Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Croat Canuck 2

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

Croat Canuck

Final (22/0/0); Ended Wed, 2 May 2007 20:37:57 UTC

Croat Canuck (talk · contribs) - Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Croat Canuck. Croat Canuck is a longtime Wikipedia editor dating back to August 2005. He was made an administrator in December of that same year (previous RfA). He has been in good standing during his entire tenure as an editor and administrator, racking up over 8000 edits. In February of this year, Croat Canuck falsely believed that he would be able to give up Wikipedia and pursue other interests, so he resigned his adminship and retired. He returned this month.

Croat Canuck participates in many areas of Wikipedia and is a tremendous asset wherever he goes. His most notable work is with WikiProject Ice Hockey where he improves articles and does a lot of thankless tasks like moving pages and maintaining templates. He also participates across the board in RfA, FAC, and other areas.

Croat Canuck is a level-headed editor who voluntarily gave up the mop - please join me in supporting his getting back the tools. Mus Musculus (talk) 22:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Yes, I accept, and thank you Mus Musculus for being so eager to nominate me. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 06:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just to briefly say my reasons for leaving on February 2 was that I just couldn't do it anymore, and I seriously thought I would never come back, and for a long while I didn't. However circumstances in my real life changed and I have also eliminated a lot of useless time-wasting expenditures (such as computer games). As a result I have a lot more time on my hands and my passion for editing has returned (as seen in my activity over the last month).

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: Well same as last time when I was an admin, a lot of counter-vandalism, the odd AFD closing, speedy deletion, restoring, trying to find middle ground in arguments, that kinda stuff. And don't worry about my lack of image edits, it's something I try and stay away from all together.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: Most of my best contributions are within the ice hockey community, however I have many contributions in other regards. I have created over 300 articles, many of them player articles and stubs although some of them were good lengthy articles. I have also done extensive work in categorizing. But perhaps my best contributions to Wikipedia have been within the community itself, engaging in discussions and ALWAYS keeping my cool no matter how heated an argument gets.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: Ummm... you know other users really haven't caused me stress, because I usually leave what happens on Wikipedia in Wikipedia and don't really let it bother me. However I've been in a few edit wars, including two really big ones like the Wayne Gretzky/Bobby Orr edit war caused by wording in a single sentence, and perhaps the even bigger edit war over diacritics in player names. Both my constant goals were trying to find level ground without resorting to personal attacks, and as for the diacritics one when it became too much I just dropped out of it entirely and have refused to make a comment about it since, as the whole problem has been users saying too much and accomplishing very little.

General comments

See Croat Canuck's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
Links for Croat Canuck: Croat Canuck (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks)
I also requested that the user rights be restored on Meta, in case a steward is more readily available than a bureaucrat. This RfA is not necessary, good faith and good standing. Teke 19:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Croat Canuck before commenting.

Discussion

Comment I don't know this user but if he resigned his adminship in non-controversial circumstances, shouldn't he be able to get his admin bit back without going through RfA? Pascal.Tesson 14:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Pascal.Tesson, I am not aware of any process in place to accomplish this. There seems to be precedent for reapplying under a variety of circumstances, so I invited to the candidate to participate in this process. Thanks! --Mus Musculus (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough. You might still want to check with the bureaucrats: this whole thing might be a big waste of time for everyone involved and for Croat Canuck in particular. Pascal.Tesson 14:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Just go and ask a 'crat and they'll re-sysop at any time, providing it was in non controversial circumstances. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Posted request to WP:BN. --Mus Musculus (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Non-controversial readminships on request happen all the time. NoSeptember 14:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I find it interesting that the user only has 73 admin actions; this is quite low for a former admin. However, inactivity isn't a reason to desysop, and users don't need to take admin actions to be a credit to the wiki. (See this RfA's talk page for a log-action count.) --ais523 17:36, 2 May 2007 (U T C)
Should be summarily promoted; the candidate resigned in good standing and is not required to obtain a new consensus approval for reappointment. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Strong support as nominator, let's give him his mop back. --Mus Musculus (talk) 14:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support no reason to not have the mop again. The Rambling Man 14:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Everything checks out, and it's time to pass the puck back to him. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 14:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support just in case he isn't immediately resysopped. —Anas ^talk? 15:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support As a non-controversial de-opping, I've got no problem with him regaining his (now dusty) mop. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. However, in case of b'crat re-sysopping I can merely agree. —Alde Baer 15:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy sysop. :-) --Rettetast 16:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close -- Y not? 16:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support - very good mainspace edits but low Wikipedia edits..who cares!!..--Cometstyles 17:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy support The nominee could simply ask for adminship back (and has, in fact). No reasons have been brought up yet which would require desysopping (in fact, there has been no opposition yet at all). --ais523 17:07, 2 May 2007 (U T C)
Majorly (hot!) 17:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy support Get your mop back! Sr13 (T|C) 17:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Did a good job last time and I don't see why it would any be different now. NeoFreak 18:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~Thought~~ he was one. Oldelpaso 18:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Everything seems fine to me. Acalamari 18:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above, give him the mop back! --Phoenix (talk) 18:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a non-controversial re-opping. Bonus points for a non-acrimonious farewell message. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - agree that you should automatically get your bit back. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see no problems with this candidate. (aeropagitica) 19:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep or something --BigDT 19:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Auto~~Support Per Kelly :-) Evilclown93 20:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is one that a b'crat could close early with an immediate promotion. I am sure that, given the circumstances, a straightforward application should have been enough.--Anthony.bradbury 20:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

The above adminship 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.