Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mailer diablo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Mailer diablo

final (29/1/0) ending 10:42 31 March 2005 (UTC)

Mailer diablo is a very good janitor, spending lot of time doing New Pages Patrol. Apart from the regular maintainance tasks, he/she also regularly welcomes and helps new users. I think, Mailer diablo will be a good admin. utcursch | talk 10:44, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm honoured to accept the nomination. - Mailer Diablo 10:52, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) Contributions

Support

  1. utcursch | talk 10:46, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC) (Nominator)
  2. Support without reservation. Great editor. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 11:09, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support He already functions like an admin anyway, so this is a smooth transition. ;) --Huaiwei 11:13, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  4. Support for skill, patience and common sense. -- Hoary 11:20, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
  5. SupportTjc 11:22, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support. Very good experience with this user. JuntungWu 12:21, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  7. Support Concur with above, also very friendly with newbies. Mgm|(talk) 12:25, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support Rje 13:50, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support, Radiant_* 16:13, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support, Mailer diablo has been helpful in mediating. — Instantnood 17:05, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
    • Could you please elaborate a little bit? -- Netoholic @ 19:37, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
  11. Merovingian (t) (c) (w) 19:22, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support. Fantastic user. Neutralitytalk 22:45, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support. - BanyanTree 00:34, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  14. Oh, all right, I suppose so. ;) Grutness|hello? 00:47, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  15. But of course. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:33, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Meets my admin criterion, jguk 08:52, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support. A name I'm familiar with from some of the janitorial work he's done. I didn't know much about him until now, but the more I look into his edits, the more impressed I am. MD should make a good admin. SWAdair | Talk 10:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support. BlankVerse ∅ 11:52, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. New pages patrol is hard work. Dbiv 23:30, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  20. Andre (talk) 18:16, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
  21. Support. Deals with RC. W/o such people Wikipedia is already down. Pavel Vozenilek 22:00, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. Definitely a good editor. SlimVirgin 02:02, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
  23. Seems like a great user. --Lst27 (talk) 00:37, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. No question. - Lucky 6.9 19:23, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support Nichalp 20:19, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)
  26. Shanes 23:21, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support. jni 07:50, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support. -- Darwinek 12:08, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support. Good collaboration with other users on noticeboards, etc. Rad Racer 13:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. (Added -- I have seen actions and qualities of this person that make me feel they are not a good admin candidate.) Can't give this person the benefit of the doubt unless we had an appropriate procedure for revoking adminship in active use. -- Netoholic @ 15:03, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
    • Which doubt? -- Hoary 15:15, 2005 Mar 24 (UTC)
    • Could you please elaborate a little bit? — Instantnood 17:06, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
    • So are you saying that you oppose each new admin unless your (somewhat controversial) proposal passes? Radiant_* 12:02, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
      There is no controversy. If a procedure for revoking adminship was in regular use, I could lower my expectations of an admin nominee. In this case, there is enough doubt that I'll not be supporting. -- Netoholic @ 07:16, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
      • Since Netoholic hasn't yet responded, I'll very tentatively answer "no", as he or she hasn't opposed every other request for a new admin. (Meanwhile, I'm still left wondering about the nature of this "doubt".) -- Hoary 04:05, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

  • 4537 edits, 2041 to the main namespace. —Korath (Talk) 17:25, Mar 24, 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. You can consider me to be a "newpage patroller". :) These "newborn articles", some unwikified, need tender-loving care and attention to integrate with the ever-growing encyclopedia. The speedy feature may come in a bit handy for me and time-saver for other admins - right now I have to tag them with {{delete}} and wait for an admin to clear them up. I'm some sort of a regular on Votes for Deletion and Copyright Problems too.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. MTR. It is currently a Featured Article and the only FA article I contributed majorly. It was an article changed radically, and it has been a pleasant experience collobrating with other editors on this article. I also have a comparatively small collection of photos that I have uploaded on Wikipedia. As for now, I'm trying to get Singapore and KCR to FA status, which I find it rather challenging. (I guess Singapore will fail FAC for the 3rd time, my next consideration could be a complete rewrite). I believe in trying, trying, and trying again to succeed.
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 will deal with it in the future?
A. The only direct conflict I had was once, when by accident reverted a page back to its vandalised version, got misunderstood and listed on WP:VIP, but that was ressolved quickly. I try and douse some fires with soft approaches - I have this belief that people can and do change for the better, so I doubt I will ever be handing out red cards outright. I had a few dealings with Anonymous IPs with conflict with others, clarified their doubts and even got them to sign up for an account. ;) Quite recently, I did attempt to mediate a dispute (somewhat unsucessfully) between two editors (which I believed were geninue contributors) over edit wars, which I'm still thinking of a resolution plan. I'm also a strong believer on civility, especially the policy of no personal attacks, perhaps because I received my first abuse within two weeks of my first edit while working at newpage patrol.