Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Raven4x4x

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Raven4x4x

final (58/3/0) ending 00:47 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Raven4x4x (talk • contribs) – I mainly know Raven from his stirling work in closing nominations on Featured Picture Candidates over the past few months — including a couple that required non-trivial judgement calls when determining concensus.

If you check his contributions, you will see that he also spends plenty of time reverting vandalism and warning misguided editors. I'll let others comment on his contributions to cricket (not really my field), but note that he has been generating graphs to illustrate various player's batting averages.

Overall I consider him a very solid and useful contributor who would find admin tools helpful and use them responsibly. Solipsist 09:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

Many thanks to Solipsist for thinking to nominate me; I accept the nomination. Raven4x4x 00:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Support

1. Support Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
2. Support: Because admin should be no big deal right? ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 22:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
3. Support looks like an active, mature, well-meaning user. Should make an excellent admin. Essexmutant 01:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
4. Support. I know him well from his work in cricket. Good editor and decent guy.Tintin (talk) 01:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
5. Cliché. NSLE _(T+C) at 01:28 UTC (2006-02-21)
6. Support Yes --Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
7. Support Seems to be a good egg. Hamster Sandwich 02:07, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
8. Support jacoplane 02:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
9. Support Naconkantari e|t||c|m 02:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
10. Support - Looks good, put him to work. No Guru 04:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
11. Support - =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
12. Support Fine record, friendly user. Xoloz 05:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
13. Support. Leaves nice comments on my talk page :) — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-02-21 05:49
14. Support. Elf-friend 06:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
15. Support About time and was planning to nominate him myself. No. of edits to main namespace are on the lower side though. Great answers to the questions, btw. --Gurubrahma 06:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
16. Support. 71.112.134.138 06:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    No voting by anons. Vote struck as per above policies. ¡Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 06:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

    'twas me. Sorry, forgot about expiring cookies. Redwolf24 (talk) 08:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

17. Support, unlikely to abuse admin tools. Christopher Parham (talk) 07:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
18. Support DaGizza^{Chat ©} 08:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
19. FPC maintainer? Sounds ok. If you can do the big jobs, you can do the small jobs too. Kim Bruning 09:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
20. Support --Ugur Basak 10:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
21. Support --Terence Ong 10:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
22. Support --Hamedog^Talk|@ 12:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
23. Support especially for talk page, responses to questions, and (response to) mistakes on my RfA criteria. Petros471 12:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
24. Support: featured picture involvement is nice, and a good editor otherwise, as well. Jonathunder 14:11, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
25. Support A great contributer. -- Siva1979^{Talk to me} 14:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
26. Strong support. LordViD 14:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
27. Support edits look solid.--MONGO 15:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
28. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 17:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
29. Support nothing to add. Karmafist 19:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
30. Support Mjal 21:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
31. Support - Gladly. Sango123 (talk) 21:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
32. An almost Neutral Support I'm sorry Raven. I almost voted oppose/neutral when I saw your main namespace edit count. Only 754 under the main namespace! That's considerably low. I would like to see more main namespace before he passed adminship but based on his good character, I vote support. Moe ε 22:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
33. Support --Latinus 23:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
34. Support. —Kirill Lokshin 02:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
35. Support very good Wikipedian, excellent potential for adminship. gidonb 04:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
36. Support. pschemp | talk 05:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
37. Support --Terence Ong 08:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
38. Suitly emphazi this user. JIP | Talk 10:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
39. Support - yes, give him the tools and he'll finish the job. Proto||type 15:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
40. Support - great cricket contribs.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 22:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
41. Support - I thought he was one already. --Go for it! 13:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
42. Support I thought you were one already too, considering all the servicing you do at WP:FPC. Most definitely support.. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 13:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
43. Support. the wub "?!" 19:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
44. Support: --Bhadani 14:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
45. Support--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 19:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
46. Support - I've learned to follow instinct. Rob Church (talk) 01:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
47. I understand the concerns raised below. If I am unfamiliar with a candidate and don't see much "policy" action, I almost always oppose as well. However, my interactions with this user have shown him to be thoughtfull and approachable, and I have little doubt that any issues that arise will be only of the "learning the ropes" variety. - brenneman^{T}{L} 01:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
48. Support SoLando (Talk) 05:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
49. Support. Mushroom (Talk) 14:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
50. Support. My experiences with him have been very positive, and I don't see any potential for abuse of powers.--ragesoss 16:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
51. No reason not to trust this user. Support. (No need to thank me, if you were planning to) --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 17:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
52. Support. Friendly user and found no reason not trust him with extra tools.--Dakota ~ ° 17:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
53. Support. Does a great job in both FPC and Reference Desk. I too thought he already was an admin. --Fir0002 www 23:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
54. Support as above. WP:FPC has benefitted greatly by his contributions. enochlau (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
55. Support as per above statements. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 19:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
56. Support Can certainly fill in any blind spots on-the-job. — Adrian Lamo ·· 03:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
57. Support zafiroblue05 | Talk 08:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
58. Support. See no reason for concern. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Great editor, but too much of a technocrat for my taste. --Colle||Talk-- 07:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose No meaningful participation in AfD, TfD, etc. In the area where he has the most pure edits, AfD, contributions consist entirely of reverting one blanking and one nomination that he quickly withdrew, for example. Very few deleted edits suggests little CSD familiarity (beyond perhaps G1 nonsense, per answer to question 1). Overall, I don't think there's evidence of how this candidate feels about and how much they know about deletion (a key admin role), which could lead to problems. Sorry... --W.marsh 16:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
3. Oppose per W.marsh. SushiGeek 02:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

• Edit summary usage: 100% for major edits and 100% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 32 minor edits outside the Wikipedia, User, Image, and all Talk namespaces. Mathbot 01:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• See Raven4x4x's edit count and contribution tree with Interiot's tool.
• I won't make this a formal question in the questions section, but I'll ask it here; you obviously know a great deal about images, and you must have picked up a fair amount about Wikipedia image policy. However, you've never commented at Images for deletion, and as far as I can tell you've never tagged an image copyright problem. Is there any particular reason for that? If you become an admin, would you be interested in getting to know the seedy side of the image space along with the good side? Chick Bowen 02:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I like the comment about the 'seedy side'. You are right that I've never been involved in that side of things (either in images or articles). It's never really interested me, but it might one day I guess. Sorry I can't give a more definitive answer. Raven4x4x 06:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
• There is a comment above about Raven have 'only' 754 main namespace. When succumbing to editcountitis, please remember not to compare apples with pears. A user who spends time recategorising articles can easily clock up a hundred edits or more when narrowing a category, but it is a different kettle of fish when it comes to a user such as Raven who spends time illustrating articles. To add one cricket graph, he'll presumably have to spend time offline collecting the statistics and rendering the graph, then upload it, add a description and license, and finally add it to the article to collect one edit count in the main namespace. There is a reason why we add caveats along side edit count tools. -- Solipsist 06:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

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. Firstly, as Solipsist mentioned I do a lot of work on the Featured Picture Candidates page. Often a nomination, such as this one, has many different versions for discussion. Once the most popular one is put in articles, all the other ones are just sitting there as redundant images, and I could delete them under CSD I 1 if the creator agrees. Then there is RC patrol, which I try to do a bit of every day using Lupin's fantastic tool. Rollback of course would be useful, plus the ability to block persistent vandals (perhaps I could check WP:AIV now and again) and even deleting any nonsense articles I find (that's CSD G1, of course Raven4x4x 08:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)). Finally I already browse the Administrator's Noticeboard frequently (for interest's sake) so I'd be happy to help there in any way I can. Raven4x4x 00:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?

A. Nothing overly spectacular in terms of articles I'm afraid; I'm nowhere near a Featured Article writer and I've never written brilliant prose in my life but I do what I can. I mostly contribute to articles about cricket, which I greatly enjoy watching and writing about. I have written or expanded a handful of short articles about cricketers (such as Bill Ponsford and Everton Weekes), and done a lot of little things like filling in numbers. I have made an awful lot of graphs as you can see from my user page, and I'd like to think that they're interesting encyclopaedic additions. I'm also happy with my work with FPC, which encourages so many brilliant photographers to contribute further. Raven4x4x 00:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

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 don't believe there is any user who is pissed off with me right now, and while I'm very glad of that I don't have heaps of experience dealing with huge conflicts. The biggest stressful situation would be when deciding what to do with a drug chart FPC which was full of different versions, original research allegations and the like, and I had no idea what to do with it. As you can see on the bottom of that page I asked for help and considered all suggestions before making my decision. Then there are a few minor issues, such as one I had just yesterday when I reverted an anon's addition to an article that I believed to be incorrect ([1]) and warned the user. The addition was in fact correct, and I apologised to him here. I think I handled these incidents as well as I could, and I intend to do the same in future; think before editing, ask for help if you don't know what to do, admit that you might have made a mistake and apologise if you have. Raven4x4x 00:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Question from Colle.

1. Hypothetical, yet oddly realistic admin situation: Browsing Wikipedia one day, you find the greatest photo ever to grace an article; a photo that speaks 500 million words. The one-of-a-kind image was just uploaded by the photographer, who licenced it as 'non-commercial use only'. The author's edit summary states: "This image is for the great people of the world, never to be taken by the evil corporations." Meanwhile, a renowned corporate POV warrior leaves a message on your talk page requesting you immediately delete the image, citing this. What do you do?

A.I would contact the photographer, explaining that such a license is not acceptable for Wikipedia and ask them to reconsider their license. If they refuse then I'm afraid it will have to be deleted. If the copyright warrior insists it be deleted while I'm still discussing it with the photographer, I could always save the image and description on my computer before deleting it, knowing that if the photographer reconsiders it can always be uploaded again. Raven4x4x 06:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.