| Revision as of 11:03, 15 March 2007 editMailer diablo (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators55,576 edits →[]: s← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:19, 15 March 2007 edit undoMackensen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators125,233 edits supportNext edit → | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
| #'''Oh yes''' I've seen this editor around many times and proves that he's a very fair and balanced editor. -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 10:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | #'''Oh yes''' I've seen this editor around many times and proves that he's a very fair and balanced editor. -- '']'' - <small>]</small> 10:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| #I'm ] and I '''approve''' this message! - 11:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | #I'm ] and I '''approve''' this message! - 11:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| #Sure. ] ] 11:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| '''Oppose''' | '''Oppose''' | ||
Revision as of 11:19, 15 March 2007
Clawson
Voice your opinion (7/0/0); Scheduled to end 04:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Clawson (talk · contribs) - I've been on Misplaced Pages since September of '04, back when having 3000 edits was "a lot" and anything over 1000 pretty much guaranteed you'd been around long enough for a mop and bucket. My activity here has been pretty steady ever since, with a few small wikibreaks interspersed in there for real life, etc. I believe the time has come to ask the community for its trust with the admin tools, as I'm very tired of seeing anon IP vandals (in particular) singlehandedly occupy the time of multiple users in reverting their mischief on pages like Battle of New Orleans. Those of you who've interacted with me over that time span know that while I may not always be the easiest person to get along with, I do strive to be fair and objective, two qualities which I feel to be vitally important in any Misplaced Pages administrator.--chris.lawson 04:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: As self-nominator, I accept, of course.--chris.lawson 05:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Misplaced Pages in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for participants:
- 1. What sysop chores do you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Administrative backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
- A: I'm more than happy to assist with page moves, protection/de-protection, vandalism follow-ups (being able to actually block users after issuing four warnings will be an incredibly useful ability), etc. My areas of interest in Misplaced Pages (largely aviation and numismatics, with a smattering of other random topics thrown in) seem to be particularly devoid of administrator assistance at times, and it would be nice to be able to help out the WikiProjects of which I'm a member without having to track down an admin for help all the time.
- 2. Of your articles or contributions to Misplaced Pages, are there any with which you are particularly pleased, and why?
- A: Boy, this one's tough. If you look through my recent edits, probably 90% of them are RC patrol of my own watchlist, and while that's a dirty job that someone has to do, it isn't really anything I'm particularly proud of. My contributions to ATR 42 and ATR 72 have gone a long way toward making the articles useful, and I think the core group of us working on Comair Flight 5191 did a damned fine job. I also made some pretty substantial contributions to Dime (United States coin) way back when (I might even have been the originator of the structure the now-Featured Article has; I don't remember). As far as admin-type stuff, I think I did a pretty good job with Copperchair's RfAr, which went all the way up the chain of dispute resolution.
- 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: See above re: Copperchair and also the Talk archives for Comair Flight 5191. I have tried, throughout the various disputes, to hear both sides of the argument and to support my position with facts and policies as reasonably as possible. I do not like for edit disputes to escalate all the way to RfC or RfAr, but if another editor is willing to push it that far, I won't hesitate to bring the issue to the attention of uninvolved parties who can offer a fresh perspective on the issue. I believe very strongly in building consensus first and using formal dispute resolution as a last resort.
- General comments
- See Clawson's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
Please keep criticism constructive and polite.
Discussion
Support
- Support - why not? --BigDT 05:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support - the user has an extensive history of excellent editing, vandal-reversion and carrying editing disputes through talk pages. The only problem I can find is a series of 'rvv' edit summaries for someone who reverted mebibyte to megabyte - eg . While the user was wrong to do this, it's not vandalism. - Richard Cavell 05:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support I don't see a problem here. (aeropagitica) 05:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support Looks good to me! Kukini 06:58, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support I'd prefer more wiki-space edits, but all the other pro's more than make up for it. The Rambling Man 09:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Support will definitely make a good admin. - Anas 10:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh yes I've seen this editor around many times and this edit proves that he's a very fair and balanced editor. -- FayssalF - 10:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 11:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Mackensen (talk) 11:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral