Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rlandmann

Rlandmann

Not usually one to blow my own trumpet, but am requesting sysop access mostly to help with some of the tidying-up that I do around the pedia. Specifically, I'd like to be able to delete mistakes in page names (mine particularly!), and also delete outright junk (ie Speedy Delete candidates). --Rlandmann 15:46, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

9,282 edits since March of 2003. Over 3000 in the last month. Snowspinner 15:58, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

Support

1. Looks good to me. Snowspinner 15:58, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
2. Rlandmann has my full admiration, I would have nominated him had I knew that he’s still not an administrator. GeneralPatton 16:05, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
3. A definite support. Rlandmann does a LOT of work here, especially at for the aviation pages. Elf-friend 16:13, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
4. Looks solid, did not see any signs of trouble -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:19, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
5. Neutrality 16:34, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
6. Everyking 16:41, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
7. Cribcage 17:21, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
8. Well if Anthony voted against you, then I feel pretty darn safe voting for you. Please do make sure you are familiar with all Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, especially the speedy deletion policy. blankfaze | (беседа!) 19:05, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
9. David Gerard 20:38, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
10. Acegikmo1 21:02, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
11. Strongly support. --Lst27 22:57, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
12. Merovingian✍Talk 22:58, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
13. David Cannon 23:20, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC). You mean to say that Rlandmann has been with Wikipedia all this time, and still hasn't been granted sysop access? I'm sorry we've overlooked you for so long, Rlandmann. You have my unqualified support.
14. Haven't noticed Rlandmann before, but a quick check reveals great contributions, courteous and helpful talk page discussions, and good work on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Definite support. —Stormie 00:32, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)
15. Geoff/Gsl 05:34, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
16. Kim Bruning 08:53, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC) Good contributor.
17. Warofdreams 11:54, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
18. Seems like an excellent contributor to me. - MykReeve 12:02, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
19. Jwrosenzweig 16:59, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC) I'm just sorry I didn't think to nominate before -- a very good editor.
20. Yet another data point for my argument that self-nominations are not inferior to "regular" nominations. Just look at all the people above, several of whom regularly look for good people to nominate, and all of whom overlooked this overqualified contributor. And myself, just as guilty as the rest. As my penance, I support. --Michael Snow 17:48, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
21. You weren't a sysop already? Oops. James F. (talk) 21:21, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
22. Been here longer than me. Edited more than me. Hasn't gotten into any fights. Isn't an admin yet? Correct this, we will. Isomorphic 02:54, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
23. Catbar 03:13, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
24. Decumanus 03:25, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
25. older≠wiser 13:54, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
26. jengod 21:21, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)
27. Jiang 22:23, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
28. I thought he was already an administrator. --Lst27 22:47, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
29. 172 23:14, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
30. More Rlandmann, please. +sj+ 05:24, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
31. Guanaco 23:46, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)
32. Andre 04:49, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Oppose

1. We shouldn't be deleting mistakes in page names, we should be redirecting them. anthony (see warning) 15:53, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

   I assumed that what he meant was the ability to delete redirects for the purposes of page moves and the like... which is very useful. Snowspinner 15:58, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)

   It seems unlikely to me that that's what ey meant. anthony (see warning) 16:01, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

   Even still, deleting page namings caused by typos and the like is on the list of reasons at Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion, so I don't think this comes out to being a problem. Snowspinner 02:04, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

   It was recently added as a reason by an anon. But the fact that this is a legitimate candidate for speedy deletion (at least until I remove it) just makes me more concerned. anthony (see warning) 01:51, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

1. Sorry - to clarify what I meant by deletes - I meant both deleting to make way for a move, but I also think that some pages are irredeemably badly named. For example, "alan dower blumlein". Forgetting the fact that it's apparently a copyvio, I don't see any point in keeping that particular redirect... but please someone correct me if I'm wrong... --Rlandmann 16:22, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
   • It's certainly not a candidate for speedy deletion. anthony (see warning) 17:03, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• • Maybe I'm not making myself clear? Since it's probably a copyvio, it's a moot point anyway. I'm not saying it's a candidate for SD - only that if and when we have an article under Alan Dower Blumlein, I see no reason to keep the current article title (quotation marks and all) as a redirect. alan dower blumlein perhaps, but not "alan dower blumlein" --Rlandmann 22:18, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • You don't need sysop power to list something on redirects for deletion. anthony (see warning) 01:51, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • Come now... Angela's on the Board now, she can't implement all the deletions for us anymore. ;) - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 21:37, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
        • That's true. Though, since there were 222 deletions yesterday I doubt anyone could do them all. :) "alan dower blumlein" was never a CSD even before Anthony reverted the latest addition to the policy. See When should we delete a redirect?. Angela. 02:52, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)

• Holy Prepuce is hillarious! Thanks for that article -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:23, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. Have you read the section on Administrators?

A. Yes

2. Are you interested in, and do you think you'll have some time to perform, the chores that only sysops have access to do, to help keep Wikipedia up to date?

A. Yes

3. If you become a sysop, which sysop chore or chores (WP:VFD, recent changes, watching for vandals and vandalism, responding to editor requests for assistance, any other) do you especially think you would be able to help with.

A. Watching recent changes. I do this as a matter of course anyway as part of the work I'm doing on aerospace topics, but when I come across obvious mistakes or rubbish, I like to act on them, regardless of whether they're in a subject area I'm working in or not. I participate in VfD and Copyright Problems as a by-product of this watch I keep.

4. In your opinion, what article have you contributed the most succesfully and helpfully to?

A. Well, I'm particularly proud of Holy Prepuce :) and also Alexander Lippisch and Hellmuth Walter.

5. In your opinion, what has your best contribution to the running and maintenance of Wikipedia been? (i.e., have you reverted a bad stretch of vandalism, done extensive work categorizing articles, helped mediate a dispute?)

A. I categorised several hundred aircraft articles, and do my best to try and keep articles within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft reasonably neat and consistent.

6. 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. Twice - once over an article name and once in a stupid revert war (ironically, while attempting a dispute resolution!). I believe that the solution to all conflicts between users is community involvement - and it was my impatience to sit tight through a formal dispute resolution that led to the aforementioned revert war. Anyway, whether formally or informally, the involvement of third parties is definitely the way I'll go in future.