Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Marine 69-71 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Marine 69-71

(10/7/2) ending 11:21 02 November 2004 (UTC)

Very responsable, serious worker who takes this encyclopedia very seriously. Should be an administrator. "Antonio Ozzy's Twin Martin"

  • I accept the nomination, I feel honored to have been nominated by my son, even though we have different points of view. In the begining I argued at times with some of the best administrators because of my lack of knowledge of the policies of Wikipedia. As it turned out, those administrators became my best source of knowledge and I thank them for that. I enjoy writing mini-bios about people who have made a difference and whose actions have affected many lives. I have written over 120 of these with the purpose of educating future generations. I thank God that I am able to do this trough Wikipedia. In regard to the Joaquin Phoenix saga mentioned by Ambi, I accepted my fault and offered my appologies to the other party, which in turn has turned out to be one of the best editors of some of the articles which I have written.

User:Marine 69-71

Support

  1. AntonioMartin (I'm assuming the nominator supports. Andre)
  2. I voted no last time, but Tony has done so much editing since then, including a very high proportion of new articles, so this time I support. —Stormie 11:55, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
  3. Acegikmo1 21:18, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  4. ugen64 22:56, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC) - certainly.
  5. Lst27 22:46, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  6. Wolfman 01:02, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  7. Good User--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 10:55, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  8. David Cannon 21:59, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC). I understand people's reservations (the nomination is from a relative, etc.), but since voting NO last time, I've lurked around this user a bit and am impressed with what I see. His willingness to admit his mistakes definitely counts in his favour, so I'm giving him my vote this time.
  9. Ambi 05:48, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC) I'm changing my vote to support, for similar reasons to Davidcannon's vote. Ambi 05:48, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  10. I can't support someone who rarely tags their edits, as this practice makes it very difficult for people reading the history of the page. Shane King 00:18, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC) I see he's responded to my comments and has been tagging his edits. Great work, it's a good quality to be able to take criticism and work to improve. I now support! Shane King 03:58, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 23:03, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  2. His acceptance of this nomination is only his 2nd edit in the Wikipedia: namespace. Admin candidates need a balance of work, to show they understand policy and the community. -- Netoholic @ 01:17, 2004 Oct 27 (UTC)
  3. Oppose for now. Not just the Joaquin Phoenix incident mentioned by Ambi, but a similar conduct in a dispute over Agustín Stahl and Tomás Batista thereafter. I haven't observed any problems since and might reconsider at a later date, but please have somebody other than Antonio nominate you next time. --Michael Snow 04:27, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. tregoweth 15:43, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
  5. CryptoDerk 02:06, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
  6. Maybe in a couple of months. BCorr|Брайен 17:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. Needs to do more of the wiki-chores that "nobody notices"; provide edit summaries when editing; and show up more in the 'back corridors' of the wikipedia.Pedant 19:12, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Alright, seems like a decent user. Based on the arguments in the oppose column I am moving my vote to neutral. Andre (talk) 11:18, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Most of his edits are in Main, but he seems to have a grasp of Wikipedia policy and such. I am a bit concerned about his recent conflicts over articles, but not excessively. I am ambivalent. --Slowking Man 06:38, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Comments

  • 2402 edits since May 24, 2004.
  • Marine had an unsuccessful nomination back in June: details here —Stormie 11:55, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • Nominator is the candidate's son, according to their user pages. -- Netoholic @ 01:17, 2004 Oct 27 (UTC)
  • While I understand and respect the views of those that oppose it because I nominated it, Id suggest people to judge not by who nominated him, but by his contributions and hard work (He spends about 8 hours a day in this site) at Wikipedia. -- "Antonio Simon from Duran Duran Martin"

The trial

  • J: You have been charged with being involved in disputes. How do you plead?

T: Guilty, your honor.

J: Would you care to explain yourself?

T: Yes, your honor. I once wrote an article about Joaquin Phoenix without knowing that there already was an article on him. This led to a misunderstanding on my behalf because of my lack of knowledge of the workings of Wikipedia. Eventually the situation was solved with a merge and when I realized that I was wrong, I wrote to the other party and apologized.

J: What do you have to say about the "Agustin Stahl" and "Tomas Batista" disputes?

T: Those are two articles among the 120+ which I have written. When I saw that the pages were moved, I asked for protection until an agreement could be reached . I wasn't sure when was it or when it wasn't proper to accent names. Since, Wikipedia did not have a policy in regard to the use of accents, it was discussed in the "Talk" page. I did accept what the majority of users suggested and the matter was settled. I didn't know it was a dispute. I wrote to those involved and offered my hand in Wikipedian friendship.

J: Do you have anything else to add, before we pass judgement?

T: Yes, your honor. I believe that everyone on this jury at one time or another was involved in a dispute or editing conflict. It's a shame that those who do not know me are judging my abilities on past incidents and not on my contributions and the quality of my work. My disputes were solved and I was brave enough to to accept my faults and to let the others know. Even though some people might hold my past against me, I'm not one to hold a "grudge" because that is not the Wikipedian way. (added by Marine 69-71)

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.I would like to help by looking out for copy write violations and vandalism because I take Wikipedia very seriously and have seen the harm that is sometimes done by outsiders who's only purpose is to mess-up a good article.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I believe that all of them. I have written 120+ articles about people who have done outstanding things in their lifes and who for the most part are relatively unknown. I enjoy educating others through Wikipedia.
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. Yes, however, it was during the begining when I did not understand the workings and policies. Thanks to people like User:stormie, User:RickK, User:Hajor and others, I learned how the system works. Now, I do not get stressed out and I just accept the edits unless I feel they're wrong, then I would discuss the matter in a friendly way. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong and I'll accept it however, if the other person is wrong then I just hope that person accepts it. If we can't reach an agreement, then what I normally do is ask an administrator and accept what he/she decides.