Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mabdul

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for adminship

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alyo (talk | contribs) at 22:12, 26 March 2012 (→‎Support: s). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mabdul

Voice your opinion on this candidate (talk page) (42/1/0); Scheduled to end 03:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination

Mabdul (talk · contribs) – Ladies and gentlemen, it's a pleasure to offer Mabdul for your consideration. I first encountered mabdul in #wikipedia-en-help, where he is a dedicated helper and a great ambassador for Wikipedia, always keeping his demeanour and showing considerable WP:CLUE. He's been with us since March 2008 and has over 24,000 edits to his name, and is a rollbacker, file mover and account creator. In terms of content, he's got 4 DYK credits and a Good Article to his name. Additional positives include OTRS access, enabled e-mail, a clean block log, and a pageful of praise for what he does.

There are several reasons why Mabdul's work on wiki is limited by not having the tools and I shan't tread on his toes in writing them all out, but an example is not being able to view deleted contributions, which obviously rules him out from helping someone with a query about a deleted page and makes more work for other admins.

Mabdul is entirely suited to being a sysop here, and his contributions in an administrative role would absolutely be a net positive for Wikipedia - I recommend him unreservedly. WilliamH (talk) 21:07, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I proudly accept. Many thanks to WilliamH for this nomination. mabdul 03:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What administrative work do you intend to take part in?
A: As WilliamH already pointed out I'm a regular helper in the IRC help channel and thus the viewdel/restore option would be a great improvement for answering requests. Moreover I'm a reviewer in the articles for creation (AFC) project and I regular find articles which need a history merge (see my CSD log) or should be deleted because of a copyvio. I'm already helping with {{helpme}} requests and SPERs and would additional answer {{admin-help}} requests and WP:PERs. I'm also active at tfd and would help out there.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: I have improved many web browser related articles and my GA-promoted article Arena (web browser) is likely the best article. Personyze was rescued by me in December, Teambox was completely reworked and "rescued", Jambo OpenOffice was expanded. There are many more articles which got an expansion or gnomish work on it. (like my ibid fixing I started last year)
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: There was a major problem at Pinoy Big Brother: Double Up violating BLP and other serious problems - the case was settled down by User:Chzz after finding that many sections were a copyright violation. The problems are listed at Talk:Pinoy Big Brother: Double Up#Removal of content. With this exception I can't remember any problematic situations.
Question from Hipocrite
4. Please detail your understanding of the relationship between IRC (which you brought up in Q1) and Wikipedia. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A: IRC is a great additional tool for helping new/unexperienced users and emergiency cases. The help channel and others are linked rather often onwiki and it is sometimes easier and faster. But to be clear: I see the chat only as an additional tool and what happens in the chat has not that weight in comparison to the onwiki activities. A few weeks ago there was a big discussion/RFC at Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help if the channels should be reformed and if the responsibility of these (independent) channel should be moved to the WMF (which was refused before that RFC).
To the admin related help which is regular asked at #wikipedia-en, #wikipedia-en-classroom and #wikipedia-en-help is moving pages to blacklisted pages (which can be done by me through the account creation flag), history merges (mostly not asked, but founded), deleting pages for uncontroversial moves, CSD deleting, checking deleted pages (why? Is the actual draft similar? etc.) and similar ones. mabdul 18:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Glrx
5. You've had some involvement with SpiderGraph chart. You deleted the additional reading section. You are interested in AfC. What other problems do you see with that article? Glrx (talk) 18:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A: Yes, I was reviewing this pages multiple times and cleaned it up. My opinion is that this article shouldn't have been accepted since I still see the problem that it lacks indendent and reliable reference, it is not encyclopedic written and needs a cleanup which was also confirmed by User:CharlieEchoTango. I stopped checking and helping this user, but left the page on my watchlist. After removing the further reading section and having to explain again why I removed this section, I lost my faith and restored the section in the hope that another user will cleanup the page in future and removed it finally from my watchlist. mabdul 18:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review his contributions before commenting.

Discussion

Support
  1. Support Very helpful and technically knowledgeable editor with good judgment. No concerns he would abuse the tools. wctaiwan (talk) 03:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Generally clueful user. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Confirmed....err wait, wrong button. Yep, obvious support as nominator. Helpful, trustworthy, knowledgeable, clueful editor who gives me no impression he would abuse the tools. WilliamH (talk) 03:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Useful, polite, no obvious reasons not to. Oh, and he helped me with my German homework once. He is indeed quite a Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 04:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. Lovely bloke, sensible, and helpful. Very good with new users, which is good, because he works with them a lot (which is good because they tend to need it). Oh, and he's sensible. Did I mention that? Understands what's going on and how things work, and as such how to deal with them, when to deal with them and when instead to simply step away. Sense is good. — Isarra (talk) 04:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support -- Per this and WilliamH commented above. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 04:48, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Wait, you weren't one already? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:50, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. I trust the nominator, been helpful in #wikipedia-en-help and it's an area that needs more administrators. Secret account 05:56, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support An immensely helpful Wikipedian, I trust Mabdul to be an effective and fair admin. --Mrmatiko (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. What the fuck? Since when is Mabdul not an administrator? Master&Expert (Talk) 07:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support Of course. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 09:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Duh, obviously. Mabdul knows his shit. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 09:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support Have seen him at AFC doing great job. Certainly Mabdul has the temperament to deal with editors specially newbies and the knowledge of Wikipedia as well. --SMS Talk 09:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support - What? Mabdul isn't an admin? WormTT · (talk) 10:08, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support – definitely! Mabdul is loaded with cluefulness, extraordinarily helpful, and I particularly like the way he will go the extra mile for newbies. Giving him the tools will be an excellent move. Pesky (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support, thanks for being willing to pick up the bit, and help out with mopping up. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. I thought you were an admin already! (lol) Good work at WP:AFC. Bmusician 11:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support per WormTT . Strong sense of Clue, and in my dealings with him he's been everything we could want in an admin. Achowat (talk) 11:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support per all the above and I am sure the user will make a fine admin. Hallows Aktiengesellschaft (talk) 11:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:10, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support no questions, he deserves it -Nard 12:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support Admirably combines gnomish work and writing.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support. Seen him around a lot, and have seen nothing at all that concerns me. Lynch7 13:01, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support no concerns. -- RP459 Talk/Contributions 13:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support. I wish all RfA decisions were this easy. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support I have mainly seen his contributions to the possibly unfree files and files for deletion discussions and he seems to be a competent user. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support. The reasons for adminship (answer to question 1) initially looked a little weak. However I have looked through Mabdul's contributions, and he makes many good quality CSD tags. This is a more compelling reason than the "view deletion" argument. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:50, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Support - seems to be both willing and able. Good luck. GiantSnowman 16:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support Had nothing but good interactions with Mabdul. Have no doubt he will use the tools appropriately. Russavia ლ(ಠ益ಠლ) 16:32, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support - obvious.--Ankit MaityTalkContribs 16:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support No concerns. From my dealings with Mabdul, I have no doubt that he will be one of those admins that chips away at all the backlogs no one else wants to do. Pol430 talk to me 17:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  32. 👍 Like. Whenever I've seen Mabdul around they've been pleasant, competent, and helpful. Am confident that Mabdul-with-a-mop would be a net positive. bobrayner (talk) 17:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  33. I don't know this user but, if WilliamH see's him fit, then so do I. I trust nominator.—cyberpower ChatLimited Access 17:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support Candidate has done a lot of work and won't abuse the tools. Glrx (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support No reason to think candidate will abuse the tools. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support I've worked with Mabdul at the account creation interface and I can tell that he is a trustworthy editor. I have no doubt he will abuse the tools. -- Luke (Talk) 19:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support I thought he was an admin already. --Guerillero | My Talk 19:37, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support - Has done great work here, no obvious problems - looks like a good candidate. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support - Seems to know what he's doing! - Happysailor (Talk) 19:56, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  40. I've had many positive interactions with this user over the past year, and he's definitely trustworthy and qualified for the mop. There have been times when he's asked for admin help while accepting AfCs when there's a history conflict, so the need for the tools is clearly there as well. — The Earwig (talk) 20:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Stephen 22:08, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Absolutely...my goodness, there have been a pretty good crop of RfA candidates lately... Nolelover Talk·Contribs 22:12, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. I want to be an admin so I can help out on IRC? I am strongly concerned that this user isn't aware that IRC has nothing to do with Wikipedia. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise per my question. Hipocrite (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Opposing before you've even posted your question? GiantSnowman 15:34, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. As it stands now, I'm convinced thiswise. IRC is a festering sore on the suffering body of Wikipedia. Hipocrite (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Mabdul&oldid=484083540"