Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Smoddy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Smoddy

final (36/0/0) ending 18:16 24 April 2005 (UTC)

I have now been a user of Wikipedia for over six months, and have just totalled 2000 edits to all namespaces. Before I go any further with this self-nomination, I had better recognise my fairly (and that is fairly) sparse level of actually writing articles. I don't really find that stuff fun. What I do find fun is the janatorial stuff (i.e. WP:CSD, WP:VFD, WP:TFD, WP:RFPP, and RC patrol) that other users find less enjoyable. For example, I have no aversion to going through the What links here of a disambig page and correcting them all. And, to avoid the questions, I know that's not stuff I'd need adminship for, but it's similar. I think I am calm and fairly (!) rational, and could handle the proverbial mop and bucket. I would also note that I am very keen to look at the village pump and the help desk and respond to requests there. Smoddy (tgeck) 18:16, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

To follow Peter Ellis's example, I shall respond to Blankfaze's standards for adminship.

Number of edits: over 2000
Time on project: over 6 months
POV editing: that I am aware, none
Dispute issues: Bar a small semantic brush at Maori language and the below-mentioned issue with Irate, none.

Support

  1. violet/riga (t) 19:11, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. Good 'janitor'. Phils 19:34, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. — Matt Crypto 22:28, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. My direct experience is positive. I didn't find anything in history to reject. Thanks for dealing with vandals. Pavel Vozenilek 23:34, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Almost anyone who is a janitor gets my vote. Howabout1 00:10, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support. Good janitor, interacts well, extra points for the selfnom.--Bishonen | talk 01:09, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Mais certainement. Grutness|hello? 01:21, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Looks good.-gadfium 03:19, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. Seen positive good work. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:26, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. Support. jni 05:26, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  11. Support Seen this user on cricket-related articles Squash 08:20, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  12. PedanticallySpeaking 16:24, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  13. But of course. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:50, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  14. A good chap, he is obviously passionate about what he doesThe.griffter 17:57, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
    • I should mention that I know this user personally. I did not ask him to make this vote. Smoddy (tgeck) 17:14, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  15. Support – From what I've seen, he's very active in the delete listed pages and the cricket projects. Will make a fine wiki "janitor". However I find it hard to believe that a 16 year old is a qualified cricket umpire and scorer. :)  =Nichalp (talk · contribs)= 18:54, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
    • Qualified scorer, yes. I was stretching the truth with umpire – I have an exam in two weeks. I didn't see the need to go into that level of detail, and it was essentially correct. I'm sorry if I misled anyone... Smoddy (tgeck) 19:25, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • I was pulling your leg. I didn't intend on making it an issue. :)  =Nichalp (talk · contribs)= 06:13, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
  16. Support - Taxman 19:19, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Merovingian (t) (c) 19:57, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:10, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. He dealt with User:Irate in an exemplary manner, and is also a good janitor, how can I not support? Rje 00:46, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support. JuntungWu 14:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  21. SUPPORT. I'm new here, and Smoddy helped me find my feet; I've also had a little chat with him and I have concluded that he is a very responsible Wikipedian. Admin material. Good record. Etc, etc. I've checked his history and dealings with the user Irate. Pretty laudable for a 16-yr.-old. A very good friend to have and a very reliable ally. Very passionate about Wpdia. Responsible chap, etc. etc. JMBell° 16:29, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support. Reasonable person and good janitor. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 17:36, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  23. Support. I thought he was an Admin Trampled talk 14:33, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support - I just now read his Featured Article, nice work, I can say, as I have been a student of international law 'one generation' before. And, Smoody is only 16, that is today's news for me. All the best to Smoddy: me, the oldest of the lot voting for the youngest amongst most of us.--Bhadani 20:25, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support - someone who goes through the "What links here" of a disambig page and corrects them all is a dedicated janitor. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 04:31, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support - Strict and stern, but controlled and fair too (in his dispute with User:Irate). Just like an admin should be. Sjakkalle 14:47, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  27. BanyanTree 19:31, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support. RickK 22:15, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
  29. Jiang 06:50, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support. Looking good! :) - Mailer Diablo 10:26, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  31. I didn't vote here yet? Wow. Strongly support. --Lst27 (talk) 22:15, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  32. utcursch | talk 12:45, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
  33. Support--Bjarki 00:49, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  34. Of course. ugen64 06:37, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  35. Does not meet my admin criterion, (though, of course, if Mark Butcher and Alan Knott were truly comprehensive, they'd be up to FA status too! :) jguk 07:25, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  36. Support. Noisy | Talk 07:51, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments

  • Having seen his dealings with Irate, and then looking into other contributions, I think Smoddy would make an excellent admin. violet/riga (t) 19:11, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Smoddy currently has 2006 edits: 1008/53 to articles/talk, 475/32 to Wikipedia/talk, 106/253 to User/talk, 50 to Image, 20/6 to Template/talk, 2 to Help, and 1 to MediaWiki talk. —Korath (Talk) 19:57, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
    • I would say now that most of my edits to User pages are to people's archived talk pages or to my stylesheet, most of the Wikipedia pages are VfD subpages and most of the Image pages are reverts of vandalism. Smoddy (tgectek) 22:10, 17 Apr 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. As I say above, I can see me dealing with deletions, CSD, VfD and otherwise, as well as page protection when needed. I would be prepared to block problem users, but would probably get used to the responsibility before doing this – I don't like creating enemies. The quick revert tool would also be very useful.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Well, I have nudged two articles towards FA status. I made a significant part of the successes and failures sections at League of Nations, and recently nominated and guided Swastika to featured status. Of articles I essentially took from scratch, I feel Mark Butcher and Alan Knott are both fairly comprehensive on their subjects. I do, however, prefer to take an overall picture. I feel that the janatorial work I have done has improved Wikipedia significantly, and it is with that that I am most pleased.
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. I did get into a certain degree of conflict with Irate over a string of personal attacks (I got into his bad books for defending a new user he unjustly attacked). I filed the RFC against him and instigated the RFAr which is going to see him blocked (if it hasn't already). I feel pleased with the way I handled the matter, although I am disappointed that Irate could never feel that he could reform, as I dislike seeing users booted off Wikipedia. I tend to save stress for real life – there's little point in get in really het up about a hobby!