Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Water Bottle

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Water Bottle[edit]

final (48/1/0) ending 06:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Water Bottle (talk · contribs) – I don't have too much to brag. I've been here for over an year now, I've been active in "inactive" areas in Wikipedia such as WP:MF, and occasionally participate in AfD when I can. If relevant, I am an admin in Commons. -- WB 05:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Self-nomination

Support

  1. Support: because administrator privileges should be No Big Deal, right? Swatjester 17:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Why not...you look good to me =). Tvaughn05e (Talk)(Contribs) 06:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Changed from neutral, willing to let talk page edits by as great edit summary usage plus you do use user talk pages. NSLE (T+C) 06:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Jaranda wat's sup 06:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 07:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. Seems a strong user.SoothingR 08:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Looks good. --pgk(talk) 09:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Very positive contributions to our project. Good luck! gidonb 10:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 10:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support --Ugur Basak 11:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support looks like s/he can be a large help as an admin Where (talk) 13:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. --Adrian Buehlmann 14:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support everything looks good Mjal 15:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support solid looking user, unlikely to abuse the tools and answers to the questions fine. Once again, a lack of understanding of the finer nuances of Wikipedia should be no bar. I'm an admin and I still make mistakes. Adminship is no big deal. Hiding talk 16:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support --NaconKantari e|t||c|m 17:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. SuperBowl Sunday Support File:SuperBowlXL.png εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 21:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. SuperBowl Sunday Support File:SuperBowlXL.png - Has done a lot with current tools, would be a strong admin. Has fought to keep WP content on other sites licensed and to remove illegal mirrors. Tawker 22:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Copy cat :-) εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. :) Tawker 22:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support Has been very friendly and will be most definitely be a great admin. Gflores Talk 23:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support looks good or maybe I'm just thirsty. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 23:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Great user, love wikis. --Igman 04:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support. --TantalumTelluride 05:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. SupportPschemp | Talk 06:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Yes! An editor who likes to work. John Reid 07:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Proto||type 13:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 15:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 15:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support —Quarl (talk) 2006-02-06 20:18Z
  28. Support, looks pretty well qualified for wielding the mop. Phædriel ♥ tell me - 22:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support, will make a fine administrator. Hall Monitor 22:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support -lethe talk + 06:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support. Elf-friend 10:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support. Great user.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 16:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support About time, has always left a good impression with me. Banez 17:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. support reasonable enough user. aa v ^ 22:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support. Clearly committed to the 'pedia and knows enough about policy and process to be an efficient and fair admin (without drowning in Wikipedia: space like I sometimes have). Superm401 - Talk 07:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support --Jusjih 09:05, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support Looks good enough. Krashlandon (e) 13:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 13:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support. --Myles Long/cDc 16:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 20:54, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support good editor --rogerd 04:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. Thryduulf 14:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support. Heart's in the right place. Ditto brain and spleen. BD2412 T 02:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support. Has done nothing to suggest he won't be a good admin. Raven4x4x 09:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support All in 15:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support. Mushroom (Talk) 02:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support. Great Wikipedian. —BazookaJoe 13:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support --Terence Ong 02:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Weak oppose, user shows no indication of familiarity with process, other than a bit of AFD voting. >Radiant< 11:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are you sure about that? [1] shows way more edits other than the AfD-votes, even when we disregard the Hangman-edits.SoothingR 12:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not everything in Wikispace is a process. I hadn't noticed the FPC activity, but that was over half a year ago. My opinion is that since admins often adjudicate (or are otherwise involved in) process (e.g. *FD, VIP, FAC, RM etc) a candidate should have some experience with that before being mopified. >Radiant< 13:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Neutral

  1. Looks good, edits seem balanced but lack of talk page edits. NSLE (T+C) 06:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 06:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • See Water Bottle's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.

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'm interested in helping out in deleting images (speedy or not) as I do in Commons. Also moving articles and various other tasks.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I've been active in WP:MF for the last few weeks, (that's why my edits are lowering down), where I have to contact various admins and ISPs who are mirroring Wikpedia without the correct copyrights. I made the templates and etc. for that project. Additionally, although somewhat inactive recently, I am responsible for creating the templates and basically most of the guessing system in WP:HM. Article contributions can be found here.
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. I had some minor discussions over use of images (see User:Mike Garcia) and some templates, but none of them were major enough to note. I wasn't really stressed by any of them. As far as how I will deal with them in the future, I will go with assume good faith as much as possible and stay calm over the conversations.
4. Would you apply "ignore all rules" to your admin powers if you felt really strongly about something, even if other people disagreed? Ashibaka tock 23:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A. Depends on what kind of rule it is. I would most likely obey the rules like WP:3RR and WP:MOS nonetheless unless it was an extreme case (which I have yet to encounter).
5. How would you respond if another admin undid one of your admin actions without discussing it with you first (e.g. (un)blocking, (un)protecting, (un)deleting)? Hermione1980 00:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A. Simply ask.
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 article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Water_Bottle&oldid=1082479251"