Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Schissel

Schissel

final (12/1/0) ending 02:43 20 June 2005 (UTC) Schissel has been with Wikipedia since October of 2004 and has made many quality contributions. I first ran into him when I noticed his List of compositions for cello and orchestra. I was amazed at his diligence and the great contributions he has made to Wikipedia; Schissel is particularly active in the classical music fields. Besides creating and writing great articles, he has also been active in copy-editing and fixing broken wiki-links. I believe that Schissel would make an excellent admin, due to his past work, and that the time is ripe for the community to promote him! Flcelloguy 02:43, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Accepted, thank you. Schissel : bowl listen 04:19, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Support

1. Customary first vote as nominator. :) Flcelloguy 02:43, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Support, without a doubt. A superb contributor, smart and level-headed, and apt to be an equally superb admin. Antandrus (talk) 02:45, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. Support. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. Support. utcursch | talk 06:03, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
5. Support, a courteous, sensible Wikipedian. --RobertG ♬ talk 14:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. Support. --Kbdank71 14:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
7. Support. I believe you are ready for the responsibilities of administrator. Bratsche^{talk 5 pillars} 22:39, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
8. Support. Has done excellent things for the classical music section of Wikipedia; I expect he'll use adminship wisely and well. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:24, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
9. Support. --Missmarple 10:42, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
10. Wow, Schissel, you do get around. Enthusiastically support. A Man In Black 22:26, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
11. Support. Worthy contributions to the field of music. --Sn0wflake 01:30, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
12. Support, same reasons as Mindspillage. Pavel Vozenilek 20:49, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Note: Boothy443 has opposed every single admin request on this page, failing to give a reason every time. If you would, Boothy443, kindly give us a reason for opposing every admin? Thanks! Flcelloguy Give me a note! ^Desk 21:05, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Because Boothy443 has opposed every adminship request on this page without reason, I have left him a polite comment/suggestion on his user talk page that he either provide reasons for his opposition or withdraw his votes. Flcelloguy Give me a note! ^Desk 21:22, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

• Kate's Tool says 2186 edits --MikeJ9919 04:49, 13 Jun 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. Rollback-reversion, blocking, perhaps temporary page protection. Reversion editing has occupied a bit of my time.

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. Cello Sonata No. 1 (Brahms) , Violin Sonata No. 1 (Schumann), and Symphony No. 6 (Nielsen) for giving these major works descriptions in adequate detail; Nikolai Myaskovsky for musical and biographical detail on a major Soviet-era pedagogue and composer.

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. When disagreements here have led to stress rather than to productive discussions as has sometimes been the case, I've often found it best to try to remove myself from the person or situation if I can. When this is not possible judgment is called for, but recusing 'self is preferable! Schissel : bowl listen 04:19, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Day-later edit to answer to 3. The most serious conflicts I can remember that I have been involved in were over Categories and Templates; I created a Template that I shouldn't have, and did delay in asking for it to be deleted (also, the information I received which led me to do so arrived only awhile later, but I should not have assumed that state-produced images were public domain); by then a category had been created referring to the template. This seems to have been resolved. The other situations revolved around the category Category:Romanticism and may not be resolved as yet; I don't know. Schissel : bowl listen 02:43, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)