Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Xchrisblackx 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a request for adminship that did not succeed. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Xchrisblackx

Final (12/30/7) ending 16:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Xchrisblackx (talk · contribs) – I am a fairly experienced with around 900 edits and I'm soon to have 1000 being that I have finally critiqued how I fight vandalism using manual tools as simple as the recent changes and have begun working with VandalProof. I am an ex-councillor of Wikipedia: Community Justice I'm also a member Wikipedia: Association of Members' Advocates. My first edit was made October 26th (Though I'd been browsing Wikipedia for around a month before that) Other things I'm proud of are that I'm co-founder of Wikipedia: Wikiproject Paranormal(along with Martial Law)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept Mahogany

Support

  1. Moral support. You may be a great admin candidate two or three months from now. participate more and learn more about Wikipedia. —Cuiviénen, Wednesday, 3 May 2006 @ 17:18 UTC
  2. Moral support I like the user, but I suggest withdrawal. It is rather early. Get some more experience.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 18:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. Moral support I have had a fair amount of contact with this user before. They have been around for a while, and have a fair amount of edits, so I support. I know I can trust them with the tools - I very much doubt he would abuse them. However, I know he may not meet many other user's criteria for admin. For this reason, I morally support, but encourage you to withdraw and wait a couple months. -zappa.jake (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
    Moral support and suggest withdrawl - More experience needed. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 23:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  4. Proper support. You have enough overall and wikipedia namespace edits to prove that you are experienced enough to be an admin. DarthVader 23:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  5. HYPERSTRONG SUPPORT Seen you in action. you'll make a GREAT Admin. Martial Law 23:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC) :)
  6. Support, unlikely to abuse tools. Kimchi.sg 00:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    Moral support. I have a lot of rcpatrol edits too, but I think an admin needs more varied experince. I would suggest spending time reviewing policies, votes for deletion, and arbitration. Creating and editing articles, apart from rcpatrolling, would help too. Give it a few more weeks.Dlohcierekim 02:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    Striking "Moral suoort". Please see discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Moral_support. Change to "Oppose"
  7. Mega Moral Support. I know this user very well, and though the edito count isn't quite as high as many admin nominees, he wouldn't misuse the mop. Computerjoe's talk 07:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    I've crossed this out as I find your nom wrong. I'm not an admin, yet I wasn't reelected. The reason you were not re-elected, IMO, was that you were not as present in the community as Ilyanep. Until this is changed Neutral Computerjoe's talk 07:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    Support again Computerjoe's talk 06:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support Don't lose hope if you fail in this nomination. --Siva1979Talk to me 14:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support No good reason not to. Rich Farmbrough 14:56 4 May 2006 (UTC).
  10. SUPPORT! I have been on Wikipedia for some time and created an account that was attacked late last year, thanks to xchrisblackx, he fixed my page from the vandalism done to it when I was in my "Wikpedian Infancy" Since then, xchrisblackx has been of great help to me over Wikipedia and I thank him for this. I have seen him in action when he co-created the Paranormal project and files and I trust him completely. I know he will do everything in his power to be a great administrator and I have seen that he is part of a great many Wikiprojects and is part of programs suh as the recent changes patrol, welcoming committee, and community justice, xchrisblackx will be a great administrator if given the chance and I think he should be elected a soon as possible. Good luck xchrisblackx, I know you'll make a great admin after you make the vote! --Prodigy130 00:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  11. Support - Richardcavell 02:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  12. Moral support. Guy can obviously learn on the job but I would advise to withdraw your RfA request and comeback in a couple of months, after you have diversified your work. Regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asterion (talk • contribs)

Oppose

  1. Oppose. 6 minor edits in the article namespace? I'm sorry, but you've not given me any evidence that you have knowledge of any policies, or anything that I feel would be required of an admin. --Darth Deskana (talk page) 17:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC) Make that Strongly oppose. My previous comments still stand, and you've overwritten your old RfA in creating this one. I really don't believe you should be given admin tools if you'd make such a mistake as that. No offense, but you really don't seem like admin material in my opinion. --Darth Deskana (talk page) 17:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks for pointing out that he overwrote the old nomination. I've restored the old nomination and moved this RfA to WP:RFA/Xchrisblackx 2. --Durin 17:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Not enough experience, IMO. Please try again in a few months.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 17:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose - proud --Dragon's Blood 19:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose, I would like to see more substansive article edits. I will of course support when you have more experience. --Bjarki 19:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose - over half your edits are to user/user talk pages... You need a whole lot more contributions in article and wikipedia namepsace before you can be seriously considered (join us more often at AfD! Good way to easily gain visibility and experience in the Wikipedia namespace.) Founding Wikiproject:Paranormal is a good start. Write new articles, contribute a lot to your project and be a part of community discussion and you'll get there. Oh, and edit summaries are helpful. Grandmasterka 19:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose - You'll be good admin material in a couple of months time, but at the moment you're still too inexperienced. Reyk YO! 20:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. Maybe later. Even though this user has about 1000 edits in all, only about 146 of them are in the (main) namespace.—G.He 21:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  8. Oppose - At the time I don't feel you are prepared, but keep learning and contributing and you'll be a good candidate! Afonso Silva 22:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  9. Oppose Sorry, need more experience and edits. MoppEr Speak! 00:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  10. Oppose due to insufficient use of edit summaries. Royboycrashfan 01:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  11. Oppose, lacks experience and edits, edit summaries also concerns me as well. --Terence Ong 02:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  12. Oppose, lack of contributions to the project. — xaosflux Talk 03:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  13. Oppose, per Xaosflux abakharev 06:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  14. Oppose: level of experience and edit summaries both too low. Jonathunder 17:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  15. Oppose. User is not technically savvy, per Darth Deskana, and some of the replies to questions suggest an uncertain grasp of what adminship powers are for, like "helping the Admin cleanup articles." Anybody can clean up articles and it's not something that helps the admin especially, but rather the project as a whole. I also find this post on Martial Law's page a little worrying.[1] The user seems to be afraid that government agents on this site will spook his RFA (because they fear his paranormal interests?). I can't read it any other way and I'm not happy about it. And the answer to the (to me) very important question 3 below is specific yet useless. As for using {{civil1}} to cool somebody down, in that situation, well, there are just more things wrong with that idea than are necessary to enumerate here. Sorry, these things don't look like admin judgment to me. But please bear in mind that it's not necessary to be an admin to be useful to the project and an allround good and helpful contributor. Bishonen | talk 20:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC).
    Comment:This User has been attacked, once by having his account hijacked to make it appear he was committing gross vandalisim. Two, he was attacked again by a unknown user who claimed that he was polluting Wikipedia with paranormal paranoias and fantasies, and he indicated that a Wikipedian may be a govt. agent. Attack one was really sophisticated. Attack Two was totally crude and rude and insulting. Martial Law 04:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC) :)
    Really? That may get some support votes withdrawn. Having a wikipedia admin with a compromised account would be a nightmare. Has he changed his password since? And are you sure of what you say, Martial Law? It reflects rather badly on the candidate, since the only way his account could be compromised is if he were careless. Bishonen | talk 08:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC).
    He has since secured his account, incl. password. Someone hacked his account during and after Wikipedia:Paranormal Watchers was set up, then someone accuses him of polluting Wikipedia with paranormal delusions and fantasies. Something is goin on here. I'm not a coincidence believer. Two attacks on this user concerning paranormal matters ? Coincidence ? No way. He was attacked, plain and simple. Martial Law 19:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC) :)
    He edits from a computer in his high school library and forgot to log out one day, allowing one of his buddies to temporarily take control of his account. After having this explained, and resetting his password through the e-mail feature, he somehow lost control a second time. Thatcher131 01:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  16. Strong Oppose too few edits (under 1000), which is even worse for someone who says they dedicate their efforts towards vandal fighting. Needs to use edit summeries... and the self nomination doesn't help --T-rex 21:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  17. Oppose. Not long enough as a consistent contributor. Zaxem 00:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  18. Oppose for short edit history and frequent failures to use edit summaries.--Jusjih 06:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  19. Oppose, sorry, but nowhere near enough edits. Please see my standards. Stifle (talk) 11:27, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
    I would also recommend that you get someone else to nominate you next time, and that you either adopt a non-confusing signature (i.e. one not totally unrelated to your username) or change your username to match your signature. Stifle (talk) 11:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  20. Oppose: I have a lot of rcpatrol edits too, but I think an admin needs more varied experince. I would suggest spending time reviewing policies, votes for deletion, artitlce improvement drive, etc. Creating and editing articles, apart from rcpatrolling, would help too. Give it a few more weeks. I look forward to voting for this user-- later.User:Dlohcierekim | User_talk:Dlohcierekim 13:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  21. Oppose More edits that are not on talk pages the_ed17(talk)Use these! 17:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  22. Oppose, per Xaosflux. Naconkantari e|t||c|m 19:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  23. Oppose User edits from a computer in his high school library and lost control of his account when he forgot to log out, someone else got on and took advantage (his school IP address also hosts a persistent minor vandal). Not enough technically know-how or maturity in my opinion. Thatcher131 01:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  24. Super Strong Oppose Can't keep his own account secure therefore giving this user admin tools would create a disaster. Also asks for "support and comments" on his RFA which is BIG no no in my books. Mike (T C) 12:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  25. Strong Oppose This should be closed early imho. He has nowhere near enough experience, main space edits (146?!), or project involvement. Please don't be disheartened - you quite simply aren't ready. Good things come to those who wait. --kingboyk 15:41, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  26. Oppose. He is a good user but some topics as unsecured account are too controversial for now. And although I don't really pay much importance to the editcount, 1000 is still very low. Might support in some months, though. --Tone 22:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  27. Oppose may seem like a strange reason, but you seem to only contribute during the same three hour period every day (14:00 - 17:00 UTC) ± an hour or two. I would like to see an admin who can contribute more than just a set time, or if it is set, a larger time period. Not enough edits, and self-nom means you haven't really impressed upon somebody personally that your admin material. Chuck 12:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
    Also, just very recently, you seem to have made the newbie mistake of calling something vandalism, when it is not. Someone tried to fix a spelling error on your userpage here and you reverted it calling it vandalism. Which prompted the user to get upset and post this. I feel that (especially since Userpages are well within the realm of places anyone can edit) that this points out your lack of understanding of the system and inability to keep out of conflict. Chuck(척뉴넘) 12:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  28. Oppose, you has too many edits in the User namespace and I don't think that the ~1,100 edits you have are enough. Try to have less edits in the User namespace and more in the main namespace. Evan Robidoux 23:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  29. Strong Oppose the quote found by Bishonen is very worrying to me - this kind of paranoia would not be appropriate in an admin; people working for the Government are allowed to be wiki editors and admins and should not be discriminated against. I agree with the other good reasons for oppose given above. Gwernol 12:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  30. Oppose don't need more admins. Ardenn 03:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. Neutral. Like the user, don't like the level of experience to date. Stay on course and I'll support in a few months or so. :) RadioKirk talk to me 17:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Perhaps later, needs more experience. - Mailer Diablo 20:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. Neutral Enough project namespace edits but not enough article edits. Try again in a month or so, and I would definitely "strong support" you. —Mets501talk 01:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  4. Neutral mostly per discussion on Wikpedia Talk:Requests for Adminship#Moral Support; moved from moral support. -- Jjjsixsix (t)/(c) @ 02:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  5. Neutral changed from mega moral support. Computerjoe's talk 07:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
    Changed back. Computerjoe's talk 17:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  6. Neutral. You seem to be a great user but you seem to be new and if you keep at it your time will come. --preschooler@heart my talk - contribs 05:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
  7. Neutral Can't oppose, you're a great user, but I don't think you're ready yet. (Heck, I don't consider myself ready, and I've got 2000 edits!) --Primate#101 00:36, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Contribution data for this user (over the 1091 edit(s) shown on this page):
Time range:
160 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 18hr (UTC) -- 03, May, 2006
Oldest edit on: 13hr (UTC) -- 26, October, 2005
Edit summary use: 16.32%
Average edits per day (current): 6.83
Edits on top: 8.43%
All significant edits (non-minor/reverts): 10.91%
Significant article edits (non-minor/reverts): 0.82%
Minor edits (non reverts): 1.83%
Quick reverts: 4.77%
Unmarked edits: 82.49%
Namespace:
Article: 13.2%
Article talk: 5.87%
User: 22.18%
User talk: 31.26%
Wikipedia: 17.51%
Wikipedia talk: 6.51%
Image: 0.92%
Template: 2.38%
Category: 0%
Portal: 0.18%
Help: 0%
MediaWiki: 0%
Other talk pages: 0%

Username        Xchrisblackx
Total edits     1092
Distinct pages edited   247
Average edits/page      4.421
First edit      09:09, October 26, 2005
        
(main)  146
Talk    64
User    242
User talk       341
Image   10
Template        26
Wikipedia       191
Wikipedia talk  72

Comments

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: I am looking forward to helping the Admin. cleanup articles and help protect other articles from vandalism. Mahogany
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A:Wikipedia: Wikiproject Paranormal Mahogany
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:Yes see this letter I got:"RE: Vandalism The message you sent me was surprisingly clear for a person of your beliefs. I don't have a right to blank your "thoughts"? I propose it is you who is the vandal when you put such garbage on here in the first place. What gives you the right to add your IDEAS to an encyclopedia, which supposedly should contain FACTS? People who contaminate a reference work with their own personal agenda make me sick. I'm sure there are droves of websites out there where you could discuss your "paranormal" interests with like-minded X-files addicts, but please keep your paranoid dreams off Wikipedia." I kept myself very civil and used this to try to cool him down {{civil1}} This went down for my editing Paranormal articles period. If there are any requests I will dig through my past edits to find what made this guy get so uncivil with me. Mahogany


The above 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.