Very weak support per about half your 400+ WP:space edits being to the dinosaur and buffyverse projects, which is good, but does not bespeak fluency with the administrative processes. - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  43. Support. Baseball,Baby! balls•strikes 04:02, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support per nominator, all around good contributor. Yamaguchi先生 05:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  45. As an editor, he is careful with references and conforming to manual of style. As an administrator, he will show similar attention to detail. Support. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support per nom. Valentinian (talk) 11:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support - Iolakana|T 11:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  48. Support. looks good to me.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 12:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support. Mostly Rainy 13:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  50. Support. --tomf688 (talk - email) 13:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  51. Strong Support. I really like the effort you put into admin coaching, by the way. E Asterion u talking to me? 23:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  52. Strongest Support This just goes to show that I should check RfA more often. I've known Firs for ... geez, six years now? Seven? Exactly the kind of person we need as an admin. Ziggurat 23:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  53. Support this editor has a great attitude! Really liked the answer to question 2 -- Samir धर्म 12:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support, without reservations. Sango123 04:18, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  55. Tried-and-Tested Support. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 15:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  56. Meets 3/3 support GangstaEB~(penguin logs) 22:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  57. 20 ounces of meaty support TrackerTV 00:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-26 10:46Z
  59. Support Sarah Ewart (Talk) 13:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  60. Support from what I can see there don't appear to be any problems. —Khoikhoi 19:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support. — FireFox (talk) 11:07, 28 July '06
  62. Support: Yes. --Bhadani 13:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose

#Only Oppose don't meet my standards GangstaEB~(penguin logs) 21:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Are these the standards you changed just seven minutes earlier? Just asking. :) To be clear, am I supposed to have more than, less than, or exactly 7/24ths in WP namespace? --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I change my standards a lot these days. My opinions switch alot.
Neutral
  1. Neutral - Are you all friends or what? I can't touch this request. I don't see anything wrong but at the same time I don't see anything about how the user deals with mediation issues. You can count on me looking for a dispute Firsfron is involved with to see if he deals with it fairly. --HResearcher 12:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
    Hello HResearcher. As nominator I'll jump in here for a moment. You can read about one disagreement described here, wherein there was friction between Firsfron and Spawn Man. However, it ended amicably, and they continue to work closely together on the dinosaur project.(See [1], [2].) Firsfron said, "He admitted he shouldn't have resorted to personal attacks, we continued working closely with one another on the project, and we both moved on. Clearly, he wants what's best for the encyclopedia and WikiProject Dinosaurs, and he was able to put his anger behind him. For my part, I know he's got the good of the project at heart, and I'd rather work with someone who is enthusastic, even overly-enthusiastic, than someone who is blasé about the subject." [3] Perhaps this may alleviate some of your concerns. But if not, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Cheers, Fang Aili talk 13:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
    Hi HResearcher. You're right in that it is important that a potential admin candidate be able to show s/he's got a level head, thinks before hitting 'save page', and won't abuse the admin tools. Although Fang Aili has (very kindly) provided some links, I'd like to show you more in-depth the ways I have tried to back off, go with the flow, realize that everyone's contributions matter, smooth over differences, focus on the big picture, build the community, mediate, lend a helping hand (or a reference) whenever possible, compliment people, even when they're angry with me, etc. I'm not sure if my providing you with these difs will change your mind, but they are there for you to peruse, or if you wish, feel free to go thru my contributions. --Firsfron of Ronchester 23:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments

Last 5000 edits.Voice-of-All 00:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Viewing contribution data for user Firsfron (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ)
Time range: 60 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 0hr (UTC) -- 22, Jul, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 1hr (UTC) -- 23, May, 2006
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 99.84% Minor edits: 99.73%
Average edits per day: 123.48 (for last 500 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 837 edits): Major article edits: 99.82% Minor article edits: 100%
Analysis of edits (out of all 5000 edits shown on this page and last 42 image uploads):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.02% (1)
Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 1.14% (57)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 72.18% (3609)
Superficial article edits marked as minor: 11.75%
Unique image uploads (non-deleted/updates): 35 (checks last 5000)
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 3663 | Average edits per page: 1.37 | Edits on top: 25.2%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 79.98% (3999 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 15.34% (767 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 4.62% (231 edit(s))
Unmarked edits: 0.04% (2 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 77.58% (3879) | Article talk: 2.16% (108)
User: 4.16% (208) | User talk: 6.86% (343)
Wikipedia: 5.06% (253) | Wikipedia talk: 2.88% (144)
Image: 0.68% (34)
Template: 0.04% (2)
Category: 0.34% (17)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.24% (12)

Username Firsfron
Total edits 9077
Distinct pages edited 5451
Average edits/page 1.665
First edit 21:45, December 27, 2004
 
(main) 6283
Talk 1193
User 296
User talk 486
Image 35
Image talk 2
Template 17
Template talk 10
Category 37
Category talk 44
Wikipedia 416
Wikipedia talk 257
Portal talk 1
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: In case no one's noticed, Wikipedia is huge, and with only ~900 admins, some of whom are not active or are semi-active, there are still areas that occasionally get neglected. I'd like to try my hand at WP:AIAV, closing WP:AfDs, closing WP:CfDs, and helping out on the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page. I've helped out some on Recent changes patrol, but obviously can only revert and warn users. I do already use popups, AWB, VandalProof, etc.--Firsfron of Ronchester 21:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I'm proud of my work on Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs, although clearly some of our 1,000 articles still need a lot of work. I'm proud of our teamwork and abilities to work with one another despite the often confusing situations surrounding many dinosaur genera. Paleosaurus is one excellent example of a terrible taxonomic mess the group members were able to fix. I'm proud of Featured Articles Velociraptor, Psittacosaurus, Albertosaurus, and others which will soon be featured because of the project members' dedication. We've slowly built a community, and it feels really rewarding.
I work on several WikiProjects, and my goal, really, is to have fun while building the encyclopedia.--Firsfron of Ronchester 21:28, 21 July 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 think it's close to impossible to work on 9,000 articles and never have a conflicting edit. The key is to realize the person on the other end also wants what's best for the encyclopedia. I've lost sight of that in the past, but I think I've always tried to work within policy to improve the article. In the future, I want to appear as a more positive editor. --Firsfron of Ronchester 21:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Optional Question from Draicone
4. Answer this if you wish. It is entirely optional, and is merely to assist myself and other voters make an informed decision. Question: How do you believe you would best use your admin tools if your RfA is succesful?
A:Thank you for the question. I mentioned above that I'd like to help out with closing WP:AfDs and WP:CfDs; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old is listed on WP:BACKLOG. I've also noticed that WP:AIAV gets swamped from time to time. Basically, our admins are often overworked, and cannot always pay attention to the many needs of the encyclopedia. I would be one more hand willing to help mop up messes. Is that too vague? I hope I've answered your question.--Firsfron of Ronchester 23:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Thankyou for answering. --Draicone (talk)


Optional question from Lar:

5. (one big long question about categories of admins and your thoughts about them) Are you aware of the notion of adminstrators saying they're willing to be voluntarily recalled or reviewed, by a less onerous process than a new RfA (or worse) arbComm action? What do you think of the idea? Would you consider placing yourself (placement should only be done by oneself) in such a category if you were made an admin? Why or why not? Are you aware of the notion of Rouge admins? What do you think of the notion? Do you see it as purely humorous or do you see what it's driving at? Would you consider allowing yourself to by placed in this category (placement is traditionally done by someone else) if you were made an admin? Why or why not? (note: both these categories have some controversy attached to them, for different reasons, and note also, although I am a policy and process wonk I am in both categories, and finally, note that there is no wrong answer here...) ++Lar: t/c 22:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Cool question. I'm aware of the proposed Admin Review, and I think it's a good idea. In Wikipedia history, there have only been a few admins ever de-sysopped, despite some pretty awful wheel wars. Were I to become an admin, I would certainly volunteer to a review of my conduct, even though I'm aware that so much of what admins do are judgement calls, and my actions would always be open to multiple interpretations. As for WP:ROUGE, I'm aware of the page and category. It's cute, and I don't really see the harm in it, as long as it's kept out of article space. I think a sense of humor is important on Wikipedia, where we all must interact with one another, although I don't think I would want to be added, for fear someone (and there would be someone) who saw me in such a category and really mistook "Rouge" for "Rogue". And even though that last sentence is hopelessly fragmented, I'm hitting "save page" anyway.--Firsfron of Ronchester 04:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
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.