Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Reedy Boy

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

Reedy Boy

edit

Closed as successful by Cecropia 01:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC) at (47/0/0); Scheduled end time 22:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reedy Boy (talk · contribs) - Sam has been a Wikipedian since 25 September 2005 and from then to now has made thousands of positive contributions to various articles, especially related to aviation. He's also very active on the AWB pages - if he was an admin he could add approved users to the list. He's also kind and helpful, and a valued contributor here. Let's give him the mop! :) Majorly (talk | meet) 15:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Thankyou Majorly, I Accept - Reedy Boy 21:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

edit

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: As with everything I undertake, I like to try my hand at doing as many different things as possible, but of course, this wont be without reading up on policies and getting a better understanding of the processes. Vandalism, as we all know, is an unrelenting task that doesnt just go away. I like to occasionally help out with RC patrol, reverting edits, and warning users as appropriate. Currently, not being an administrator, I am unable to deal with vandals other than reporting them or asking other administrators to take the appropriate actions.
The ability to edit protected pages will help greatly when working on AutoWikiBrowser to edit check pages for users and versions, a task that I currently have to ask other people to do.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I am generally pleased with most of my Wikipedia edits. Obtaining bot approval on Reedy Bot for WikiProject Tagging using AutoWikiBrowser and Kingbotk's Plugin, has allowed me to help out various WikiProjects adding tags to new pages, aswell as categorising pages and updating tags. Reedy Bot has amassed around 45,000 edits.
As I have used Wikipedia for research and information, I have updated pages and added facts and figures to pages. I have also updated page formatting, added new sections, improved the flow of text and fixed typos.
I have done a large number of edits on Aviation related articles as well as other articles that fall into my knowledge range.
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: During my time at wikipedia, I havent been involved in any conflicts over edits. I try to Assume Good Faith as much as possible, and if I was involved in a conflict, I would try to assume good faith. I would try to understand the points of view of all the participants. I have observed other on-wiki disputes, and have learnt from these.

Optional questions from User:William Henry Harrison (now blocked as a sockpuppet)

4. If your account was infiltrated by a vandal and because of this you were banned from wikipedia and your talk page was protected making it impossible for you to ever be able to tell everyone that you were hijacked, how would you ever get the point across? How would you get the respect of the wikipedia community back? And what would you do to prevent this problem in the future?
A:I hope this will never happen to me, but as we all know, very few things are impossible. I have recently changed my password on both of my accounts (ie this account and my bot account - Reedy Bot), to one meeting more of the generally reccommended 'secure password criteria' - ie greater than 8 characters, including numbers, uppercase letters and alike.
As with the recent account admin accounts that have been comprimised, I would request a checkuser. As i have a static IP, and nearly all my edits take place from this IP, this should provide enough evidence to prove the edits were not preformed by myself.
If my account was compromised, and my talk page protected, meaning I couldnt reply on the talk page to try and resolve the issue, I do have a few Wikipedians (All admins I believe) on my contact lists for MSN, and I am often active on various Wikipedia and other related IRC channels. These Wikipedians that i have on my MSN contact list, who i have spoken to many times in the past, would be able to help me verify my ID. So if the problem did arise, I would be able to request help from those people, and from some of the general Wikipedia Community who do hang around on IRC. This would allow me to try show that the actions weren't preformed by myself.
I would then hope that the community would understand the problem, and I would be allowed to carry on editing as before. Then to prevent this happening in the future, i would change my password to try and make it more secure. Reedy Boy 11:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Have you ever used a sockpuppet?
A: I have never used a sockpuppet account, however, as previously mentioned, I do have another account, User:Reedy Bot, who has been issued bot approval for 1 task, per the process at WP:BRFA. The Sockp Puppetry policy tells us that alternate accounts only used for certain purposes can be considered sockpuppets that are in violation of policy. Running a Bot is not listed as a Forbidden use of sock puppets. Reedy Boy 11:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

edit

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

Discussion

edit

Support

  1. Support per nom, a good user who could use the tools. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Obvious support - good luck! Majorly (talk | meet) 21:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Majorly Support - a good user who will use the tools well. Plus, Majorly nom'ed him, so he must be good. (If this sounds bad, AGF please) :-) --tennisman sign here! 21:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support will only use the tools for good. Martinp23 22:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Uh...obviously. Well-rounded user, and will do a great admin job around here. Jmlk17 22:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support, go get 'em. -- Phoenix2 (talk, review) 22:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support - He is very experienced and will use the tools well ...--Cometstyles 22:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Looks like a good admin candidate. (aeropagitica) 22:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Support No reason to oppose. He'd best serve wikipedia with the tools--William Henry Harrison 22:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    User has since been blocked as a sockpuppet.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 17:27, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support - The AWB request page could use another maintainer. Requesters are forced to wait due that page's lack of attention far too often. Suggestion: a notice (to requesters) at the top of that page to contact you to let you know they are waiting, may help to speed things up. The Transhumanist    22:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support, Seems like user will use the tools properly. --Random Say it here! 23:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. No signs that he will abuse the extra tools, and good contributions to the article namespace. --DarkFalls talk 01:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Coming out of hibernation just to support this. A positive user if I ever saw one — Lost(talk) 02:15, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 02:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. support, user has a great history and would make a terrific admin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GrooveDog (talk • contribs).
  15. Support per nom. PeaceNT 03:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Excellent, experienced candidate who I'm sure will mop wisely. - KrakatoaKatie 05:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support no concerns here, good candidate. —Anas talk? 10:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Default support. —AldeBaer 12:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support The kind of user who I would trust with the mop and bucket. Good luck! The Sunshine Man 13:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Certainly! He will be a great asset with the mop! MaxSem 14:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Strong Support The man is an editing machine who has also contributed greatly to many areas of Wikipedia life. So despite concerns about the low number of mainspace edits (just joking, since Reedy Boy has like a billion mainspace edits :-), this Alabamaboy is happy to support Reedy Boy!--Alabamaboy 15:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. Good user, no problems. - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info | Talk) 15:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 19:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support excellent user. Gutworth 22:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support. Plenty of experience and will be an asset as an administrator. Will (aka Wimt) 22:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Strong support agree with the above. Acalamari 22:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. --Wikipedier is now U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support so bad your head will spin! Definitely would make an amazing admin. ~EdBoy[c] 14:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support I have encountered this user at AWB and found him to be very helpful and a fine asset to the community. I thing his worked will flourish with the additional tools. JodyB talk 14:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Strong support. Sam pretty much lives Wikipedia. He really wants it to be the best tool it can be. His personal knowledge and dedication will be a valuable asset for the project.Jodyw1 16:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support-Been here much longer than is needed to be a good admin. Tools will be good for AWB related things, and other admin jobs. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 18:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    This support is appreciated, but can I ask what time length is needed to be a good admin? Majorly (talk | meet) 18:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    For a good admin, I would say about 1 year. By about, I mean not set in stone, and there are exceptions (I just supported some who has been here for only 5 months.) The year allows candidates to learn about policy, experience conflicts that they'll need to know how to handle if they become an admin, and participate in the project (eg. contributing to articles, xFD, AIV, RFPP, 3rr, etc.) Someone here as long as Reedy Boy will know all the policies (possibly have them memorized :) ), and will be a good judge of consensus since he's probably seen many arguments about x and y. --R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 18:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support - hahnchen 22:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support - LuciferMorgan 10:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Seems like an honest, dependable editor. Just what we need as an admin. hmwithtalk 11:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support per the sentiment expressed above by hmwith. The candidate seems to me to be calm, polite, enthusiastic about contributing to the project, and has a good understanding of and plenty of experience with policy and processes. No concerns on my part. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 05:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support Good person to get the tools. Captain panda 18:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Certainly nothing to suggest will abuse the tools. Davewild 19:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Everything looks good to me. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support A good honest, polite Wikipedian with a ton of experience under their belt. I think you'll do a fine job. --132 21:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support Hooray for anti-vandals! Great user, great cause. Imhungry talk here
  41. Support. Strong support because I know Sam is kind, keen and dedicated (we work together on my plugin and AWB, and chat on MSN). Support neutered just a little bit because despite what some of the above assert, Sam has had very little involvement in RFA, xFD, and other project space pages except for AWB, and last time we discussed it he didn't really know his way round the policy pages. The bottom line is I know he won't abuse the tools, and the rest can be learnt quickly - just make sure you read everything on the admin list Sam before getting started, and ask for advice or help if you're not sure about anything. Good luck. --kingboyk 20:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support I think its all been said. If you can get AWB to run on a Mac, I'll vote for you twice (shhhh...) —Gaff ταλκ 23:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support Miranda 14:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Phenomenal user. —METS501 (talk) 18:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support: always helpful and kind. —Phil | Talk 18:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support Appears to be a great candidate. --Cheers, Komdori 20:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support!!!! Anything that I could say has already been said, so I'll just leave it as a very strong support. Neranei 23:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support raise your hands to the sky and say AMEN! --Infrangible 01:32, 3 June 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Reedy_Boy&oldid=1259393200"
  NODES
admin 25
chat 1
COMMUNITY 4
Note 1
Project 7
USERS 4
Verify 1