Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Konstable

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.

Konstable[edit]

Final (47/0/0) Ended Wed, 13 Sep 2006 13:15:39 UTC

Konstable (talk · contribs) – I have been editing Wikipedia for over a year (earliest edit I can find is July). Signed up for an account in November 2005, started contributing to Wikibooks and Wikisource in January, then major contributions with my account on Wikipedia started in May. (Altogether I have 6 accounts on other Wikimedia projects, see my user page for links to them). I have been really active on Wikipedia, to the point of addiction at times, except for a recent one month break due to being extremely busy in real life. (Not that it should matter in whether you trust me with the tools, but I don't think this departure will happen to me again any time soon, though I cannot guarantee it.) Since then, I have been an active RC patroller, and this is the main reason why I am requesting adminship. It often occures with RC patrol that non-admin users have to end up playing cat and mouse with vandals while the report waits on WP:AIV, this takes up a lot of time which could be much better spent and can cause frustration to users wanting to see those admins. I would like the ability to deal with vandals directly and more efficiently, as well as help to others do the same. So I am here requesting to be entrusted with the tools to help out. Konstable 09:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: Self-Nom. Konstable 09:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


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: As mentioned in my statement above, my prime motivation is to deal with vandals more efficiently, as well as helping out at WP:AIV, where I have seen backlogs of over 40 minutes. Also I frequently deal with image tagging problems, so I would like to help out with deleting unsourced images (which tend to get a backlog every now and again) and, as I have done some New Page patrol before (though not so much recently), I would probably do some speedy deletions of violating articles and help out at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. These are the areas that I am thinking about currently and where I would like to help the most, but I am confident to help out at any other adminship chore.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I am most pleased about my contributions to Pericles (most of them just over a month ago just before I took my break). I first came to the article when I reviewed it for WP:GA and failed it due to major balancing and POV language issues. As Ancient History has always been one of my interests, and as I happened to know something about Pericles already, a couple of weeks later I came back to the article to fix it up. I did some part time digging up reliable resources at my university library to help balance the article out with more points of views, and made some big changes to the general language style. I have made quite major changes to it. Because I am not really a big expert on the area I doubt that I could have gotten it through WP:FAC my self, but what I am most pleased about is that these changes that I made inspired the original editor (who had previously given up in despair) to revive hope! He got back to the article, and with some copyediting help, get it through to Featured status!
Another thing that I would like to mention is actually my contributions on another Wikimedia project - Wikibooks. I have used my knowledge from my childhood, refreshed by some books I got from a library, to write a great deal of modules in wikibooks:Wikijunior Dinosaurs. This included trying to dig up quality free images, which proved problematic. But I managed to upload some old public domain images and two images for which I managed to get permission from two artists who specialise in Palaeontology! I really enjoyed working on that project, and I would say it's been my top favourite out of anything I've done here. And though it is still not ready for any sort of publishing and a lot of sections could use some major copyedits, I am very pleased to have been able to contribute so much.
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 haven't had too many problems really. The biggest one I remember was when I was still a rather inexperienced editor and a disgruntled real life friend of mine decided to write articles about me. Featuring my full name and completely ridiculous attack information about me designed to provoke me; to make it worse this came at a time when I was staying up all night working on a very important time critical real life project. I did not know about the deletion process then, and I had only dealt with one case of vandalism before. This caused me a lot of stress as I feared Google's web crawler would get to it and keep it cached for months for everyone googling about me to see. Real life stress mixed with Wikistress is a scary thing. However a friendly admin (FireFox) had deleted the page for me, blocked my abusive friend and reassured me that he will keep watch for any similar pages! Actually this event is what inspired me to contribute to Wikipedia more, even if I can't make major content additions to my favourite areas of expertise (the Wikipedia articles there are generally much more knowledgeable than me already). So in fact this was a beneficial experience! Apart from that, I have had a couple pretty minor encounters that were borderline stressful, but nothing to really bring me down. Most recently I started to over-react over something I shouldn't have, mainly due to thinking too much into a simple matter, but I took a wikibreak and prevented myself from losing my temper and being drowned out in stress. At other times whenever I get a hint of stress I would sometimes take a quick break from Wikipedia, or the computer altogether, even if it's for only a couple of minutes to compose my thoughts.
4. (optional) Check out our huge admin backlog. Some pages, such as WP:CP, desperately need help. Intend to help with anything other than AIV and CSD? alphaChimp(talk) 13:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. I have already mentioned my willingness to help with image deletions; abuse reports and requests for investigations sound like where I would like to help out as well. Just in general, I will watch the backlogs and help out where and when I can. I would probably say that, together with WP:AIV, abuse reports and requests for investigation would be my higher priorities due to some sense of urgency in dealing with unhelpful and abusive editors.--Konstable 23:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just to address Ian13's concern more directly. I am mentioning these specific tasks that I would like to work on in the immediate short term future, i.e. if I were to be granted adminship that is where I would start. However I understand that backlogs don't stay fixed for eternity, and I am more than willing to help anywhere where I am needed.--Konstable 23:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Support
  1. First weak support changed to First support (see below) changed to First strong support (see below) - I personally don't have a problem with Konstable being a sysop, as his history appears to be in order. However, third party nominations show that at least one member has a lot of trust in the user, which isn't blatantly obvious here. --Draicone (talk) 10:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    While running through my contribs, I actually found that I ran into this user way back at the beginning of July when User talk:Thetinyhole made some suspicious yet accurate edits to Jean-Jacques Tizié that I incorrectly marked as vandalism. Konstable's reaction to the situation was excellent and I appreciate his doing so, in addition to the fact that it shows he is good at assessing a situation. Vote changed to Strong Support. Good luck, not that you'll need it. Maybe you'll have unanimous support for your RfA? --Draicone (talk) 09:20, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support. – can't see any problems here. Re: the above comment, I see nothing wrong with self-nominations, they show a certain amount of 'bravery' for want of a better word, and it certainly does not mean nobody has trust in them. Konstable is a solid contributor, always acts in good faith. He (?) does a lot of good work reverting vandalism, I've noticed he helps out at Articles for Creation quite a bit too, amongst many other things. — FireFox (talk) 11:26, 06 September 2006
    Comment: Thanks for your comment, I've taken it into account and changed my vote. --Draicone (talk) 08:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Me too. I find no problems in self-nominations myself. It shows that the user has initiative to wanting to contribute more to this project. Besides, he is here for one year already and this is his first RfA. Unlikely to abuse admin tools as well. --Siva1979Talk to me 12:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. This is an easy support. You have the necessary experience and you stomp vandals. The request is also well written and clear. — Ram-Man (comment) (talk) 12:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support - I too don't see anything wrong with self noms. I've seen him on the vandal fighting scenario many a times. He could definitely use the extra tools.-- thunderboltz(Deepu) 14:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support. Femto 14:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support per above. Michael 19:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. - Mailer Diablo 19:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Merovingian - Talk 21:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - been around the block, fights vandals, and wants to fight them more. --Mnemeson 00:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Seen him on RC patrol and we had a backlog at WP:AIV just last night. I like people who know their strengths and want to capitalize on them. BaseballBaby 00:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support. Seems fine. Will help backlogs, and stats show that he is active in AN and the related pages (abuse reports/OPs...).Voice-of-All 02:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support per above. No problem in self nomination _Doctor Bruno__Talk_/E Mail 02:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support --Mike 02:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - I have seen this user around, everything looks good me (including the Q4 answer). --WinHunter (talk) 05:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support. Good and responsible contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support - good work! :) NCurse work 07:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. Great user! --Nishkid64 20:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support His contributions reflect experience in what he wants to use the admin capabilities for, and he seems to be rather civil and trustworthy, so sure, good luck! I also like that he's from New Zealand, for his time on Wikipedia will probably be when most admins are asleep hoopydinkConas tá tú? 22:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support. —Khoikhoi 00:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Looks like a good contributor, meets my standards.-- danntm T C 02:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support per VOA and hoopydink. Have seen him on RC patrol, seems pretty sensible. :) Luna Santin 17:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. Backlog of 40 minutes at AIV? Bah, you should have been around when no reports had been touched for 2 hours ;) -- Steel 18:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support images. :) Dlohcierekim 18:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support per all above, quality user, no issues. Newyorkbrad 21:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Unlikely to abuse tools. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 22:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support -- Tawker 04:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support Brian | (Talk) 06:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support, great editor, has done a lot of work on RC patrol.--TBCTaLk?!? 20:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Dina 22:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Konstable’s answer to optional Q4 shows willingness to help with backlogs, but more of a focus on abuse reports dealing with abusive editors. I say: Yea! JungleCat talk/contrib 05:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support Helped me with things in past, valid contributer uses edit summaries well. - Mike Beckham 08:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support Talked with on IRC... seems worthy of sysop permissions DemosDemon 09:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support meets my criteria. -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support Ian¹³/t 11:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support. Very helpful user, and certainly appears qualified for admin rights. Markovich292 19:49, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Looks like the tools will better help him police Wikipedia, and keep its quality up to par, TewfikTalk 03:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support, naturally. Daveydweeb (chat/patch) 03:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support; I remember seeing Konstable around when I used to do more RC patrol. Good editor, can use tools. --Allen 04:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support. I really don't see any substantial issues. The answer to my question was fine. We really do need more admins. alphaChimp(talk) 04:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support. A friendly, helpful user who has done a lot of work to improve New Zealand articles. I am particularly grateful for his help with Māori articles on the en:Wikipedia and for help he has given me to make major improvements on the Māori language Wikipedia. Kahuroa 04:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support --Ageo020 23:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support KOS | talk 00:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Support Williamborg (Bill) 03:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support, This person is freindly, talked to him before. Would make great admin -- Lego@lost EVIL, EVIL! | 06:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. zOMG Support! I thought Id done this already! Not too sure about these Kiwis though... ;) - Glen 11:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
Neutral until Q4 is answered, alphaChimp raises a valid point. Btw, other that WP:CP, also consider that there is a very huge image related backlog (e.g. Category:Images with no fair use rationale) --WinHunter (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC) switching to support. --WinHunter (talk) 05:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Neutral leaning towards Oppose. I feel there are more reasons why a user should want to be an admin. I think most of all they need to ba adaptable to different problems and to help clearing backlogs, and I think at present the user does not show this. Will reconsider if Q4 is answered. Ian¹³/t 20:42, 6 September 2006 (UTC) Changed to support. Ian¹³/t 11:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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/Konstable&oldid=1140160982"