Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Master Thief Garrett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Master Thief Garrett

final (38/7/2) ending 07:37 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Master Thief Garrett leapt into Wikipedia, boots and all, in April 2005 and has since made a laudable 3500 edits. He’s clearly a fan of The Legend of Zelda, and many of his article edits have related to this and similar video games (but please don’t hold that against him!). However, much of his most important work is beyond the sphere of the article space, prowling and patrolling the vfd pages and nabbing more than a few vandalist-created pages. On vfd, you will find him saving and condemning articles equally - he is neither inclusionist not deletist. A self confessed mergist, MTG prefers myriad shards of stubs collated together into meatier articles. He has shown himself to be adept at handling criticism - even abusive criticism from some of Wikipedia’s less tolerant denizens - and performs janitorial work admirably. Grutness...wha? 07:38, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly accept. What can I say about me that hasn't already been said? :) Basically I've already been acting like a pseudo-admin for a couple of months, and having the proper little functions to do everything with will just make it easier.
In recent weeks I've kind of gone "off" my normal procedures of monitoring things for admins to deal with, as often my good-intentioned excavation results in speedies and potential Vfds piling up. This way it'll be a lot more streamlined, so I hope I'll feel more interested in these things once more.
Oh, and this: if you're going to vote against me, at least have the decency to say why. Linking to your admin pre-stated requirements (rather than saying they exist) would be sufficient for this.
If you have a specific question to ask, please feel free to add it to the list. Now after eating up about a meg of bandwidth with the preview button I think it's time I saved this! I hope I've covered everything... GarrettTalk 08:04, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Mais bien sûr! Grutness...wha? 07:39, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  2. support Looks like a solid candidate. Microtonal 07:45, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  3. I'll trust that Master Thief will accept (I see no record of it on his or Grutness' talk page), and I know how good he is as taking care of vandals. Support. Harro5 07:47, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
    I said I'd nominate him if he reminded me in mid-July. Hence This. Grutness...wha?
  4. Carnildo 08:09, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  5. Absolutely. Radiant_>|< 08:30, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support, seems to be a very dedicated user, and devoted to fighting vandalism. Columbia 08:32, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  7. j'ai un grand crayon. and I intend to use it. Seriously, with all the work that I have seen Master Thief Garrett do, I was under the impression that he was an admin already. Good and well thought out edits and comments. Support. ∞Who?¿? 08:44, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support. Not an admin already? This one's "no big deal." -- Essjay · Talk 08:46, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support. I've been waiting until the Master Thief had been here long enough so I could nominate without being thrown into a cell with Graham Capill.-gadfium 08:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support. An excellent enthusiastic user, and I really like the humor. :-) Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:10, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  11. Yes, yes. Phils 11:43, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  12. Definitely Support. Will be a good sysop. --Exir Kamalabadi | Contributions 12:30, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  13. 'Support - doesn't seem likely to go on a vandalism spree, seems familiar enough with policy. Guettarda 13:06, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  14. Support.Another great user has drawn me out from my policy not to vote. Howabout1 Talk to me! 14:27, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  15. Support. Active on the village pump and in the community. Great admin material. --Dmcdevit·t 20:13, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support, good work all around. Phoenix2 23:30, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Support, definately worthy to take charge of another mop and bucket, I think he would make good use of the tools if given to him. Jtkiefer 00:38, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support, definitely. An excellent contributor. Sarge Baldy 00:57, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. -- DS1953 02:58, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support. JuntungWu 04:07, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  21. El_C 04:13, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support Stewart Adcock 16:32, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  23. That's hot. Mike H (Talking is hot) 20:35, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. Great contributor to the Legend of Zelda articles. Should make a good admin. Thunderbrand 01:38, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support. -- the wub "?/!" 13:59, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support.  Grue  18:04, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support Good contributor, no reason that user cannot be trusted with key to janitor's closet. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 23:25, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
  28. Merovingian (t) (c) 11:32, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Support You show great restraint in dealing with vulgarities and have a number of valuable contributions. -- JamesTeterenko 05:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support. Good article-space and VfD contributor. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 13:17, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  31. Support. Thryduulf 15:48, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  32. Supprt. Bluemoose 21:21, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  33. Andre (talk) 22:51, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  34. Strong support. A solid contributor. -- BD2412 talk 01:14, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  35. Support; good candidate. I like what I see. Antandrus (talk) 04:32, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  36. Strong Support I don't always agree with Garrett (example: the Pokeprosal), but his work on VfD has generally been great, and overall he's intelligent, stable, and thoughtful. No reason to believe he won't make a great admin. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:01, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  37. As strong as it gets. Garrett is one of the best Wikipedians I've met. smoddy 22:33, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  38. Support I wanna be the last guy to vote ;- )Redwolf24 (Talk) 05:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. Three months is not enough for me. Dmn / Դմն 12:49, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    ...aaaaand your goal would be... six maybe? Just askin'... :) GarrettTalk 12:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    My standards can be found at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Standards. Dmn / Դմն 15:22, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
    Oh, of course. Thank you. GarrettTalk 01:19, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Great work. Just keep it up for another few months without burning out or flipping out and I'll change my vote to support then. For now, three months is insufficient. siafu 14:06, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  3. Oppose--Boothy443 | comhrÚ 21:10, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  4. Opppose. 3500 edits is quite commendable but he is still a little too green. Once he is re-nominated I will change my vote if he keeps on the same track. —RaD Man (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Three months or so is far too early for a nomination. I recommend withdrawal and reconsideration in early September. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:45, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  6. Oppose. Has made a negative impression. No, I won't provide evidence. Supporters are not asked for diffs. Grace Note 00:42, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
    • This is very vague... I'm dying to know which situation(s) you're drawing from. Could you at least provide one little example, pretty please? *gives puppy-dog eyes* :) GarrettTalk 01:55, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. three months...? 28 support votes.... freestylefrappe 00:55, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral. Although he has acted quite commendably in the three months he's been contributing to Wikipedia, it's still only three months. Before I can support him, I wish to see him contribute for another six months. Denelson83 09:16, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  2. Neutral Great contributor but I would prefer a few more weeks under the belt. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

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. Generic and boring tasks. Monitoring new pages and recent changes, rollback, speedying... basically nothing "new" from what I've been doing except I'll do it myself instead of listing it somewhere and waiting (while the list builds up, like as not).
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Definitely BS Zelda: Kodai no Sekiban. This was my fledgling effort and is still the most thorough article I have written here. When I first came here it merely redirected to BS Zelda; that vast shortcoming in what was otherwise an impressive resource inspired me to try out this weird "wiki" system and write something about it. And now look at it! Besides a few things I've recently discovered, that covers everything the western world knows about this elusive game.
I have also worked on various stub-consolidation projects such as The Legend of Zelda series enemies and Wikipedia:Pokeprosal, and hope to do similar with other cruft. I've dedicated an entire section of my otherwise utilitarian user page to a list of other such pages I've worked on, but these are definitely the standouts.
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 been trying to think of the answer to this one but I just fall short. Certainly I've disagreed with edits (or editors) but I wouldn't call it "stress", I reserve that word for exams! It's also due to the fact that I haven't been editing many really controversial articles, since my university studies don't allow me much time for extracurricular research, hence my edits to "simple" things like games.