Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Clamster5: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Deskana (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Dorftrottel (talk | contribs)
m →‎Discussion: unstriking, Yechielman had forgotten to sign in / indent comment -> then informing both users
Line 48: Line 48:


'''Neutral'''
'''Neutral'''
#<s>'''Neutral'''</s> but leaning toward support. The dispute referred to in Q3, while disturbing, is too long ago, and Clamster5 seems to have learned from it. I have no reason to believe she will misinterpret speedy deletion criteria. I am a little annoyed by the mistakes in spelling and grammar. Certainly I would support a second application if I'm still around in a couple of months. [[User:YechielMan|Yechiel]][[User talk:YechielMan|<span style="color:green">Man</span>]] 12:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
#'''Neutral''' but leaning toward support. The dispute referred to in Q3, while disturbing, is too long ago, and Clamster5 seems to have learned from it. I have no reason to believe she will misinterpret speedy deletion criteria. I am a little annoyed by the mistakes in spelling and grammar. Certainly I would support a second application if I'm still around in a couple of months. [[User:YechielMan|Yechiel]][[User talk:YechielMan|<span style="color:green">Man</span>]] 12:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
#I'm confused. You seem to be opposing on the grounds of spelling and grammar, but then saying you'll support in a few months? Can you please explain your vote a bit more, I don't quite understand it. --[[User:Deskana|Deskana]] [[User talk:Deskana|<small>(talk)</small>]] 17:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
#:I'm confused. You seem to be opposing on the grounds of spelling and grammar, but then saying you'll support in a few months? Can you please explain your vote a bit more, I don't quite understand it. --[[User:Deskana|Deskana]] [[User talk:Deskana|<small>(talk)</small>]] 17:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:22, 27 May 2007

Clamster5

Voice your opinion (2/0/1); Scheduled to end 00:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Clamster5 (talk · contribs) - I've worked with Clamster on a number of pages related to A Series of Unfortunate Events, and she's always been very helpful and kind. I think they would make an excellent admin if she were to become one. Mrmoocow 00:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept. Thank you, Mrmoocow. ***Clamster 04:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Questions for the candidate

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: One of the many tasks I do on Wikipedia is going through recently-created pages. Much of the time, I stubify and wikify articles, but I also often add speedy-delete tags to articles which meet those criteria. There are always seems to be a backlog for speedy-delete candidates, and I would work to clear that. I have some experience with AFDs and would definitely help out there.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: My first registered edit was on July 7, 2006, although I made numerous anonymous edits. I have made many large contributions to WikiProject A Series of Unfortunate Events (now WikiProject Lemony Snicket). Many, but not all, of my edits have to articles within this scope. I cannot take full credit for any page, but I have been making edits and improvements to A Series of Unfortunate Events since the beginning of my time here on Wikipedia. Additionally, I created and made major contributions to Houses in A Series of Unfortunate Events, Geographic locations in A Series of Unfortunate Events, Business locations in A Series of Unfortunate Events, and Towns in A Series of Unfortunate Events. I have also made large contributions to The End. As I do a great deal of reading on Wikipedia, I also tend to just edit and improve things as I find them so I have made edits to articles about many different topics.
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: I admit there was a time when I got very overheated and fustrated about an AFD that I stooped soo low as to make a personal attack against someone with a different viewpoint. I feel horrible that I blatantly broke an important policy on Wikipedia. The AFD discussion is here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chapter Fourteen. The other user involved and I were both stubborn and our differing viewpoints led to to petty fighting. We ended up in a revert war, but were able to settle our differences with a mediation.
4. Could you clarify further about this revert war? Why did you continue reverting even though you knew you were breaking 3RR? --ais523 11:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
A: The other user and I were just going back and forth, reverting the page to what we thought was the best setup for the page. We both ended up reporting the other for 3RR. It was a dispute that got just out of hand. Once again, it seemed important at the time, but now I just feel embarrassed that I blatantly broke policy and let a minor dispute get me upset.

Optional question from User:William Henry Harrison

5. If you were given the power to have complete control over wikipedia what would you do, what would you change, and why?

General comments


Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Clamster5 before commenting.

Discussion

Support

  1. In looking over Clamster5's edits, I see nothing to suggest she'd abuse the tools. Another admin on RC patrol is always good. EVula // talk // // 07:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support you seem like a good editor. I recommend that in future you try to fill in an edit summary for just about every edit you make from now on - other than that, nothing seems to be too wrong. Good luck! ;) –Sebi ~ 10:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support she could use the tools. Everything she does seems to be for the good of wikipedia. I like how she stood up to the admin, it shows strength and this is what we need in an admin.--William Henry Harrison 17:02, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

  1. Neutral but leaning toward support. The dispute referred to in Q3, while disturbing, is too long ago, and Clamster5 seems to have learned from it. I have no reason to believe she will misinterpret speedy deletion criteria. I am a little annoyed by the mistakes in spelling and grammar. Certainly I would support a second application if I'm still around in a couple of months. YechielMan 12:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm confused. You seem to be opposing on the grounds of spelling and grammar, but then saying you'll support in a few months? Can you please explain your vote a bit more, I don't quite understand it. --Deskana (talk) 17:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]